RRVs: Any Opinions?

[Dash]

Apologies if this has been discussed before - I imagine it must have been talked to death at some point, but I can't find anything searching the forum. Would be more than happy to be pointed toward the appropriate thread!

Was just reading up on the CFRS trial of Rapid Response Vehicles in a couple of rural stations, and found that they had been implemented extremely successfully, with very positive feedback from crews (judging by the official report anyway!). But I've heard a lot of negative opinions in the local media about the use of RRVs in Tyne and Wear (different vehicles, but the same concept of reduced cost and crew I think). Obviously rural vs. inner city deployment will have a big effect on how appropriate different appliances etc. are, but was wondering what the general feeling is about RRVs replacing Type B appliances? I imagine it must be a bit of a divisive issue, but would love to hear opinions and any first-hand experiences!

[Bgjm21]

I guess for remote rural locations it’s better than nothing if you can send out a crew with less staff as opposed to none at all or ones coming from a long distance away... Atleast with certain more minor incident types.

but to replace wholetime crewed fire engines with a vehicle that has a significantly reduced capability is reducing your speed and weight of attack on fires and putting extreme moral pressure on the crews when they arrive. The vehicle might make attendance times look good but if the crew can’t properly effect a rescue then it’s simply a box ticking exercise.

Personally If forced to chose I’d rather have less appliances but with a sufficient and safe level of crewing taking slightly longer to get there but being able to react with a full capacity upon their arrival than to be turning up at incidents with a crew of two or three and waiting to commit for a proper appliance to arrive 

[Messyshaw]

It's a simple case of H&S to me - especially with BA

Cumbria have at least 2 small 4x4 vehicles towards the south of the County. They certainly make sense when considering the narrow roads and rural setting.

But they ride 3 with 2 x BA and just a few hundred litres of water. So it is expected the 3rd FF will be BA control officer, OIC and pump operator.

I am sorry, regardless of the advantages of these vehicles, to place the BA wearers at such risk - especially where back up could be 15+ miles away- is reckless 

[Carl]

5 hours ago, Dash said:

Was just reading up on the CFRS trial of Rapid Response Vehicles

Just a reminder to all posters going forward. If you could be more specific when quoting services. I wasn't sure if the reference was to Cumbria, Cleveland, Cheshire or Cambridgeshire as they all use CFRS. Just a tip

[Matt]

So going to the original post in question of the C's it will be Cumbria in question as they are the only one to call them RRV's.  Here is one taken from Twitter yesterday.  A little more to what they carry is here.  

In simple terms a small fire unit, that is rapid as it only requires a crew of 2 to roll out the door.  Cumbria have 3 of these.  It's ok to mobilise one of these providing the caller gives you the correct details but has happened here a number of times the job is the opposite to what has been called in and requires a full PDA then mobilising when its an RTC that needs multiple casualties extricating or a fire that is a bit more than a bin fire.  Yes they can get down tracks or into the woods and carries a bit more water than a scotty back pack.

These vehicles have a place and a number of Brigades who have had Land Rover L4T/L4P's over the years have upgraded their capacity to enable to allow them to do small fires rather than mobilising the pump.  My local station and one the other side lost their RDS pumps and were replaced with these so all they go to is RTC make safe and small fires, might go to other jobs but purely for extra crewing.  Even had one mobilised to a job 100m down the road from a WDS station whilst they all sat there!  Brigade could of saved a lot of money but leaving the RDS pumps and putting one of these on a WDS station better cover would have remained in the town and the second one would of been better to join the other one in the City where they are busier.

Why put one of these in a rural station when you would be better just mobilising the pump, still got same amount of crew turning in regardless just different truck rolling out the door.  

[Keith]

On 01/05/2020 at 19:24, Dash said:

Was just reading up on the CFRS trial of Rapid Response Vehicles in a couple of rural stations, and found that they had been implemented extremely successfully, with very positive feedback from crews (judging by the official report anyway!)

They would do, won't they? 

