# Whats the fastest you ambulance can go?



## bobsicle (Sep 19, 2013)

Yesterday my partner got it up to 94mph on the freeway downhill and I was able to get it up to 93mph that night. It pretty much topped out at 93-95 downhill. 

What is the fastest your rig can go?


----------



## chaz90 (Sep 19, 2013)

*Sarcasm on* I don't consider it a productive day until I have the speedometer wrapped around to 15 again and my partner is wailing for mercy louder than the siren. *Sarcasm off* Seriously with this thread though? I don't think I'd be advertising how poor my driving choices were on a public forum.


----------



## akflightmedic (Sep 19, 2013)

Sheer stupidity...I vote for a thread lock down (if I had that privilege).


----------



## STXmedic (Sep 19, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> Sheer stupidity...I vote for a thread lock down (if I had that privilege).



This.


----------



## Medic Tim (Sep 19, 2013)

emtsocal said:


> Yesterday my partner got it up to 94mph on the freeway downhill and I was able to get it up to 93mph that night. It pretty much topped out at 93-95 downhill.
> 
> What is the fastest your rig can go?



Mind telling us the area so we know to avoid it.

Lights and sirens do not save lives.... and they don't really affect transport times...lights and sirens does not mean speed and get there fast.... lights and sirens are designed so you can make a smooth direct path to where you are going.


----------



## mike1390 (Sep 19, 2013)

It appears the OP works for Americare ambulance. I know a supervisor from there is a member here hopefully they see this and will can this $*** head. Talk about stupidity.


----------



## EMT B (Sep 19, 2013)

mine will make .5 past light speed...


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Sep 19, 2013)

70mph is the fastest I have gone. Speeding in an ambulance is an extremely stupid and dangerous thing to do.


----------



## Tigger (Sep 19, 2013)

DesertEMT66 said:


> 70mph is the fastest I have gone. Speeding in an ambulance is an extremely stupid and dangerous thing to do.



Almost as stupid...putting it in writing on a popular forum where your employer is easy to identify.


----------



## Jim37F (Sep 19, 2013)

emtsocal said:


> Yesterday my partner got it up to 94mph on the freeway downhill and I was able to get it up to 93mph that night. It pretty much topped out at 93-95 downhill.
> 
> What is the fastest your rig can go?



Please tell me this was in the new grand theft auto game and not in real life


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Sep 19, 2013)

Jim37F said:


> Please tell me this was in the new grand theft auto game and not in real life



I doubt so or else his post would have probably included "running over some hookers, shooting some citizens, and blowing up a helicopter".


----------



## exodus (Sep 19, 2013)

DesertEMT66 said:


> 70mph is the fastest I have gone. Speeding in an ambulance is an extremely stupid and dangerous thing to do.



I have done over 100....   kmh


----------



## Mariemt (Sep 19, 2013)

I have caught myself cruising down the highway and looked down and thought oops, I better put my cruise on. I'm a little lead footed today. Of course there was no patient on at the time and we were headed back from a transfer. So I set it at 67 in a 65 . I'm a rebel.

In all seriousness, we are not allowed to go high speeds in our rig, nor would I want to. I have enough to look out for if I'm driving emergent,  why add dangerous speeds on top of it. 90+ ? With my crew in the back? No way how would they survive that? How would a small car going through an intersection make out? They wouldn't . Use your head!


----------



## Aprz (Sep 19, 2013)

When we go above 72 mph I think, it alerts our dispatch. They can see our location, speed, and if we are going CODE 3 or not. They can also unlock our ambulance for us.

Just because it's CODE 3 doesn't mean we have to go 10 mph over the speed limit (law is up to 15 mph, 10 mph is company policy). Like others said, smooth safe driving is more important.

I once had two transports from the same sending and receiving facility in a row that is about 19 miles apart. One CODE 3, one not. Surprisingly, we saved 4 minutes (I would've thought seconds up to a minute). Maybe we recorded the time incorrectly, or also most of the transport is on a busy street with tons of lights. Still, 4 minutes is not worth risking my life, my crews' lives, the patient's life, or the public.


