On 4 Apr 2018 18:11:47 GMT, Marland wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:34:52 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:


Here's another spotted on Friday:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-43601949

Ever get the feeling maintenance was a bit slack? Also I wouldn't want to be
on an aircraft with problems at that airport if their fire trucks take so
long to turn up that the bus is virtually burnt out.

Different territory (landside vs airside); different fire trucks.

Thats no excuse. Would they have been happy to watch the terminal burn down?



What are the roads like around the terminal.?
The type of Fire truck used at Stansted is 3metres wide, a typical fire
brigade one is 2.3

I doubt the roads are so narrow that the airside type could not get around
driven carefully but in the excitement of a shout it may not be the best
time to find out. And would they be legal to use on a road that while it is
probably airport property may come under the various road traffic acts
because it is accessible by the public.

Stansted Airport Fire Service appear to have a normal fire engine as
well as a handful of much bigger airport specific vehicles. Looks tiny
next to them. All appear to have registration plates and up to date VED
so appear legal on the roads.

(I'm not saying they should respond to anything other than aircraft
fires, just that the fleet would appear to be able to from a driving
on the roads perspective. I expect there is more to fighting fires than
arriving in a big red truck and glaring at it.)

On 05/04/2018 09:58, David Walters wrote:
On 4 Apr 2018 18:11:47 GMT, Marland wrote:
snip

Stansted Airport Fire Service appear to have a normal fire engine as
well as a handful of much bigger airport specific vehicles. Looks tiny
next to them. All appear to have registration plates and up to date VED
so appear legal on the roads.


They need to be "road legal" in order to respond to incidents outside
the airport perimeter using public roads. (I'm not saying they would
always respond. There used to be different procedures for different
airports and some discretion. But it's easy to envisage the outcry if
they sat on their hands for - say - a plane down on the M11 on the basis
that "we're not taxed and insured for that".)

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid