I’m a retired cop and the only thing I know about fire trucks is how to block the road so traffic doesn’t hit them. [:)] I’m hoping some firefighters here can give me some advice. I’m working on detailing a Boley brush truck as seen below
The rear deck just doesn’t look right. It has what appears to be a pump on the tail end and the two hose reels but nothing in between. Is the rest of the body just a water tank? Even if it it is, wouldn’t there be some chrome non-slip diamond tread up on that deck? Like I said, I have no idea what it’s “supposed” to look like but it just doesn’t look right to me after seeing fire trucks for 25 years. Even brush trucks always seemed to have more stuff on the top deck so any advice would be appreciated.
They are usually called brush rigs. There is a water tank in the middle. There are tool compartments on the side, which is what the doors on the sides are for. For an engines/pumper, there is usually a hose bed on top of the tank.
By the way, fire trucks are the ones with the large ladders on top that are part of the truck. In the past, they had no water tanks. If they did, they are called quints. However, I cannot find anything called a quint on the manufacturers’ websites. Although Firehouse magazine does list quints.
EricSP, thanks for the references. I know what a quint and a brush truck is but that quint in the brochure has the biggest rear view mirrors I’ve ever seen. I wonder how many times they get broken off in the service life of the apparatus. [:)] So, with a brush truck, should I have a normal hose bed on the top of the tank? In my memory, that would be modeled as something like six or seven coils of hose laying horizontally on the bed? Would that hose line be attached to the pump on the rear while the reel hoses were used for fast attack. I also remember some of our brush trucks having hard suction lines to draft from ponds and the like. Would that be appropriate for this rig and, if so, where it normally be mounted?
LR, nice try but the photos came through as just red “X”'s. [:(]
I have never seen a brush rig up close. I am more familiar with the engines and trucks one would find in the city. I should note I am not a firefighter. I know someone who used to be and went on ride alongs, and have read about the rigs, so I am not as knowledgable as an actual firefighter would be. With all of the options, I suppose there are brush rigs with hose beds and ones without, although I am not sure. I just edited by original post so that the link so to Pierce’s brush rig page instead of to their pumper page.
Thanks again, Eric. I’m pretty sure that the Boley model is based on the CDF (oops…CalFire now, they changed the name) Model 35 before they retrofited the urban interface panel. The did this to a lot of CDF trucks after the Oakland Hills fire when the CDF brush units weren’t able to act as pumpers because they had no hydrant connection capacity. You can see the urban interface changes in the chrome panel behind the cab on the Model 35. The pictures at the various web sites always seem to show the trucks from the side and never the top and that’s what I want to see. It looks like CDF carried two hard suction hoses right at the top of the bed on many of their engines so that gives me a hint at least. I know they had more hose than was on the reels because they’d switch to the bigger hose once they got it hooked up to the pump. I’m hoping a firefighter that worked on a brush truck might have more details. If not, I’ll have to fake it. [:)]
When I try to open LR’s red “X”'s in a new window, I get a page not found error on Photobucket so there’s something he’s doing wrong copying and pasting links.
Thanks, ratled. I know Craig and never thought to look on his site sice he covers just about every fire in northern California. He has some good profile shots of the prototype for the Boley brush truck but none of the bed area. I guess a brush truck bed doesn’t hold a lot of appeal for most viewers. [:)]
BTW, those here who think that they are great photographers, have a look at Craig’s site. Not only does he produce outstanding photographs but he does it when fire is literally on top of him at times. A lot different than setting up a static shot for few hours.
That looks more like a mini-pumper to me. A mini-pumper have a rating of 400 gpm and used as a quick response or in narrow alleys. Living in the country we had many uses of a bursh truck. Ours was a four wheel drive pick up. The bed had a small water tank and also a portable pump attached on top. We carried 2 1/2" suction hose with a floating strainer, booster hose like the ones on your pumper and 150’ of 1 3/4" hose with nozzles, brooms to beat the fire out and also special rakes, not garden, to look for hiden fire in the roots. Forgot we had shovels also. On the front where yours has a hose bed we had small sprinklers along the bottom of the fender and piped back to the valve connection on the pump.