----------



## CFal (Sep 19, 2013)

I once saw an ambulance going 95 on the way back from the hospital to the station, no lights or sirens


----------



## Achilles (Sep 19, 2013)

I got ours up to 58 in a 55. :blush: 
Speeding is bad :nod:


----------



## MissK (Sep 19, 2013)

Our units are governed at 82, but we're only allowed to do 10 over the posted speed limit.


----------



## TransportJockey (Sep 21, 2013)

75... That's out limit on the freeways (cause it's the speedlimit out here). I know when I worked in Texas we could hit just about 80 in our Medium Duty (but the speed limit on that freeway is 80). One of the local services which I no longer work for have a habit, that pisses everyone off and is contributing to them going under, of going everywhere at 95mph (the max governed speed of their units)


EDIT: I hope that supervisor sees this and can figure out who the hell it was. They need to be disciplined a bit


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 21, 2013)

310 mph.................


----------



## Achilles (Sep 21, 2013)

Flight-LP said:


> 310 mph.................



What do you average, and what's the range?


----------



## 9D4 (Sep 21, 2013)

http://youtu.be/-Z_mqjyndXE?t=1m38s
I think this one beat you OP :rofl: (headphone users may want to turn it down a bit).
Edit: Also agreed about the supervisor should be informed.


----------



## wannabeHFD (Sep 21, 2013)

I had to respond to a call in another district of ours that took me down a long straight highway. Around here cars will pass us even going emergency. It was a grease burn at a fast food place so I decided to punch it. Got a little over 95.


----------



## firetender (Sep 21, 2013)

*Comment from the bone yard*

I don't imagine things have changed much in 35 or so years. 

Until you're in the driver's seat of an ambulance, as a kid the perception is that a large percentage of medics WILL push the edge of the envelope any chance they get. It doesn't matter if that's the truth or not, that's what gets noticed; not the ambulance quietly and calmly wending its way to the hospital or scene. These are really cool, lit-up boxes running around the streets doing stuff that civilians just don't get to do. Your little kid head interprets this as freedom.

"Give me a piece of THAT action!" gets ingrained in you at an early age. Probably before you understand this responsibility thing. When those lights and sirens start coming your way, what do you perk up and look for? How fast is the guy willing to go? How will he/she handle all those pesky other vehicles in his/her way? The adrenaline rush of watching transfers over into the adrenaline rush of wanting to do.

So for relatively young medics newly entering the field (we're talking the vast majority of Newbies), you could count on, uh, let's just say testosterone-like hormone levels (this applies to female medics as well) determining just how far the person will take advantage of the perceived opportunity to push society's limits.

Being handed the keys to an ambulance is not unlike being brought to the Tree of Knowledge, you know, the one with the snake and the apple?

This field does not attract the sedate and easily regimented. For Goddsakes, no matter how much they are warned away from thinking it, who completely eliminates the romantic, Super-hero image of getting all the tools and freedom they need to actually save lives? And who amongst us is immune from pushing the pedal closer to the metal (literally or figuratively) in the belief that -- especially in THIS case -- every second counts?

So for all the flack the OP is getting, please, don't kid yourselves. Driving motor vehicles fast and furious is part of U.S. culture. Beating the cops at their own game is a National pastime. Just the idea of getting a chance to stretch the rules of the road is an attractor to the field and for all the political correctness that everyone wants to project, it's a part of the reality of EMS and gets acted out often.

Shock and outrage at a simple, typically American question "What have you had that baby up to?" presents a very nice image of professionalism. But I don't think it's realistic. And I completely understand why many are reluctant to fess up to expressing a very human trait; taking it to the limit.

This is coming from your Grandfather who prided himself on 3 a.m. 90 MPH charges from a move-up position at a godforsaken cow-patch into town 18 miles away and did pretty good at cultivating relationships with local LEOs so I'd get away with it.

I don't really buy that we were a different breed in the 1970's. What do you think?


----------



## Stoked (Sep 21, 2013)

9D4 said:


> http://youtu.be/-Z_mqjyndXE?t=1m38s
> I think this one beat you OP :rofl: (headphone users may want to turn it down a bit).



Fake. 

Lights and sirens?  Check.

