Department designed specs

[pauloghia]

It seems that some major departments have a basic spec they use and possibly even designed themselves, regardless of the manufacturer. It seems like some have a  spec that regardless of the manufacturer, is always the same behind the cab. An example is the FDNY, having the same basic spec on their Seagrave and KME engines, ever since they began running the spec in the early 1990's. Another example are the Seagrave and Ferrara rear-mounts looking like the same spec, while the 1980's Mack CF/Ward 79's had theirs and even the 1970's era Mack CF and ALF's looked the same behind the cab. LAFD did the same with Seagrave and Pierce. Are there departments that design theor own rigs like that and send the spec to the manufacturers and if so, what other departments have their own proprietary designs?

 

[lfdlt31]

I'd say pretty much every major municipal fire department in North America has their apparatus custom built for them. And by major I mean like any place with a career fire department...anyone..and probably some volly's too.

 

[Bulldog]

CF is certainly correct, almost every fire department know better how big or small writes specific specifications for every apparatus purchase.  Sometimes, especially the case of small volunteer departments, these specifications are written against a truck from specific supplier.  This is done by specifying something that the other companies don't or won't provide.  However most departments write a general specification that multiple suppliers can meet.  One of the main reasons this is done is because they are required to purchase equipment through a competitive bidding process.  Some of these are even so strict that if only one vendor bids equipment can't be purchased without special approval or rebidding of the contract.

Larger departments like FDNY know what works for them much better than the equipment suppliers.  They also want uniformity between different generations of equipment to make it easier on the companies when they use a spare or different piece of equipment.

 

[raybrag]

Larger departments like FDNY know what works for them much better than the equipment suppliers.  They also want uniformity between different generations of equipment to make it easier on the companies when they use a spare or different piece of equipment.

Not to mention commonality of parts for easier/less expensive maintenance and reduced spare parts inventory.

 

[pauloghia]

I probably worded my question wrong. I know how specs go and all. Most apparatus when you look at them though seem to follow a cookie-cutter pattern of design that deviates with wants or needs. What I meant is do some departments like FDNY or LAFD literally take pencil and paper and draw the spec themselves, then submit it for the lowest bid. Like I said, the new KME and Seagrave units are identical, other than the cab and nameplates. On top of that, you don't find those design specs with any other departments.

 

[BCR]

I have been told fdny specs right down to the type of hardware used on the appratus (nuts, bolts etc). Fdny appratus I believe are also a couple inches narrower than the standard units most depts buy. I am pretty sure in an fdny spec, everything ground up is speced out by them with no deveation allowed. So from what i know/have heard, yes, the size of the cabs, hose bed, compartments, layout of cab and compartments etc. is spec'd by the fdny and the manufacturer (seagrave, KME, Ferrara) gives a bid on what it will cost to provide a finished product. It's more like blueprints what the fdny provides as opposed to a spec sheet like most departments put out. It all comes down to parts availability/ stocking parts. The bigger the department, the more important it is to have uniform appratus, I can't remember the exact number but fdny has millions in spare parts, if they just took what ever the manufacturer offered it wouldn't even be possible to stock parts for a department that has hundreds of appratus. I can't speek for LaFD but I think fdny has the hardest spec out there out of any city, a big part of that spec is the full bumper to bumper warranty that also requires the manufacturer to have a service facility in the city limits (I think or maybe x amount of miles) there specs being so tough that there are a lot of manufacturers out there who cannot meet them or choose not to bid on them(like Pierce) because the warranty requirements and the fact that they have to retool there assembly line for the fdny units.

 

[lfdlt31]

I've heard from a guy that was pretty high up in E-One back in the 90's that "you will never make money building a truck for FDNY" because their specs and warranty requirements are too taxing on the manufacturers. That is probably why E-One and Pierce do not bid on FDNY. Also Ferrara was an ego thing, he really wanted to build FDNY trucks.

 

[FDNYrigs]

I call BS.  I find it hard to believe that you dont make money building rigs for FDNY. 

First, these corporations are in business to make profit - period.  Second, a FDNY contract might be difficult to comply with, but you just build that into the price.  Also, to sell 30 to 60 rigs at one time to one customer is a lot easier and cheaper than selling one rig to 30 to 60 different customers.  And the fact that you sell rigs to FDNY is a priceless feather in any company's cap.  Need I continue?

 

[lfdlt31]

Hey Im just telling you what the number 2 or 3 guy on the continent with EOne told me.... he seems to be in the know and has some pretty good contacts in the biz...

 

[JohnnyBopp]

According to a contact at FDNY shops (who i spoke to when i was picking up a spare rig).....

