Snuffer Truck

[Cannon]

Our Municipality is considering buying a snuffer truck ( that is a truck with a CAFS SYSTEM (COMPRESSED AIR FOAM sYSTEM)

Have any out there used the system and what do you think of them? I have tried the unit in demos and it preformed very well but the fire commisioners office wants us to have a regular fire truck.

[MacGregor, MB]

take a serious look at a pumper with foam capabilties, we just got a new one and it works great without having to bring another truck for water

[Michael13]

Within the last 12 years we have purchased a new pumper, tanker, rescue and built a new hall. We are now looking to purchase/build ourselves a Brush Fire/Snuffer truck. The plan is to use a 1 ton chassis, with an club cab. We own a pump and roll pump, which came from our old tanker. We hope to use it on this truck. Any comments on snuffers would be great.

[Eno_75]

We were talking about CAFS yesterday, and the general concensus was that if you have a full time hall, or guys who use the system all the time- enough to be able to make decent foam with the thing, then the truck / system is a good idea. However, the system loses its effectiveness if you don't use it frequently because the operators struggle to get good foam from lack of practice. We had one out at a 25 acre fire a few months ago from a neighbouring station and it was, in a word, useless. We put out more fire with our '75 GMC 1 ton.

[edpink]

CAFS was mentioned last night at training. The chiefs reasoning is because of our situation. 3 firehalls all staffed by volls, and the extreme large area we cover here in N. Ontario. Response time all be it is as fast as we can, but due to area size it takes a while somtimes. Also sometimes we don't always get full crews, and also mainly a lack of water supply. He figures with CAFS we can handle a situation faster. I did alot of searching on the net last night and it's very popular in Europe, mostly for places like us in the country. I don't think big city depts with oddles of paid staff and tons of fancy equipment would really need it, but they'll probably get it anyways because they have the big bucks to spend.

[Michael13]

Snuffers are for depts who have little water supply, and great distances to travel between the hall and the scene. I doubt large city departments would use this system because the is an unlimited supply of water and many engines to cover the area. We are looking into purchasing a snuffer model that slides right into a truck box. We plan on buying a 1 ton chassis, and adding a few cabinets, for brooms and shovels and various brush fire equipment. The area I am from, no one has a snuffer unit, but since we have the Nevada money we are considering purchasing this unit, and putting it together ourselves, to save considerable money.

[WFD999]

Havent worked with snuffers much. But we do have a front mount with a 750 GPM pump. Might give you a little more flexablity. Front mount with pump and roll and weve mount a 1 1/2 cannon on top in the equipment well which attaches to the rear pre connect. This thing is great for fields, dithces and edge of brush lines.Gives us the option to nose up to water source and draft without as much fear of getting planted. Carrying a 1000 gallons of water which hopefully will get a good handle on struture fires until heavy water support units can arrive. Only toy we wish we had is on board foam. The other thing I would suggest is wide base tires on the front for a little more floatation off road. Have a good one.

[oldarffer]

I am with a large, hydranted, full time department and unfortunately we have a Snuffer unit. The department purchased it and utilizes it as a rapid response unit. If you are looking for a brush truck, buy a brush truck. The CAFS unit is great for exposure coverage but useless as a brush truck. It is on a F550 chassis and is top heavy and almost overloaded. I doubt an overloaded F550 will get to a fire call faster than a new full sized pump with a Detroit Series 50 or 60. We purchased CAFS because of its ability to knock down structure fires 3 - 5 times faster than straight water. You don't flow less water you just make the water you use more effective. A full sized CAFS pump, we use the Waterous Eclipse, allows us to flow up to 3000 lpm of Compressed Air Foam indefinately because of the size of the system. The Snuffer unit we have allows a maximum of 400 lpm of CAFS. The Snuffer unit we have supplies a very poor CAFS foam that I would NEVER EVER EVER consider taking inside a working structure fire, and yes it is running according to manufacturers specs. The compressor is just simply too small. You only get an effective CAFS stream for about ten seconds then have to shut down the line and let the air presure build up again.