Ludicrous, even plaid speed?  Check.

No backboard visible?  

Fails the smell test.


----------



## 9D4 (Sep 21, 2013)

firetender said:


> I don't imagine things have changed much in 35 or so years.
> 
> Until you're in the driver's seat of an ambulance, as a kid the perception is that a large percentage of medics WILL push the edge of the envelope any chance they get. It doesn't matter if that's the truth or not, that's what gets noticed; not the ambulance quietly and calmly wending its way to the hospital or scene. These are really cool, lit-up boxes running around the streets doing stuff that civilians just don't get to do. Your little kid head interprets this as freedom.
> 
> ...


Some valid points. IMO, however there's a big difference stupidity and acting on a romantic notion of such in the field. There's also a big difference between doing something stupid and doing something stupid when you're liable for other's lives and when someone besides yourself would be liable for damages (employer would be on the hook if someone going 90+ wrecked into a pedestrian, another car, etc... not just financially, but also with their reputation). 
There's also a big difference between acting on those same romantic notions in your POV and as a professional. If you only want to get into EMS to be able to "push the envelope"... Well, that's just not a very valid reason and I know for damn sure I wouldn't want you to work on me. 
Now, for all that, I haven't gotten much field time under my belt (but I am in the young demographic you described), but I'd like to think I'm rational enough to know that being an endangerment to everyone else on the road, myself, my partner, and my patient isn't going to help at all. Especially when you consider what exactly you are driving; poor handling, poor brakes, high center of gravity. Excessive speed comes with a hell of a lot more risk in something like that.
Edit: I would like to say that even though I think that I'm rational enough, I'm definitely not immune to the bug for more speed. So, take what I said with a grain of salt. This is from the perspective of a 18 YOM that has worked in the field, but never drove. So, I'm rather limited on my view. I can say from my work, though (I've been working part time at a dealership), that even though I get the opportunity of driving the occasional LS Camaro and other of the sorts, that I have never acted on the urge of driving someone else's car recklessly. Which I know doesn't translate equivalently, but it's the closest example I have.


----------



## Akulahawk (Sep 21, 2013)

What's the fastest I've _ever_ driven an ambulance? Only as fast as I needed to go... and _never_  faster than conditions allowed. That being said, there were times when I  took the ambulance right to the engine RPM limiter. Our ambulances  didn't have a governor on them. My best guesstimate was that the  speediest of the ambulances could do about 104 MPH. I might be off by a  couple MPH. Literally. I also can count on both hands the number of  times that speed was necessary (and safe fortunately) over the course of  7 years in the field. 

And to answer the next question: No, I  didn't like one minute of it. Going that fast was NEVER fun. The freeway  portion of those runs probably averaged close to 103 MPH and the  surface street portion probably averaged 45. I'm MUCH more wary of Code 3  driving on the street than I am on the freeway.


----------



## Amberlamps916 (Sep 21, 2013)

Our ambulances are equiped with "roac safety".....governed at 75mph.


----------



## Jim37F (Sep 21, 2013)

Flight-LP said:


> 310 mph.................



Me guesses yours doesn't come with a Ford oval or Chevy bowtie on the front... XD


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 21, 2013)

Average is probably around 175-200 and range is about 1200 miles. Give or take a few,  lol


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 21, 2013)

Jim37F said:


> Me guesses yours doesn't come with a Ford oval or Chevy bowtie on the front... XD



Nope. Dual PT-6 engines.........


----------



## CFal (Sep 22, 2013)

firetender said:


> i don't imagine things have changed much in 35 or so years.
> 
> Until you're in the driver's seat of an ambulance, as a kid the perception is that a large percentage of medics will push the edge of the envelope any chance they get. It doesn't matter if that's the truth or not, that's what gets noticed; not the ambulance quietly and calmly wending its way to the hospital or scene. These are really cool, lit-up boxes running around the streets doing stuff that civilians just don't get to do. Your little kid head interprets this as freedom.
> 
> ...



 ++1


----------



## akflightmedic (Sep 22, 2013)

Firetender,

While your message is inherently correct, I will publicly take the position of being a hypocrite.