The idea was that we had sever af options to use depending on the terrain and size of the fire. There were times that I just used the front sprinklers to extinguish the fire by driving along the edge of the fire. Of course we had to overhaul the fire to prevent rekindle.
We also used it for water supply. Not having pressurized water we depended on ponds on farms and creeks. To reach some of those creeks we needed the four wheel drive. We just backed it up to the creek, hook up the hard hose and supplied a 4" line to the portable tanks or engine or tanker.
Tom, thanks for that information. I think the term “brush truck” is a western term while grass truck or mini-pumper is used back here. I know the rake you’re talking about, I think they were called “McLeod”'s after the USFS guy that invented them. It seems to me that this truck carried some hose on the bed of the truck and hard suction hose mounted on the side. I think that raised red area off to the top side of the bed is supposed to represent tool storage like the shovels and rake you described.
That’s interesting about the sprinklers being mounted on the right. Never saw that in California since any wildfire we had was usually well out hand for a truck to get near it let alone have one that could get put out with a truck mounted sprinkler. Were they very visible or hidden under the body?
I think I’m getting a better picture of this now. I’ll use solder painted black and coiled to represent the hose on the bed. I’ll use #16 wire to represent the hard suction hoses and hang them on the side. I’ll paint the top of the storage container silver to represent chrome diamond plate since you fire guys seemed to love chrome. [:D] Speaking of that, do those black mirrors look right to you? All the ones I remember seeing always had big chrome mirrors.
I’m a firefighter in California and most of the brush rigs we have out here will have a cover over the rear area so that embers will not burn the fire hose underneath. Usually they are made of diamond plate and extend all the way to the back with flaps of cavas hangining down in the back. Between the two 1" hose reels ther will usually be a couple of 5 gallon buckets of foam and whatever gear the crew can’t fit into the cab. Usually kept in red dufflr bags.
Here’s the problem with asking such a question on a national forum. On the “left” (okay, West…) coast they might use designations for names and equipment requirements that are different from us in the East, etc.
The apparatus model pictured above is indeed a “brush truck” of sorts, more specifically to be considered a Wildland-Urban Interface rig. Some of the “brush trucks” used by the CDF/CalFire/Whoever out there carry a good compliment of “structural” equipment to augment their brush capabilities. This includes the bigger pump, structural attack lines (1 3/4, 2.5, etc), structural tools (halligan/flathead axe, etc).
Now, when you throw things like the NFPA, which write a set of recommendations on most aspects of the fire service, you get a whole slew of different types of naming conventions, specifications etc.
If you want a way to model something in the rear, get yourself a “patch kit” from the local craft store that would be used on a pair of slacks, jeans, etc. You can cut yourself a hose bed. cover, which would protect the racked hoses in the rear from embers resting on the hose.
I’m a member of a rural volunteer fire department. My job is to operate the pumps, keep track opf all equipment and watch out for the safety of all hands. I know a thing or two about fire trucks. The trucks with the big ladders on top of them are called ladder trucks here. A fire truck is a pumper truck fitted out to deliver water at 1200 gpm or better. A water carrier is called a tanker. The type of brush truck in the photo by the O.P. is a mini pumper. The type of brush trucks in use here usually consist of a heavy duty dualy with a 200 to 350 gpm pump and 200 to 300 gallon water tank. Add a number of tools (shovels, rakes, etc) and about 230 feet of hose and the vehicles weight limit has been reached. My dept uses the same type setup with 175 gallons of water, foam, hoses and tools mounted in the back of an old military Chevrelet Cut-V that has a load rating of one and a quarter tons (2500 lbs).
The “generally accepted” form of a Class A (read: Structural, front-line engine) is a 750 GPM pump. The “standard” truck that many departments are spec’ing as a base model is a 1250 gallon per minute pump.
There is a difference between a mini pumper and a brush truck, and here’s where that distinction comes in to play from the “manufacturer” side of things.