If you want a brush truck stay small and use an injected Class A system. Your truck will spend less time stuck and more time fighting the fire. If you are responding to structural fires in your district with the unit, in my opinion the Snuffer is a waste of money. It is better to have a full sized fire pumper with CAFS capabilities for interior fire attack.

[Michael13]

I havent been home in a while, but the truck arrived a couple weeks ago. Now we are waiting for the CAFS unit to arrive so we can put in the truck. Then a lightbar has to be added and various accessories added. (radio, reel, hoses). We were hoping to have it for this grass fire season, but I dont think its ready. We got a single cab 1 ton, so we are hopeful it doesnt sink out of sight. It shouldnt, the unit wont weigh that much. Those F 550 are way to heavy to be taking off road, so we stayed small. Also, this unit will not be used for rapid response, like medical calls. And for structure fires, our pump will still be first out the door.

[OldCigar]

edpink. Eno_75 hit it right on the nose. I am in NWOntario and while we have only one hall now, in three years will have another. BUT the biggest problem is in training. Was at the Merritt Country & Western Festival in BC last year and talked to the guys that came around with their 350 Ford Club Cab with a snuffer slide in unit. They told me that you need constant training to produce good foam and if you don't you are just wasting foam and manpower. They strongly advised me that as long as we were all volunteer and no full time to stay away from it.
We have foam on our pumper and it works well when we need it and does not require the amount of training a CAFS unit requires.
Just my two cents.
Stay safe.

[lm3929]

SNUFFER is the Brand name for one of several CAFS units

[Roadwarrior]

In my experience, you either love 'em or hate 'em.
So far, I've seen no reason to love 'em, lots of reasons to hate 'em.

[Michael13]

We have had ours since early summer now...I can list more things that were wrong with it, and still wrong with it. We had the most trouble with our supplier sending equipment. Then we had 3 or 4 different nozzles and finally got the right one. Then we mixed foam brands together that reacted together and made the ugliest smelliest 'goop' ever, and plugged the system up so bad, we had to do a total flush. We finally have it working right...it makes pretty good foam...it took us forever to realize that our tank fill valve must be shut to maximize full output. So, yes, alot of training to be good at it...It has responded to a few fire now. We have also realized it won't knock down a fully involved tractor trailer on fire....(30 foot flames). We didnt expect it to. ( Our pumper was out of service), knocked the fire down with tanker/pumper. The best call it has been to was a standing wheat field on fire, caused by an overheated bearing on the combine. Front run trucks rolled first and were unable to get to the fire. Brush unit arrived and put the fire out in 3-4 mins. The fire had consumed 8 acres already and if left to burn, would have burnt close to 100 acres of standing wheat. We beleive the cost of the truck, saved the farmer and his insurance company that much alone. So we all say the truck is paid for. One person drove, one sat on the tailgate, and one on the top of the tank running the nozzle and the CAFS unit knocked down 15 high flames...They coated the edge of the fire with foam and it burnt itself out. This is exactly what we wanted. A compact, 4 x 4 that can get in the fields and put out a fire. Some have said the capability isnt there, that we run out of foam and water before anything can be accomplished. But I sure know it worked faster than 5 guys in PPE with brooms and shovels.

[ABFF37]

I think as these posts have shown, the effectiveness and success of a snuffer truck depends on what it is being used for. If it is for field fires, or as an additional unit to back up a pump by covering exposures and so on, it's probably not a bad idea.

If it's bought and set up as a rapid response vehicle to have its entire own district, and to be first in on structure fires...NOT a good idea. My department purchased one and set it up to cover a rapidly developing area of the city, and overall it has been a nightmare.

Not exactly due to the snuffer itself...I mean it does exactly what it was designed to do, and works just as it was supposed to work. It produces good foam, and has a good little pump on it. But it's not designed to take the place of a front line pump, and is not able to handle a structure fire (i.e. a house fire) on its own as a first arriving rig. Nor is the three man crew (originally two man) able to act appropriately at a structure fire.

These trucks definately have an important role to play, but it seems that with a pump on them and a CAFS system some departments tend to get a little carried away with this trucks capabilities. It is a support unit, and nothing more.