Yes, we have all foolishly pushed the limits either in an ambulance or our POV, however the majority of us soon realize either by natural personal development or by unfortunate incident, that the decision was not the wisest and should be avoided.

With that being agreed, those of us who "feigned" displeasure at the lack of the OP's professionalism did so out of good intentions. When the neophyte comes along, we should set higher standards (professional hypocrisies if you will), in order to try and change the mentality which has permeated our culture too long and not really contributed to obtaining the respect and support we need from the community as a whole. I do not think it is in anyone's interests if every single senior member immediately began with tales of speed and risk.

I relate this to my kids...there is a time and place to tell them most everything. I will not fill their heads with story after story of how much pot I smoked and how fun it was. When the time was right, I did tell them I smoked weed. It was pretty much to the point of Yes I did it, Yes I enjoyed it but I quit because of x y z. We discussed both the pros and cons and this led into a deeper discussion of how I support its legalization, regulation and recreational use. But I know from that sit down and discussion (and many follow up discussions) that they understand the risks and challenges choosing to engage in could pose.

This is the same for the new guy bragging about speeding in his ambulance. We had to engage the behavior, talk about risks (which many did), provide studies or discuss studies about how time is not really saved (again some did), and overall express displeasure with the act itself but now know the OP is fully informed of the potential risks and challenges should he choose to do this again.

That in itself is human nature at it's finest (?)...


----------



## JumboBeef (Sep 23, 2013)

I'm in The UK, and this thread has interested me.

Are you talking about speeds on the open highway, as opposed to around town?  Our normal speed limit for Ambulances on a motorway (your freeway) is 70, so 90-95 on an emergency run (in good weather conditions etc) is normal (and you'd be overtaken by cars, 90+mph is pretty normal).

Seems I would be shot for doing those speeds over there


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 23, 2013)

It is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on if the speeds are safe or not.

Blanket statements by either side of the argument are equally wrong.


----------



## Jim37F (Sep 23, 2013)

JumboBeef said:


> I'm in The UK, and this thread has interested me.
> 
> Are you talking about speeds on the open highway, as opposed to around town?  Our normal speed limit for Ambulances on a motorway (your freeway) is 70, so 90-95 on an emergency run (in good weather conditions etc) is normal (and you'd be overtaken by cars, 90+mph is pretty normal).
> 
> Seems I would be shot for doing those speeds over there



This might be an issue of mixing up kilometers per hour versus miles per hour. I'm not very good with the math but I do know 100kph is roughly 62mph or slightly slower than the speed limit on the freeways around here. 

Based on the OPs past forum responses (visible under their profile) we can pretty much narrow down that he/she lives and works in Southern California and is therefor most likely using miles. A quick look on my handy converter app says 100mph is roughly 161kph, a far different story than 95-100kph.


----------



## Tigger (Sep 23, 2013)

ffemt8978 said:


> It is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on if the speeds are safe or not.
> 
> Blanket statements by either side of the argument are equally wrong.



When would it be appropriate to operate an ambulance at speeds exceeding 90 miles per hour?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 23, 2013)

Tigger said:


> When would it be appropriate to operate an ambulance at speeds exceeding 90 miles per hour?



Ever driven through Montana?  :rofl:

I didn't specify a speed, nor did I say it was appropriate.  What I said was it is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on.

Is 90 mph appropriate on every road or interstate?  Nope.  Could it be appropriate in an area where the posted speed limit is 75-80mph?  Maybe.


----------



## Jim37F (Sep 23, 2013)

Oh sorry Jumbo, I just re-read and saw you used mph. Maybe this is why one shouldn't post very first thing when he wakes up before the coffee is had? Lol


----------



## firetender (Sep 23, 2013)

akflightmedic said:


> When the neophyte comes along, we should set higher standards (professional hypocrisies if you will), in order to try and change the mentality which has permeated our culture too long and not really contributed to obtaining the respect and support we need from the community as a whole. I do not think it is in anyone's interests if every single senior member immediately began with tales of speed and risk.
> 
> ...


 
I can't disagree there. 

The important thing is that there are many different Points of View and attitudes here for a Newbie to choose from. 

