Rescue51

I don't see them getting two stations, though that might be nice. Maybe only one station. I like the idea in north Santee, off Magnolia. I know with the Rancho Fanita development, I thought they were slated to get another station towards the west end of Santee. Not sure. So Santee has fs's 4 + 5. 4's runs an engine, a truck, and recently I am seeing a squad. Not sure if the new 4x4 patrol will be at 4's or 5's. Probably makes sense out of 5's as 4's has a newer type-3 brush rig (Brush-4). Plus 5's runs a fair amount of rescues for the Mission Trails area, and the 4x4 would be a good resource. Fs5 runs two pumpers out of the house, E5 and E205. Though I like traditional RED color rigs, I like the Santee tradition of YELLOW. The rigs at fs4 are RED now. Getting new stations are a huge commitment. They need rigs for them, and personnel running 24/7/365. Lots of $$$. ~Rescue51 https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/recent-fire-deaths-heighten-calls-fire-protection-ballot-measure-santee

Too bad Pierce does not offer the Quantums any longer. I know that was the preferred choice for Oceanside FD.

Good to know SCNRADIO, thank you for adding new information. It will be interesting to get some dirt on the new Squad-4. I suspect it might be a tender type to T4, used for MedAid calls and more. Hopefully as such, it will reduce the depreciation, mileage and wear & tear, not to mention what is rarely mentioned, which is keep the availability status higher when not used (truck) for BLS level calls.

Could this be what was listed as SQ4, instead a patrol? Nice looking rig. 300gwt. Photo credit South Coast Fire.

Seems some departments are doing what I recommended (like a parrot) for many years, which is to use a squad or rescue (technical/USAR) in place of a aerial ladder truck, for the high volume of medical aids, especially so many being BLS level. It is nice to see them doing this like El Cajon/Heartland Fire-Rescue's SQ6. I am seeing recently a SQ4 too for Santee FD, I am assuming in place of their Pierce TDA.

I noticed on a run last night, Santee FD had Squad 4 (SQ4) along with Truck 4 (T4) on the incident. Anyone have any information on which rig the "squad" is? Thanks.

Interesting to run the newer Pierce truck (formerly T15) out of 14's, as 14's is such a busy station. They will run the truck into the ground. I thought maybe the reserve truck (T215) was assigned to 14's if their front-line Pierce pumper was out of service. But, in reading the information here, seems T15 is now T14.

My understanding is Pierce no longer takes new orders/build on the Velocity design/specs. Oceanside must have slipped those orders in last year +++.

I understand, Heartland Fire-Rescue's E11 (La Mesa), may have just taken delivery of another new Pierce pumper. The front-line rig from a delivery date of around 2016, was damaged by an out-of-control vehicle, and is in for repairs. When finished, apparently it will become the front-line for Fs13.

Many agencies in Southern California seem to be finally adding BLS rigs, which is a great idea to give relief to the ALS boxes always running to hangnails, nose bleeds, and the frequent flyers with mental, or other chronic 911 call requests. Over 2 decades ago a few departments experimented for a while with the call downgrades to BLS level, and were running specific rigs for that, but I understand potential liability became a reason for taking those out of service. Today, the crazy call volume of medical aids, is overwhelming the systems. I also have been advising for 20 years for agencies to stop running their trucks (ladders/towers/platforms) on the BLS type calls. It is wearing those rigs out way too early, and at today's $1.2 - $1.5 (+/-) purchase outlay for a truck, it makes no sense.

Anyone have info or pics on the rig that is new, responding from fs#17, as S17?

I noticed that Lemon Grove E10 is now running an older Pierce, versus the newer Pierce acquired a few years back. I would think if fs10 is running a reserve as E10, it would be numbered E310, since their 2nd operational Pierce pumper is numbered E210. Anyone have any clues? I noticed La Mesa E13 is now one of the newer Pierce rigs, very standardized with E11, El Cajon's E6, E8, E9. Wish Heartland was still doing their newsletter electronic updates that they once did, but it seems many of the agencies do not do updates on their websites any longer like in past. Perhaps I will check to see if they updated anything on their Facebook accounts. ~Rescue51