AB

[smoke286]

Thats the impression I gleaned, it may have its uses, but one of them is not to replace a pumper

[iamvff]

Not exactly due to the snuffer itself...I mean it does exactly what it was designed to do, and works just as it was supposed to work. It produces good foam, and has a good little pump on it. But it's not designed to take the place of a front line pump, and is not able to handle a structure fire (i.e. a house fire) on its own as a first arriving rig. Nor is the three man crew (originally two man) able to act appropriately at a structure fire.

These trucks definately have an important role to play, but it seems that with a pump on them and a CAFS system some departments tend to get a little carried away with this trucks capabilities. It is a support unit, and nothing more.

AB

Couldn't agree more! We have had ours since 99', and in it's place it is awesome! But it does not replace the pumper, for sure. We have put out smaller kitchen fires etc with it, and it works well to prevent exposure fires as the foam coats and cools what it is applied to. the biggest problem that I see with it is that although it is quite simple to run, we seem to have a hell of a time getting our guys to figure it out, and also it is utilized completely different than a pumper, and some of our guys don't realize that no matter how many time you explain it to them!

iamvff

[ABFF37]

Couldn't agree more! We have had ours since 99', and in it's place it is awesome! But it does not replace the pumper, for sure. We have put out smaller kitchen fires etc with it, and it works well to prevent exposure fires as the foam coats and cools what it is applied to. the biggest problem that I see with it is that although it is quite simple to run, we seem to have a hell of a time getting our guys to figure it out, and also it is utilized completely different than a pumper, and some of our guys don't realize that no matter how many time you explain it to them!

iamvff

Very true! The CAFS system is great for the exposures and smaller stuff, but as you said, on that type of truck, it needs to be used differently than on a full sized pumper. And it's funny that the truck seems to lull people into a false sense of security for whatever reason. Thankfully my department has smartened up, and they're retro-fitting the hall to accomodate a full sized pump and moving the snuffer into a secondary role. We have seven new Spartan CAFS equipped pumps in six of our halls, and they are pretty amazing. I have had the priveledge of using them and seeing them in action at many fires, and they are truly unbelievable. The snuffer was pretty amazing to watch too for exposures etc...but for the real job, it's best left to its bigger brother ;)

AB :)

[oldarffer]

"You will see nothing but trucks like these and the days of the large full sized pumper are numbered." Maybe not the exact quote but close enough. This is the line of dribble we got from the Snuffer salesman. I am very concerned that city, town or municipality managers will buy in to this baloney and saddle their firefighters with a Snuffer. If the word is in the wind, get informed and fight to get a full sized pumper. Even if it does not have CAFS, a full sized Class A equipped pumper will outperform ANY snuffer made.

[iamvff]

I am very concerned that city, town or municipality managers will buy in to this baloney and saddle their firefighters with a Snuffer. If the word is in the wind, get informed and fight to get a full sized pumper. Even if it does not have CAFS, a full sized Class A equipped pumper will outperform ANY snuffer made.

WOW, talk about closed minded! As several people who actually have snuffers/CAFS units (which, by the way is a brand name! And there are many different brands of CAFS out there) have said on here....They definately do not replace a pumper, but work excellent in the proper application. How will you explain to the municipality that you just talked into buying a full size pumper with a foam system that they can't put out that bale fire because the pumper will sink to it's axles driving through that field or the field fire they could deal with because the pumper won't pump on the fly! Whats that saying that everyone loves so much..."Well, we didn't do it like that 30 years ago" :rolleyes: You are correct...clear up the misconceptions that are out there....but don't rule out new technology! ;)

No offense intended, no offence taken,
have a great day
iamvff

[BenDiesel]

We have just ordered a CAFS system for our hall. The reason we decided to go with a CAFS system is because of the mountainous terrian we live in, a full size pumper has a problem making it to MVA scenes in a timely manner. Also we work in a farming community and as stated a full size pumper has a problem in fields. It's all about the right equipment for the job.

[JoJobrat]

I couldn't agree with you more Ben. It isn't always which is the best equipment, but the best equipment for the area. As a NFF around here I have been checking things out. Not so amazing that there is such a differance in needs between the city and rural depts. Keep an open mind and do some research. It has really taught me a thing or two.