In reading over the responses to the OP I realize that particular immaturity was quite prevalent amongst me and my peers. With some examples set here -- even by those who trashed the OP for just sayin' -- perhaps a bit of discernment is becoming part of the culture. That would be great!

My point; until we start speaking with each other honestly about the psychological and behavioral quirks we exhibit in response to the unique craziness of the job description, EMS will continue to be the profession that never quite got born.

40-something years of labor has to be enough to push this kid out there, dontcha think?


----------



## Tigger (Sep 23, 2013)

ffemt8978 said:


> Ever driven through Montana?  :rofl:
> 
> I didn't specify a speed, nor did I say it was appropriate.  What I said was it is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on.
> 
> Is 90 mph appropriate on every road or interstate?  Nope.  Could it be appropriate in an area where the posted speed limit is 75-80mph?  Maybe.



Not in Montana, just super rural Colorado.

There is no time in which driving over 90 is acceptable, I'm okay with making a blanket statement on that one. We have posted 75 areas where the road is straight for miles and visibility is excellent. Believe me, there's lots of flatness out here. 

It is still inexcusable. 

An accident at that speed will be horrific, and might well have been preventable going 15 slower. 

We see what happens when mistakes are made at that speed and then often follow that with commenting on how dumb the driver was for driving that fast. I don't think I've ever been to a TA with speed as a contributing factor where I thought "you know his speeding was probably ok."

Yet somehow we are willing to accept it when our own do it? Even when we know that it serves no clinical benefit? When we are operating vehicles that are well known to be deficient in terms of crashworthiness?

We can what if or say it might be acceptable all we want but I don't think anyone can argue that this is the sort of example we should be setting, both for our fellow providers and the general public.


----------



## JumboBeef (Sep 24, 2013)

Tigger said:


> There is no time in which driving over 90 is acceptable, I'm okay with making a blanket statement on that one. We have posted 75 areas where the road is straight for miles and visibility is excellent. Believe me, there's lots of flatness out here.
> 
> It is still inexcusable.



This must be a difference between The UK and The USA.  Here (as long as conditions allow), you are pretty much expected to hit 90+ (mph) otherwise you are not making good progress.

Why do you consider 90mph unsafe? (On an open, clear road?)


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Sep 24, 2013)

JumboBeef said:


> This must be a difference between The UK and The USA.  Here (as long as conditions allow), you are pretty much expected to hit 90+ (mph) otherwise you are not making good progress.
> 
> Why do you consider 90mph unsafe? (On an open, clear road?)



If you get a blow out going 90mph that is just asking for you to loose control. If you need to make a quick lane change to avoid something (animal, debris) that can easily result in fish tailing and a crash. A random gust of wind hits the ambulance, other mechanical failures, other vehicles that you maybe passing in either direction. Heck at 90mph with our ambulances if you hit a bump in the road you could easily lose control. 

Mix something as top heavy as an ambulance and extreme speed and you are asking for bad things to happen.


----------



## Aprz (Sep 24, 2013)

Mortality increases exponentially as speed increases. If transporting, the patient in the back may be exposed to unsecure equipment, they themselves may not be restrained, and it doesn't look like the back of the ambulance just isn't safe period in accidents.

I haven't read anything that says higher speeds is associated with increased number of accidents. I guess in theory, you do have to react much quicker if something unexpected happened so I think there would be a higher chance of accident.

Overall, I don't think the risk is worth it, and studies have proven that we do not really save a significant amount of time driving faster, and that most emergencies do not benefit from fast response times.


----------



## JumboBeef (Sep 24, 2013)

DesertEMT66 said:


> If you get a blow out going 90mph that is just asking for you to loose control. If you need to make a quick lane change to avoid something (animal, debris) that can easily result in fish tailing and a crash. A random gust of wind hits the ambulance, other mechanical failures, other vehicles that you maybe passing in either direction. Heck at 90mph with our ambulances if you hit a bump in the road you could easily lose control.
> 
> Mix something as top heavy as an ambulance and extreme speed and you are asking for bad things to happen.



Maybe this is more down to the sort of ambulances in The USA?  Would you agree that American motors are....softer sprung.... than European motors?  I have driven both, and that is how it feels to me.

