The concept of two-piece engine companies dates back more than 100 years when horse-drawn hose-wagons ran with steamers. The concept continued after the advent of motorized apparatus, and some departments used it well into the 1970s. Although the idea of running two separate apparatus instead of a single engine may seem odd today, there are several advantages that departments may want to consider.

In the past, two-piece engine companies usually consisted of a pumper and a hose-wagon. The pumper made the initial attack on a fire, while the hose-wagon laid a supply line to the nearest hydrant. The pumper also had a booster pump and small water tank to handle trash, mattress and other nuisance fires. Variations on this idea included a pumper/hose-wagon matched with a booster/tank-wagon. Some departments ran two nearly identical pumpers but assigned them different tasks at a fire scene.

The advantages of this concept included the ability to carry more equipment and to allocate it to different jobs in different locations. The disadvantages included the requirement for twice the floor space in the station and twice the number of drivers and personnel to operate. Eventually, budget cuts forced many departments to replace two-piece companies with single engines, but the advantages of the older concept still remained.

Today, the two-piece engine company concept would probably appeal most to departments where there are a sufficient number of qualified drivers to respond with both apparatus and there are no limitations on station space. Several possible combinations are possible:

Pumper and water supply unit. This combination would be ideal for departments where hydrants or other easily accessible sources of water aren't available. The pumper would have a main pump, attack hose, a small amount of supply hose, ground ladders and a full complement of rescue equipment. The water tank on the pumper would be small to maximize the compartment space and keep the hosebed low. The water supply unit also would have a main pump and either a large water tank or a hosebed of large-diameter supply hose, depending on how a department chose to use it. It could remain at a fire scene to provide water until a tanker shuttle was established, or lay a supply line to a nearby water source and draft. Both the pumper and water supply unit could be built on short-wheelbase, commercial-chassis vehicles that were less expensive, lighter in weight and more maneuverable than larger, custom-chassis vehicles.

Pumper and incident support unit. This combination would be good for urban areas where hydrants or other water sources are readily available. The pumper would have a main pump, a full amount of both attack and supply hose, ground ladders and a standard-size water tank. It would carry only basic EMS or rescue gear. The incident support unit could have a small pump and tank; a generator; light tower; spare air bottles; and a large amount of EMS, rescue, salvage and other support equipment. It would be designed to supplement the pumper at fire, hazmat and specialized rescue incidents and motor-vehicle accidents. Again, both the pumper and support unit could be built on commercial-chassis vehicles.

Pumper/tanker and brush pumper. Departments that frequently have to respond to wildland and interface fires might want to consider this combination. The larger pumper/tanker would carry all the normal engine company equipment and could handle structure fires, while the smaller brush pumper would carry only a small amount of equipment and could gain access to wildland areas or isolated structures. The brush pumper could use the pumper/tanker for quick water refills to sustain operations. A variation of this combination might be the use of a mid-sized tanker equipped with a small pump teamed with two or more brush pumpers to fight large running grass fires in open terrain.

The concept of two-piece units can be extended to other combinations to serve various functions. For example,

Ladder and ladder tender. Some departments assign rescue functions to their truck companies. In a few cases, departments run well-equipped ladder tenders with additional equipment to support these operations. The tenders look and function like rescue units and often have generators, light towers, and breathing-air cascades or compressors. A few are equipped with pumps, tanks and foam systems to handle vehicle fires.

Hazmat and hazmat squad. Most hazmat units tend to be too big to operate in unpaved areas. When departments have to deal with cleaning up clandestine drug labs and illegal dump sites in remote areas, some pair a small 4x4 squad with a larger hazmat unit to handle the job. The squad can reach the site, make the initial assessment and return with samples for analysis. In many cases, the squad’s crew can contain the materials and transport them back to more accessible areas.

Pumper and foam tanker. Departments with large petrochemical facilities or major transportation hubs in their response areas may need to be prepared for large-scale flammable liquid fires. Rather than specify dedicated, high-capacity foam pumpers, departments might match one or more structure pumpers equipped with standard foam systems to a foam tanker that can supply foam concentrate for long-term suppression operations. A variation on this combination might be a stand-alone foam injection apparatus that combines a high-flow foam injector with a large foam tank to operate with standard pumpers taking water from hydrant systems.

The list of potential combinations goes on, but the advantages remain the same. Two-piece apparatus combinations often can carry more equipment, be positioned where they are most advantageous and remain in operation longer than single apparatus. They can also be more maneuverable, lighter in weight and less expensive. Whatever two-piece combination of apparatus appeals to your department, you might just find that two can be better than one.