[oldarffer]

Just wanted to clear a few thing up with iamvff. You can buy whatever truck you want to put out bale fires, fences, shrubs and even grass. My big concern is that a bureaucrat will stick the towns firefighters with a vehicle that is GROSSLY inadequate for interior fire attack. Open minds do not put out fire, water does and a typical Snuffer unit supplies inadequate volumes of extinguishant to do that safely. Great for a Rapid Response/Rescue unit or brush truck, but do not be fooled into taking that same line into an involved structure.

[iamvff]

Just wanted to clear a few thing up with iamvff. You can buy whatever truck you want to put out bale fires, fences, shrubs and even grass. My big concern is that a bureaucrat will stick the towns firefighters with a vehicle that is GROSSLY inadequate for interior fire attack. Open minds do not put out fire, water does and a typical Snuffer unit supplies inadequate volumes of extinguishant to do that safely. Great for a Rapid Response/Rescue unit or brush truck, but do not be fooled into taking that same line into an involved structure.

Grossly inadequate?? May I suggest that you do your homework, or you may find yourself to be as decieving as you suggest the salesmen are! We have had a snuffer since 1999, and I would have to say that it is far from grossly inadequate! As a matter of fact, I have personally used it in structure fires, as it has been quite adequate, with minimal to no water damage depending on the size of the fire. The only times it has not been adequate has been when there is a mechanical problem, operator error, or if the fire was beyond the capabilities of the unit. Does it replace a pumper, absolutely not, will it put out a fully involved fire, doubt it, but on the topic of structure fires for a small one room fire or the like, I would use our snuffer without hesitation, as it far out does a pumper for damage control (EG-water damage), and actually will put the fire out faster and stop reignition better than conventional water. With this being said, I would also have the pumper on scene with a charged line ready if required. I am not saying by any means that it is more than it is, I am just saying don't rule it out. There are new technologies created everyday, and this is one!
As far as the issue of a council, or beaurocrat, ordering the wrong item for the job. I am on Town council, and I would suggest that if they don't know by now that a salesman will say what it takes to sell, then they are not responsible on their job! They to should be doing their homework as well! Thats not the fault of the snuffer!!


iamvff

[Bubba]

Was gonna reply to this one months ago, thought it was dead. Our hall has had a Snuffer since the late 90's. Looking over this thread it seems that almost everyone who has replied is either for or against them, and all make valid points. As with any new equipment, it has to be wrung out so you know how to make it suit your need's and what its capabilities really are. You will more than likely break it finding out. In any situation where a single hoseline is adequate this rig cant be beat!. Our's has 150ft of inch and a half on a reel with a dual bore nozzle, and we can make slightly sudsy water or shave cream with a pull of the lever. With an air coupling on the unit we can
power all of our pnuematics as well.

These trucks do have limitations. Most of our's have been addressed by the manufacturer with either updates or suggested OG's. Some problems we had include... blown out water tank (it is plastic...with integral baffles), plugged filters (need to be cleaned after each use and purged during), poor foam consistency (factory preset non adjustable regulators now installed), mysterious pump shift gremlins (manual PTO now installed), poor foam production at 100% duty (beyond system's capability), poor foam production while doing pump & roll (must maintain proper engine RPM), poor foam production with more than 300ft hoseline (friction loss, product degradation), to name the most annoying.

Snuffers will never replace a frontline engine, seems everyone agree's on that. For anything but a structure call though, I usually jump in the Snuffer because I know it wont be the rig thats told to stand down.

Take care all http://www.firehall.com/forum/images/smilies/cool.gif

[Firefighter1680]

we have a few on our dept. tehy are only used tof grass fires etc...I have only run one a few times, very finicky...Jury is out...

[mcleodkent]

We have a guy in our hall that is realy one of the first people to use and preach about CAF. Do your homework. Snuffer may not be the CAF that you want!!!!! just saying, heard there are much better ones.