Our ambulances are not sports cars, but the ride is firm.  Chuck them into a corner, and they will hold the road (relevantly) well for what they are.

I've never heard of an accident here, purely down to high speed.


----------



## JumboBeef (Sep 24, 2013)

I couldn't add this to my last post, as I needed 5 posts, which I now have.  

Typically our ambulances look like this:

Van conversion:







Box:


----------



## JumboBeef (Sep 24, 2013)

Whoa! Huge!  Sorry....


----------



## Aprz (Sep 24, 2013)

If speeding does not significantly save time and only few emergencies benefit from rapid response, what's the point of speeding? Seems like you are only increasing chance of mortality if you do get into an accident.


----------



## MrJones (Sep 24, 2013)

Tigger said:


> Not in Montana, just super rural Colorado.
> 
> There is no time in which driving over 90 is acceptable, I'm okay with making a blanket statement on that one. We have posted 75 areas where the road is straight for miles and visibility is excellent. Believe me, there's lots of flatness out here.
> 
> ...



What speed do you believe to be acceptable and/or excusable? And on what do you base that belief?


----------



## Tigger (Sep 24, 2013)

Appropriate speed is dependent on road conditions, weather, and equipment. However even with smooth roads, perfect weather, and well designed equipment, that appropriate speed should never exceed 90. That is the ceiling. There are no conditions in which is the risks associated with traveling at that speed are outweighed by the patient benefit. 

Do we think it's ever appropriate for the general public to do this? And save the whole "it's what the speed of traffic is in my area" crap, even if that's true it doesn't make it anywhere near acceptable or appropriate.


----------



## MrJones (Sep 24, 2013)

Tigger said:


> Appropriate speed is dependent on road conditions, weather, and equipment. However even with smooth roads, perfect weather, and well designed equipment, that appropriate speed should never exceed 90. That is the ceiling. There are no conditions in which is the risks associated with traveling at that speed are outweighed by the patient benefit.
> 
> Do we think it's ever appropriate for the general public to do this? And save the whole "it's what the speed of traffic is in my area" crap, even if that's true it doesn't make it anywhere near acceptable or appropriate.



OK, that's the first half of the question. Now, what do you base this on? Empirical studies? Relevant traffic laws? Your gut? And why 90? Why not, say, 85 or, better yet, 80 (being 10 MPH over the usual interstate speed limit)?


----------



## patzyboi (Sep 25, 2013)

9D4 said:


> http://youtu.be/-Z_mqjyndXE?t=1m38s
> I think this one beat you OP :rofl: (headphone users may want to turn it down a bit).
> Edit: Also agreed about the supervisor should be informed.



Nice. Where can i get one of those


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

ffemt8978 said:


> It is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on if the speeds are safe or not.
> 
> Blanket statements by either side of the argument are equally wrong.



Sorry bud, not this time.

93mph in an ambulance on a public roadway is NEVER appropriate.  This is a blanket statement that is frankly not debatable.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

Reading further in the thread I noticed someone from the UK who chimed in that this was the norm there.  I'd be curious to know if ambulances are geared differently and handle differently, because if they are built like trucks as they are in the US, I'd still maintain they are making a mistake driving that fast.


----------



## Amberlamps916 (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> Sorry bud, not this time.
> 
> 93mph in an ambulance on a public roadway is NEVER appropriate.  This is a blanket statement that is frankly not debatable.



Quoted for truth.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> Sorry bud, not this time.
> 
> 93mph in an ambulance on a public roadway is NEVER appropriate.  This is a blanket statement that is frankly not debatable.



And where do you derive the number 93MPH as being inappropriate from?  What maximum speed is appropriate in your opinion, and what references do you base your opinion on?  Simply saying it's not appropriate in your opinion does not make it non-debatable...prove it, or at least provide some references to support your claim.



FiremanMike said:


> Reading furthery in the thread I noticed someone from the UK who chimed in that this was the norm there.  I'd be curious to know if ambulances are geared differently and handle differently, because if they are built like trucks as they are in the US, I'd still maintain they are making a mistake driving that fast.



That's quite different than your comment of your blanket statement not being debatable.