I've no problem with slightly smaller vehicles due to the nature of the area,  or as a specialist appliance to bring additional equipment or skills to an incident, but for a first attending appliance very much with Messy and Bgjm21, you need a minimum of 4 personnel and sufficient fire fighting media to have a safe system of work, so its a no from me for RRV's  or whatever they're called this week.

[Bgjm21]

Someone can correct me if i'm wrong but what ever happened to GMC's version of these mini appliances? Did they ever get stuck on the run or? I know the West Mids have loads of them as part of their fleet is there any signs of that changing?

[Messyshaw]

12 hours ago, Matt said:

In simple terms a small fire unit, that is rapid as it only requires a crew of 2 to roll out the door.  

Jesus! It turns out with 2 riders and it carries 2 BA sets?? This is far worse than I thought! Haven't they got a union in Cumbria???

So Cumbria management cover their backsides by issuing instructions from their cosy offices not to use BA when you are riding two. But that chimney fire you have turned out to is actually is a room in a house alight with persons reported. The next nearest pump is 15 miles away and its snowing. The only possible way to save this life is for one or  both of the riders to break the rules - Do you have a go or sit in the vehicle?

Its bloody outrageous to leave your employees so exposed and the community at such risk

[Carl]

6 hours ago, Bgjm21 said:

but what ever happened to GMC's version of these mini appliances?

Nope, never went on the run. They used them a bit during spate conditions for small fires, but it was simply that. Vehicles were turned into support vehicles which do not form part of the front line.

[Dash]

On 02/05/2020 at 00:46, Carl said:

Just a reminder to all posters going forward. If you could be more specific when quoting services. I wasn't sure if the reference was to Cumbria, Cleveland, Cheshire or Cambridgeshire as they all use CFRS. Just a tip

Thanks Carl, and my apologies for any confusion caused!

On 02/05/2020 at 17:26, Matt said:

In simple terms a small fire unit, that is rapid as it only requires a crew of 2 to roll out the door.

Thanks for your reply Matt! Where did you hear that they were rolling with 2? Everything I've read says 3 crew. Certainly concerning if it's minimum 2.

On 01/05/2020 at 19:44, Bgjm21 said:

But to replace wholetime crewed fire engines with a vehicle that has a significantly reduced capability is reducing your speed and weight of attack on fires and putting extreme moral pressure on the crews when they arrive. The vehicle might make attendance times look good but if the crew can’t properly effect a rescue then it’s simply a box ticking exercise.

I believe the focus at Cumbria was (at least in the initial trial) on replacing regular appliances with RRVs only at retained stations where they have historically had difficulty recruiting enough retained FFs to provide the required level of availability. Being able to provide more availability due to dropping from 4 to 3 crew seems to be a large part of the justification for the trial. Your other points still stand though, thanks!

[Dyson]

Cambs has some I believe too, they were not a success. Bottom line is, we need a minimum of 9 people on scene to begin to deal with a building fire. 

[Matt]

Regarding crew of 2, that's what the majority of these run with, the ones local to me do, wasn't aware Cumbria was riding with 3 on theirs.  With what they are carrying that will be overweight then I suspect.

As far as I am aware Cambridgeshire have Iveco Eurocargo Type B which they are crewing with fewer than 4 which I believe have been allocated to the quietest stations now but don't quote me on that, was just a conversation I had with someone last summer.

[Mark177]

On 02/05/2020 at 23:20, Keith said:

They would do, won't they? 

I've no problem with slightly smaller vehicles due to the nature of the area,  or as a specialist appliance to bring additional equipment or skills to an incident, but for a first attending appliance very much with Messy and Bgjm21, you need a minimum of 4 personnel and sufficient fire fighting media to have a safe system of work, so its a no from me for RRV's  or whatever they're called this week.

If brigades in rural areas want a LP 

I think the best idea was the GMC Telehoist, at least it could carry 200  gallons and carry 4 men.

[Becile]

You mean 4 firefighters..not neccesarily male !

[OscarTango]

....and 900 litres

[Messyshaw]

..... and I thought I was the site dinosaur 🤔🤣🤣