A true “mini pumper” is capable of doing structural firefighting work, albeit with it’s limited crew. This includes things like 1.75 inch and or 2.5 inch handlines, usually a few hundred feet of supply line, and various structural firefighting tools.
Nine out of ten “brush trucks” don’t carry nearly enough structural tools or hose to be considered a “mini pumper”. Mini-pumpers go back to the “Pumper” and “hose tender” days of firefighting, where two piece engine companies were used. Even in today’s society the mini-pumper plays
A lot of good feedback here and yes, termalogy is different between areas of the country. I live in Pennsylvania and I am a retired firefighter and local leval fire instructor. Also I been a volunteer for over thirty years.
A good example is what is called a pole ladder, the original term was Bangor ladder where they were first used. Here in Pennsylvania we call them bursh trucks and are like I said above. A mini-pumper is one as I described above but since NFPA calls for at least 500 gpm to be reconized they are not reconized as a class A pumper. I forget who said that it is a bursh/urban pumper or something like that may well be true but that came about since I retired and would only be used on a modern layout.
Engine or pumper, A class A pump capable of delivering 500 gpm or greater (Class A). It also has to be able to lift water. Now to be perfect that is 33 inches of mercury but because of the pump efficency and altitude it is lower. In this neck of the woods we expect them to lift 25 inches of mercury (that is gauge reading). It also has to be able to carry a certian amount of different sizes of hose, nozzles, ladder and other equipment like a flat-head and pick axe.
Mini-pumper The same as a Class A pumper but delivers up to 400 GPM. My last edition of the NFPA recommended standards did not reconize them other than auxillary equipment.
Ladder or ladder truck is one that has a ladder which may reach as high as 100 ft.
Quint. A ladder truck with a pumper.
Bucket. Elevating platform.
Tanker A truck that carries water. They have hard hose for getting water and hose to deliver it. If the distance is too long for hose they drive to dump (portable) tanks and dump it and return for another load of water
Truck could be for rescue, brush, tools or what ever.
Yes here we have farms but small and we usualy can get close to the fire with the truck but we also are heavly wooded and a few times we had to take the portable pump and
Forgot, we also carried several Indian Tanks, small tanks that one straps to their backs and the nozzle end has a “hand pump” to get a stream. If I remember right they hold five gallons so they had to be refilled. It would be a good idea to have some on either one side or both sides of your pumper. I don’t think you will be able to find a model but if you look at some pictures of one then I am sure that it wouldn’t take much to make some out of scrap pieces of material. Gosh how could one forget them.
One more item just to mention it.
Fire truck, what a civilian, (person not a firefighter) would call fire engine. All the departments or companies I have been associated would let the greenie know right away that is a no-no. There is a reason. If I am the OIC at a fire and I ask for a fire truck, what am I asking for. It could be any type of truck.
Whew! I never knew fire engines were so complicated_._ I spent all my time runing away from fires while you guys were running in so I just knew that, as long as it had hoses and looked like a truck, all I had to do was keep the civilians away while you guys put out the fire.
I wrote Boley, the model maker, about the history of this model and they actually answered! It is a 1996 Navistar (International) four man crew cab and chassis with an “old style” USFS Type 62 body. It’s a Type III wildland fire engine. The same body style was used by CDF and a number of other states with wildland fire responsibility. As was stated by another firefighter, the “new” body style enclosed all the hoses and gear with a diamond plate steel cover. The old style body had the hoses covered with canvas and (suprise!), they kept catching on fire when burning embers landed in the bed. The new body style became standard about 1999 and older units were often sold as surplus to rural departments. This is a picture of a surplus FWD old body style Type 62 engine in non-USFS colors:
And this is a picture of the new Type 62 body style with everything enclosed in the steel body:
So now the only question is do I model the old or new body style? I think the easiest thing to do is model a hose bed cover in canvas and call it good. I’ll add some hard suction lines along the sides and see if I can’t stick a few of those Indian backpacks on the rear deck. I do remember seeing crews trudging up the hill with those Indian’s strappet to their backs, carring shovels and Pulaski’s (finally remembered what they called them in California) and thinking how lucky I was to be a cop directing traffic. [:)] Thanks again for