[ABFF37]

We have a guy in our hall that is realy one of the first people to use and preach about CAF. Do your homework. Snuffer may not be the CAF that you want!!!!! just saying, heard there are much better ones.

Put a CAFS system on a full sized pump, then you'll have a pretty unbelievable unit. A CAFS equipped pump can run straight water, regular class A foam, and CAFS. They are definately the way to go if you want a CAFS unit to do more than just exposures or SMALL structural fires. That's what the snuffers can do, as I have said before, they're simply a support unit. The bigger jobs are best left to the appropriate (and full sized) apparatus.

AB

[Firetruckguy]

There are several makes of CAFS. Waterous or Pneumax (Eclipse), Hale (CAFSPRO) Darley (ODIN Weapon) and then the Snuffer. The performance and capability depends on your budget, needs and locale and no one system is suited for the all.

That being said the majority of full size Engines Pumpers)todate have the Waterous "Eclipse" CAFS and namely Calgary has at least 4 and more on order and Vancouver's going to be ordering 13.

A real strong proponent of the capability of CAFS is Fire Chief Wayne Schnitzlier of Westside Fire-Rescue in Westbank B.C. who just took delivery of a Smeal Custom CAFS Engine with a Waterous "Eclipse" CAFS and he has a Hub "Snuffer" that he had purchased a few years ago. He has both urban and wildland fire situations and can tell you first hand the pros-cons of both.

I know that Calgary had a Snuffer in a Ford F550 4X4 that was to be intended as a Rapid Response apparatus in a new subdivision area but I believe it met with limited success due to a number of issues. That's not to say it won't work for someone else. But Vancouver purchased two (2) Wildland Interface Waterous Pneumax CAFS for their city parks after contacting a number of users of all types.

Do you homework as to needs, operational function and budget..

[vtfirefighter]

Our department is not happy with our Snuffer on a 2008 International 4300.Anyone else had issues with an FRC Pump Boss control?? Our truck returned to dealer and they are working on it to get the truck in service.

[Firetruckguy]

Our department is not happy with our Snuffer on a 2008 International 4300.Anyone else had issues with an FRC Pump Boss control?? Our truck returned to dealer and they are working on it to get the truck in service.

Have you contacted the apparatus builder first and got them to look at it? I'd suggest you contact FRC directly or their Canadian rep whom I'm sure will work with you to get it solved. FRC and Class 1 BOTH make great products and stand behind them.

[FLASHOVER05]

Have you contacted the apparatus builder first and got them to look at it? I'd suggest you contact FRC directly or their Canadian rep whom I'm sure will work with you to get it solved. FRC and Class 1 BOTH make great products and stand behind them.

FRC's Canadian Rep is Mark Biernat.... Great Guy, he also deals with other companies such as Waterous FoamPro and Trident.

mbiernat@ican.net

[Ping007]

One of our next door department, in which we are on automatic mutual aid to with purchased a CAFS unit recently as their first due truck. As posted above, its on a F550 chassis with 200gallons of water and strictly the CAFS system onboard. They purchased it for all the same reasons list above, water supply, manpower, etc. however it is not functional. In this case, if their CAFS system fails, they are left with only a 125gpm PTO pump, not indeal while on an interior attack. As well, even they say how poor it performs in a wildland settings. CAFS has its place, exposure protection mostly, but I would only recommend putting it on a Class A engine/ pumper as an extra, not as a primary unit.

[oldarffer]

Ping007,

We used to have a unit like you described and it's full pumping capacity was 480 lpm (for about 5 seconds), certainly not enough for a proper interior attack.

We are now running close to 20 Waterous Pneumax Eclipse units in Spartan chassis attached to a 6000 lpm pump. We have the ability to flow over 3200 lpm of compressed air foam at one time. CAFS is NOT just for exposures when on a full sized unit that can produce large volumes, NOTHING knocks down fire like a properly pumped CAFS unit.

CAFS has its place - pumped on every type of Class A fire. Relegating the massive benefits of CAFS to exposures is a crime. Unfortunately, if it is on a small, underpumped system with an inadequate air compressor, as in a Snuffer unit, you may form this opinion.