According to this link, there are parts of the U.S where the speed limit is 85MPH, and others where the limit is 80MPH.  Are you saying that ambulances in those areas should be driving below the speed limit because it's not debatable in your opinion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_United_States


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

ffemt8978 said:


> And where do you derive the number 93MPH as being inappropriate from?  What maximum speed is appropriate in your opinion, and what references do you base your opinion on?  Simply saying it's not appropriate in your opinion does not make it non-debatable...prove it, or at least provide some references to support your claim.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The point of lights and sirens is not to go faster than the flow of traffic, it is to get the ambulance around slower moving traffic or a traffic jam.  If the flow of traffic is 85mph, then there's really nothing impeding the ambulance from getting through.  At your insistence of traveling at 5-10mph above those speeds "because we can" you are saving a negligible amount of time in transit and it should become a question of "is this really worth pushing this truck beyond it's limits".  Honestly, I find it horribly irritating when ambulances have their lights and sirens on on the freeway when not in heavy, slow moving traffic.  Not only are they driving too fast, saving almost no time off their transit, but they are generally confusing the crap out of other drivers.

Ambulances in America (at least the brands I am aware of) are trucks first and ambulances second.  They are top heavy, geared like trucks, have suspension and shock systems like trucks, and generally have the overloaded breaking systems to begin with.  These vehicles are not designed to operate at such speeds.  If ambulances in Europe are designed as high performance vehicles, then I suppose this would be the only debatable point.  As I have no first hand knowledge of ambulances in Europe, I left that caveat open in the event I was mistaken.

I lost my "balls to the wall" speed on runs about 10 years ago, but to be honest I lost my "responding lights and sirens to the hospital" last year after starting a part time job on a MICU.  When I was smacked in the face with sick ICU patients for 2+ hours and going with the flow of traffic, nothing on the EMS side seemed that bad anymore.  I began to realize that going lights and sirens generally saved little time and just created an increased risk of minor and major auto accidents.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 25, 2013)

Where did I even remotely say "At your insistence of traveling at 5-10mph above those speeds "because we can"?  What I said was 90mph COULD be appropriate, depending upon a variety of factors.  

For reference, here is my post in question with the relevant part highlighted...


ffemt8978 said:


> Ever driven through Montana?  :rofl:
> 
> I didn't specify a speed, nor did I say it was appropriate.  What I said was it is highly dependent upon the region and type of road you are on.
> 
> Is 90 mph appropriate on every road or interstate?  Nope.  Could it be appropriate in an area where the posted speed limit is 75-80mph?  Maybe.




I simply asked you to provide a basis and some support for your claims, which you have yet to do.  

And this is not a discussion about the use of lights/sirens, since there are a plethora of those around here.


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

ffemt8978 said:


> Where did I even remotely say "At your insistence of traveling at 5-10mph above those speeds "because we can"?  What I said was 90mph COULD be appropriate, depending upon a variety of factors.
> 
> For reference, here is my post in question with the relevant part highlighted...
> 
> ...



I responded to your isolated statement that blanket statements could not be made.  In my opinion this is a blanket statement that could be made.  Perhaps I read a bit far and got other posts confused with yours, seeing as we are talking about a speed of 93 and the maximum speed limit you posted was 85, I naturally surmised that you're philosophy of 5-10 over is OK.  Generally I would agree with this, until we start reaching these breakneck speeds.  Of course, in order to go 5-10 over the speed limit (legally), most state laws state you need to have your lights and sirens activated, which is why we brought the lights and sirens into this conversation.

Find me a place in america where the speed limit is 90-95 and the ambulances that travel those roads are engineered to travel at those speeds and have the support systems in place (breaks, shocks, etc), and then maybe I'll concede.  Until that time, it is inappropriate and creates an appreciable increase in risk with no appreciable benefit.

I'm not sure what exactly you'd like me to provide as proof.  93 is just too fast to drive these trucks.  Perhaps you should provide proof of a scenario where driving 93 miles per hour created little to no increase in risk and can be correlated to improved patient outcome?


