The Motor and the Fire Brigade.
Page 57
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Relative Cost of Horsed and Motor Plant. Settlement of the Turbine v. Reciprocating Pump Controversy.
The twelve months which have elapsed since the publication of the last Overseas edition of this journal have witnessed still greater developments in regard to the installation of fire-extinguishing equipment throughout the world, The case for the motor rests on several indisputable advantages, and these are primarily its greater radius, its higher speed capacity and its enormous saving in upkeep cost.
If the above advantages be not sufficient to persuade those firemasters and fire-brigade committees who are still doubtful as to the policy of superseding the horse, they can no longer hesitate as to their obvious public duty, when they have considered the relative annual costs of the two classes of apparatus.
Culled from the experience and records of several prominent British fire-brigades owning petrol-driven motor pumps ,turbine), we are able to set down average figures for the maintenance of both horsed and motor equipment. Assuming a fairly busy station with, say, 100 fires a year to attend, we can make the following record of actual results achieved:—
Traffic of all kinds on our common roads has speeded up considerably in the last five years, and the old-time coin
parison "as fast as a fire-engine" becomes almost ridiculous at the present time, when a taxicab can, at its normal pace, easily outpace a horsed escape or a steam pump. In regard to distance there is, of course, no need hare to labour the obviously greater capacity of the motor with its tank full of spirit sufficient to carry it, say, 100 miles.
The steam-propelled fire-pump has received little support, but the electrically-driven escape wagon and first-aid equipment have been foiled to yield excellent service for urban purposes.
As might be expected, the supersession of horse-drawn apparatus is having the effect, in large centres, of closing many sub-stations, it now being possible to safeguard from the same centres much larger areas than was previously possible.
Another tendency, which must be noted aecl which may be far-reaching in its results, is that shown by small local authorities in Provincial England to combine for the purpose of mutual fire protection by the co-operative purchase of up-todate extinguishing apparatus. The cost of a typical motor fire pump may be anything up to £1000, and this prime expenditure is a matter for careful consideration, of course, on the part of small local authorities. Such a sum, however, is of little matter when three or four provincial councils or their equivalents can share the expense, and, consequently, can share the protection afforded by apparatus of the very latest kind.
It must be remembered that the mileage of motor fire-brigade apparatus is remarkably low in comparison with other forms of suitable self-propelled traffic. Actual running and maintenance costs are of little importance provided that higher efficiency of service be secured, for, in such employment, of course, this is all-important.
With regard to the vexed question of turbine v. reciprocating pump, practical firemen all over the world are showing preference for the former type, The latest proof of this tendency is afforded by the Sydney Brigade's repeat order for nine more Dennis-Gwynne turbine pumps, after consideration of other types, compared with only three ram-pump engines.
The undeniable advantages of the turbine pump, compared with the reciprocating type, are these : (1) lower price ; (2) constant flow ; (3) better jets; (4) better lifting capacity ; (5) better average efficiency over usual range of work ; (6) facility to utilize and augment pressure in main without loss.