I noted on a T/C response tonight Ramona was running USAR#80 on that run. I did not realize Ramona got a USAR. They previously were running a 2007 or so walk-around rescue they received I believe from the County of San Diego Fire Authority. Interesting changes ahead up in Ramona.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/ramona-sentinel/news/story/2021-12-08/planning-group-supports-water-districts-move-to-relinquish-its-emergency-services-oversight Ramona Planning Group supports plan to move fire and emergency services oversight to county By Julie Gallant Dec. 8, 2021 9:33 AM PT Ramona Community Planning Group members are backing the Ramona Municipal Water District’s efforts to transfer its oversight of fire and emergency medical services to the San Diego County Fire Protection District. At their Dec. 2 meeting, members voted 14-0-1, with member Kevin Wallace abstaining, in favor of the proposal. “This should have happened a long time ago,” said Casey Lynch, a Planning Board member. “The Ramona Municipal Water District needs to get back to providing water, sewer and parks services. Getting fire services off the books and into the county’s hands, where we know they do a good job, will give us more protection and care in fighting fires.” Water district Directors Jim Hickle and Jim Piva gave a presentation to the group on how emergency service response levels could be increased without taxes or fee increases. Hickle said the water district took charge of fire and EMS services in 1981, when it merged with the Ramona Fire Protection District. In 1993, the water district started contracting for emergency services with Cal Fire, which continues to provide services today. Most water district customers have paid $188 per household annually for emergency services since that time, but the costs to provide the services have been increasing by about 5 percent per year, Hickle said. And the growth in emergency responses to 4,000 calls annually is due in part to tourists and other pass-through traffic in Ramona and also to a growing population of 45,000, he said. Hickle and Piva joined Craig Schmollinger, interim general manager, on an ad hoc subcommittee to review the finances of providing emergency services and the need for increased services. One of their recommendations was to increase staff on fire engines at Ramona Fire Stations 81 and 82 to three personnel, which they say is an industry standard. Another was to add a third advanced life support (ALS) ambulance in Ramona. Committee members also looked at ways of increasing emergency services. But after a meeting with Cal Fire Chief Tony Mecham they determined the best solution is to transfer authority to the San Diego County Fire Protection District. Reverting to a self-run Ramona Fire Department would be too costly and placing a fire services tax on the ballot for voters to consider is not likely to pass with a two-thirds approval requirement, they said. “Fire services need to increase, not decrease,” Hickle said. “We came to the agreement that what we feel is the best option is to transfer authority to San Diego County Fire Protection District. The county has more discretionary funds and economies of scale to pay for the services.” On Dec. 14, the water district board will meet at 6 p.m. at the Ramona Community Center, 434 Aqua Lane, to get public input on the proposal to apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to transfer oversight to the county Fire Protection District. Planning Group member Dawn Perfect asked whether the Ramona Fire Department’s buildings, land and equipment would be transferred to the county if the transition takes place. Piva said the facilities and their maintenance would become the county’s responsibility. But if Ramona incorporates in the future, the assets, including the land, would be returned at “zero cost,” which is the same as what the water district is charging the county, he said. In other action, Planning Group members agreed to draft a letter expressing their interest in “exploring” the option to move Ramona to a Community Services District and send it to LAFCO. In August, LAFCO staff recommended that Ramona form a Community Services District as a way for the community to be governed locally. It would be considered a transitional step toward incorporating in the future, officials said. The recommendation was made based on Ramona’s growing population and trend toward urbanization. Planning Group member Torry Brean said the letter should clarify that the Planning Group is not taking a position on forming a Community Services District but intends to get more information about the concept to be able to make an informed decision. Planning Group Chairwoman Robin Joy Maxson said the group already responded to LAFCO’s presentation on the proposal and sent their feedback to the agency. The next step is to send a letter to LAFCO expressing their interest in exploring options, she said.

I noticed the older Pierce pumper now has the numbering on it E10 which was E210. Assuming the newer Pierce is not E210. I assume from a fleet management perspective, they are trying to put runs/time/miles/cycles on the older engine, and maybe E210 gets more runs unless they use a rotation system at the house. It would not surprise me to see another Pierce engine going to Fs#10's though I could be wrong. Wonder which rig is the spare/reserve that runs as E310? Thanks