....KME is making very, very little on each engine (when factoring in warranty costs), however, selling 91 units in a single order saves them a lot of time, R&D and money in the contract and legal phase.  This will also allow them to evaluate building techniques and how the vehicles hold up in terms of wear and tear.  They'll be able to determine warranty costs after a couple of years. 

Remember, we're the largest fire dept. in the country, by far.  We have tough road and weather conditions and high run volume.  If a company like KME (who has a spotty reputation) can come in here and build a product that holds up and gets good reviews form users on our end.....it's a terrific marketing strategy for them.

 

[fdhistorian]

In order to produce 30 to 60 units, a manufacturer must have a certain capacity in terms of factory space, equipment, as well as trained and experienced staff.

If you are tied into a single customer, in a market that sells approximately 3,000 units per year among all manufacturers, one large customer can make or break you.  If that customer decides not to make a planned purchase, or decides to change vendors, you may be stuck with excess capacity and personnel.  It is not easy to quickly make up those 30 to 60 units with other customers, especially if those other customers went elsewhere while you were busy with the one large contract.

Just as purchasing from multiple vendors over an extended time frame is good for the apparatus fleet, having a larger pool of diverse customers making regular purchases is good for the manufacturer.  Profit is relative when measured against long term business sustainability and investment.

 

[Bulldog]

Just as purchasing from multiple vendors over an extended time frame is good for the apparatus fleet, having a larger pool of diverse customers making regular purchases is good for the manufacturer. 

Purchasing from multiple vendors is not a good thing for apparatus fleets unless major cost savings are derived from that action.  Having an entire fleet from the same vendor simplifies maintenance and operational considerations significantly!  It's kind of the same thing for having a diverse pool of customers for a manufacturer.  Again, I manufacturer would certainly prefer having one steady customer instead of having to deal with multiple customers as long as that single customer provided a steady and consistent workload.

 

[fdhistorian]

Having a single source fleet has all of the benefits that you mention and more.  However, if the vendor goes out of business, the fleet may be in trouble.  If the customer changes purchasing schedules or changes vendors, the original vendor will be in trouble.  Establishing a long term, mutual commitment is difficult and risky for both parties, especially with government bidding practices.  How many large volume manufacturers failed once the city changed vendors?

On the other hand, a single spec that can be met by multiple vendors is a way to work in the best interests of both parties.  This is how it is done by the military services and in Europe.

 

[grumpy grizzly]

From an advertising view point I agree you gotta get your foot in the door. In 1984 E-One lent Boston a rear mount demo, until then Boston was all TDA's with the exception of the 2 Sutphen towers. Well from 1984 to 2011 Boston purchased 43 aerials and 40 engines. In addition, from 84-86 they purchased 21 Ford/E-Ones. Now they have switched over to KME, that is a good feather cap in your hat, BFD and FDNY. Now if only Chicago would buy SOMETHING!!!

 

[lad72der]

I call BS.  I find it hard to believe that you dont make money building rigs for FDNY. 

First, these corporations are in business to make profit - period.  Second, a FDNY contract might be difficult to comply with, but you just build that into the price.  Also, to sell 30 to 60 rigs at one time to one customer is a lot easier and cheaper than selling one rig to 30 to 60 different customers.  And the fact that you sell rigs to FDNY is a priceless feather in any company's cap.  Need I continue?

No not BS. The profit margin if any is minimal. The warranty the FDNY demands is what kills these manufactures. That's one of the reasons ALF went out. These salesman especially in and around Long Island make there money selling to the volunteer companies where engines can cost $500,000 and tower ladders a million plus and wear and tear is minimal

 

[BCR]

Anything a city buys from a manufacturer has small profit margins, it's competitive bidding, you add up your cost and then add on the minimal profit you need to make a small amount of money and keep your company afloat. If they all made a ton of money a lot more people would be bidding on them

 

[fdny747]

I can say as someone who worked for Saulsbury Fire Rescue who I think by far made the best heavy rescues on the market when they were open and operating.  They use to build for a lot of big cities and they might not make a lot of money off FDNY or any big city but I can tell you this they sure made good money on all the others.  If there were 10 rescues being build each one of them had something done to it or on it just like FDNY or any other big city so maybe they don't make much on the big ones but they make it up because all the volley's want and the looks of  what the big cities have. Just my opinion...

 

[lfdlt31]

And where is Saulsbury now?

 

[raybrag]

Emergency One bought Saulsbury in 2004 and almost immediately closed the factory "to consolidate operations". 

 

[JohnnyBopp]

Emergency One bought Saulsbury in 2004 and almost immediately closed the factory "to consolidate operations". 

Yeah....that was a hit for Central N.Y.