----------



## CFal (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> Reading further in the thread I noticed someone from the UK who chimed in that this was the norm there.  I'd be curious to know if ambulances are geared differently and handle differently, because if they are built like trucks as they are in the US, I'd still maintain they are making a mistake driving that fast.



Metric system, Kilometers.


----------



## CFal (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> The point of lights and sirens is not to go faster than the flow of traffic, it is to get the ambulance around slower moving traffic or a traffic jam.  If the flow of traffic is 85mph, then there's really nothing impeding the ambulance from getting through.  At your insistence of traveling at 5-10mph above those speeds "because we can" you are saving a negligible amount of time in transit and it should become a question of "is this really worth pushing this truck beyond it's limits".  Honestly, I find it horribly irritating when ambulances have their lights and sirens on on the freeway when not in heavy, slow moving traffic.  Not only are they driving too fast, saving almost no time off their transit, but they are generally confusing the crap out of other drivers.
> 
> Ambulances in America (at least the brands I am aware of) are trucks first and ambulances second.  They are top heavy, geared like trucks, have suspension and shock systems like trucks, and generally have the overloaded breaking systems to begin with.  These vehicles are not designed to operate at such speeds.  If ambulances in Europe are designed as high performance vehicles, then I suppose this would be the only debatable point.  As I have no first hand knowledge of ambulances in Europe, I left that caveat open in the event I was mistaken.
> 
> I lost my "balls to the wall" speed on runs about 10 years ago, but to be honest I lost my "responding lights and sirens to the hospital" last year after starting a part time job on a MICU.  When I was smacked in the face with sick ICU patients for 2+ hours and going with the flow of traffic, nothing on the EMS side seemed that bad anymore.  I began to realize that going lights and sirens generally saved little time and just created an increased risk of minor and major auto accidents.



In most places the flow of traffic speed is greater than the speed limit by 5-10 MPH at least.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> I'm not sure what exactly you'd like me to provide as proof.  93 is just too fast to drive these trucks.  Perhaps you should provide proof of a scenario where driving 93 miles per hour created little to no increase in risk and can be correlated to improved patient outcome?



It's not up to me to provide proof...you're the one that made the claim, now please back it up.

This goes to my point about blanket statements by either side not being appropriate...if you make a blanket statement, you should be able to provide more evidence than "because it's my opinion".


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

redacted


----------



## FiremanMike (Sep 25, 2013)

On second thought, I'm new around here.. 

I should back down now, no point in a pissing match..


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 25, 2013)

FiremanMike said:


> _**Quoted post redacted by poster**_



Just because I am challenging you to provide proof doesn't mean I disagree with you, nor does it mean I agree.  I just dislike blanket statements that aren't supported by those making the claims.

If you believe your statement that much, there must be a reason behind it.  What is that reason, or in other words, how did you convince yourself that is the correct opinion?

And I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me what the maximum speed an ambulance should be driven at is, and why.  Several people in this thread have claimed that driving an ambulance at 90mph is unsafe for a variety of reasons, but haven't said what they think the maximum speed of an ambulance should be.



FiremanMike said:


> On second thought, I'm new around here..
> 
> I should back down now, no point in a pissing match..



No pissing match going on...just a healthy discussion.  As long as it remains civil and polite, it will continue.


----------



## titmouse (Sep 26, 2013)

5 under speed limit. Not worth speeding, when accidents happen the company won't care about you trying to expedite so they can make money.


----------



## zmedic (Sep 26, 2013)

My FluxCapacitor is down, otherwise I'd be out waiting for lightning storms. Gotta go fast and go back for my HoverBoard


----------



## exodus (Sep 26, 2013)

titmouse said:


> 5 under speed limit. Not worth speeding, when accidents happen the company won't care about you trying to expedite so they can make money.



That's dangerous.


----------



## CFal (Sep 26, 2013)

titmouse said:


> 5 under speed limit. Not worth speeding, when accidents happen the company won't care about you trying to expedite so they can make money.



you do 5 under here and somebody rear ends you going around a corner, hell might even happen 5 above


----------



## titmouse (Sep 26, 2013)

CFal said:


> you do 5 under here and somebody rear ends you going around a corner, hell might even happen 5 above



It's south florida, anything can happen.


----------