[Frostfire]

I just placed an order for a MXV three man crown (Ft. Garry) with the Watrous eclipse CAFS.
We do not have any CAFS on any of our trucks in the Yukon, this will be the first. I do not know much about the system except they are a great tool for exposures, knockdown, and that training must be maintained on them.
I reviewed the Compressed Air Foam Systems Handbook by Dominic Colletti and on page 163, there is a safety warning which states
"FEMA (Fire Equipment Manufacturers Association) strongly recomends that no hose be used on a CAFS system unless such use is recomended by the manufacturer of the system and the hose manufacturer"

I looked over NFPA 1961- 2007 and there is no mention of special CAFS hose. Can anyone shed a little light on this for me? Does our current NFPA1961 hose meet the requirments for a CAFS or should I be looking for special hose to go with the system?

The Safety warning in the book was dated 1994, it may be outdated but rather be safe than sorry!

[FLASHOVER05]

I haven't heard of any specific fire hose rated for the use of Foam more specifically CAFS applications.... the only fire hose ratings that I am familiar with is the ULC rated

[DFCSmash]

I'll try to do some more checking, but as I remember it, the issue is with lightweight single jacket hose that is overly prone to kinking when it is only carrying air and foam, rather than water.

[Ruckus]

DFCSmash is pretty much on the money. Since CAFs has much less mass than water or water based foam, the hose kinks much easier. With standard hose, this would make interior attacks difficult and dangerous.

The solution is typically 50-100 feet of "noncrimp" hose, which basically never kinks. It looks like it's a pressurized line at all times (even when stowed, which makes it a slight pain in the ass for storage). You usually put your nozzle on the end of one or two lengths of noncrimp, with standard hose between the noncrimp and the truck. That way, the 50-100 feet of hose you're taking with you into the hot zone never kink up, and anything outside should be layed out straight.

From a handling standpoint, it pretty much feels like a charged inch and a half handline except lighter.

[Frostfire]

I should have put the whole paragraph about the warning in. The rest of the warning states;

" Use of nonapproved hose can be dangerous and may cause a hose or coupling failure, producing property damage, bodily injury or death. Always follow the manufacturers reccomendations and instructions on proper use."

The problem lies with possible hose bursting, depending on pressure which in the case of CAFS, MAY release more energy than a line filled with plain water.

There is a CAFS friendly hose available, but I would rather stick to the regular, 1.75" double jacketed hose we normally use for obvious purposes if its safe to do so.

The other question I have is do any CAFS users have the combination CAFS/fog nozzles made byTask Force and would you recommend these types of nozzles or does a straight bore nozzle perform better?

Thanks, very much appreciated!!

[CdnFyreGuy]

Didn't read the whole thing but "Fire Chief" mag had an article about a CAFS line burning through I think. Might be worth taking a look.

[oldarffer]

Frostfire,

The nozzle we use with our CAFS engines is the Akron Saberjet. I am not familiar with the TFT but we have had only minor issues with the Sabrejet and the issues we had were with education and training, not the nozzles themselves. Simple and easy to use, 320 - 400 lpm of CAFS or 500 lpm of Class A or straight water from the solid bore portion of the nozzle gives a great fire attack (620 kPa PP with 60m of 44mm). For the times outside where you may require a fog, the Sabrejet gives you that option too. We standardized our nozzle compliment in 2006 and purchased over 200 Sabrejets (44mm and 65mm) and have had great opportunities to put them to good use.

As for hose. If you are using solid bore nozzles, lower pump pressures are required and the hose is therefore more prone to kinking, CAFS or water. You must enforce good hose discipline - from Batallion Chief to Rookie, you straighten a kink if you see it. We have had experience with the no kink hose and it is a very large pain in the rear end. Try dragging it around the corner and up the stairs, it is very similar to trying to advance a 44mm hoseline at 1040 kPa!!

If you need any more info, please PM me.

[Frostfire]

Thanks Oldarffer

Good information! It appears the TFT is the same as the Akron just different manufacturer.
I have done quite a bit of research since my first post on this subject and wow, did I learn alot about CAFS and the equipment required! The big thing is Training Training training!!!
Much appreciated