Chris Ferrara, Owner of US Fire Pump, shares how mobile systems, large-diameter hose and strategic foam storage combine to bridge capability gaps in major incidents
When major incidents demand massive volumes of water at speed, the limits of conventional fire equipment quickly become clear.
US Fire Pump was built around the idea that those limits could be extended.
At the centre of that work is Owner Chris Ferrara, whose manufacturing and operational experience has shaped some of the world’s largest firefighting systems.
In this interview, Ferrara explains what defines large pump capability, how it’s being applied in the field, and what’s still missing from wider industry preparedness.
How would you define US Fire Pump’s role and its unique position in emergency response today?
We operate as a specialist extension to municipal and industrial fire brigades, filling the gap when an incident demands water flow rates that standard pumpers cannot produce.
That role begins with scale: our fleet includes transport-ready boost pumps capable of delivering tens of thousands of litres per minute, submersible units that draw from almost any open source, and monitors designed to maintain heavy streams at long reach without exposing crews.
Few organisations keep that capacity on standby, so we maintain it, staff it, and move it wherever required.
Readiness would be meaningless without supplies, so we hold roughly 300,000 gallons of finished foam at multiple points across the United States.
Add to that fifteen miles of 12-inch supply hose and a roster of about fifty full-time industrial firefighters who train on the same equipment they deploy.
Because everything sits on trailers or skids, a full package can leave a yard within hours of a call and arrive with its own logistics plan.
That combination makes us more than an equipment vendor.
During events from tank-farm lightning strikes to recycling-plant battery fires, we join the incident command structure, establish high-volume water relay, and oversee application rates until knock-down is confirmed.
In short, customers purchase preparedness measured in minutes rather than days.
Could you outline large boost and submersible pumps and where each type sees field use?
Submersible pumps are the first link in our relay chain.
Each unit, dropped into a river, canal, or harbour basin, lifts around 5,000 gallons per minute straight up the discharge column.
Because motors and impellers sit below the waterline, priming issues disappear, and we can stage several in parallel to raise overall flow—four units provide roughly 20,000 gpm from a single source.
The water then enters a boost pump.
These trailer-mounted centrifugal machines add the pressure needed to carry large volumes through up to three miles of 12-inch hose.
Their job is simple: overcome friction loss so that the stream still lands with force at the monitor.
We configure boost pumps in series if the hose run is unusually long or elevation changes are severe.
Finally, delivery equipment—monitors, foam proportioners, and manifolds—takes the pressurised supply and directs it onto the hazard.
In practice this three-step arrangement allows us to draw from a lake on one side of an industrial site, push the flow under a highway, and deliver a stable foam blanket onto a burning tank roof without resorting to fixed hydrant grids that might be out of service or destroyed.
Which facilities now plan for your high-volume systems, and what drives that requirement?
The most frequent callers are petro-chemical complexes where single-tank capacities exceed two hundred feet in diameter.
Operators know a full-surface crude or naphtha fire can consume conventional resources before a control line is even established, so contingency plans mandate external high-volume support.
Insurance underwriters reinforce those requirements by setting performance targets that only large-scale mobile pumping can meet.
Electric-vehicle battery recycling and storage centres form a newer group.
Thermal-runaway events release immense heat while producing very little entry space for water or foam.
Managers offset that by arranging for remote cooling streams and oversized water supplies that keep cells below reignition temperature.
Similar thinking appears at deep-sea terminals, where a shipboard blaze might outlast fresh-water reserves and local hydrants.
We also see growing interest from municipal alliances that cover rail corridors.
A derailment involving flammable liquids often strands traditional apparatus behind evacuation zones or damaged infrastructure.
With a transport-ready relay system, a county can draft from a creek, run hose along a railway bed, and still deliver meaningful flow onto tank cars without waiting for rebuilt mains.
Walk us through events from your deployment call to the first water flowing on site.
The process starts with a rapid desktop survey.
Dispatch officers open satellite imagery, plot the incident address, and highlight every pond, river, or canal within a three-mile radius.
At the same time they review tank inventories or manifest sheets to gauge foam requirements.
Those two data sets determine how many submersibles, boost pumps, hose beds, and totes leave the warehouse.
While units are in transit, an advance team contacts the incident commander and requests a staging zone large enough for twenty vehicle combinations.
Upon arrival, crew leaders split into water-source and attack-site groups.
One prepares the draft points—often with light excavation or portable weirs—while the other lays hose, aligns monitors, and connects proportioning gear.
Because each task follows a rehearsed checklist, overlap is minimal, and flow usually begins within two to three hours.
Once water reaches the deliver-point manifold, flow rates are trimmed to match foam application targets.
Operators monitor pressure at several hose positions, watching for friction loss spikes that might signal a kink or coupling failure.
When the fire shows sustained progress—flame height drops and surface temperature falls—teams gradually adjust streams, always protecting confinement lines until final extinguishment.
Do you provide operational training or familiarisation when customers purchase your specialised equipment?
Yes. Any facility investing in our hardware receives a structured programme that starts with classroom theory—hydraulics, foam chemistry, and safety factors—and moves into hands-on drills.
Crews practise assembling submersibles, setting up boost pumps, and operating remote monitors until every member can complete the full layout against the clock.
We also support annual or quarterly refreshers, often themed around specific local hazards.
A refinery might request night-time evolutions that simulate a lightning-induced floating-roof failure, while a port authority could focus on hose management across gangways.
Because the same instructors attend live deployments, lessons stay current, and feedback loops into equipment tweaks almost immediately.
Finally, training covers maintenance.
Personnel learn how to swap wear rings, check shaft alignment, and verify proportioner calibration.
The goal is simple: ensure the gear performs on the day it is needed without waiting for outside technicians or parts deliveries that a large-scale incident could delay.
How have recent foam regulation changes altered system performance demands and tactical choices?
Moving from aqueous film-forming foam to fluorine-free blends has generated practical challenges at every step.
The new concentrates lack the quick-forming film that once suppressed vapour within seconds, so extinguishment now relies on depth and gentle application.
That means higher total solution volumes—often triple the former requirement—and careful nozzle movement to avoid breaking the blanket.
Higher volume drives bigger pumps, longer hose lines, and more proportioner capacity.
A tank fire that previously settled with 10,000 gpm might now need 30,000 gpm sustained for the same control time.
Crews must also verify that concentrate viscosity matches eductor capability; under-metering drops performance, while over-metering wastes foam reserves that may already be tight.
No site has yet published a confirmed case of extinguishing a large (>100-foot) storage tank using only fluorine-free product, so every real-world test carries added pressure.
We continue to trial application patterns on training grounds, logging data for flow, blanket thickness, and burn-back time.
Those results shape the guidance we give clients while the wider industry refines performance standards.
Have recent field experiences prompted product or design revisions requested directly by users?
Several. The most significant is a direct-inject proportioning system that uses positive-displacement pumps and flow-meters to maintain mixing accuracy from 0.3 % up to 10 % across a wide viscosity range.
Early adopters asked for a solution that sidestepped traditional venturi eductors, which swing several points when line pressure drifts.
Keeping the ratio steady with newer foam concentrates is critical, so we built a fully enclosed module that slides into an ISO container for rapid deployment.
Monitor design has changed as well.
Crews requested longer reach without manual nozzle adjustments, so we introduced electric-drive turrets paired with gyroscopic stabilisers.
Looking forward, which gaps in fire response or water supply still need better solutions?
The largest hurdle is access rather than technology.
Many municipal and industrial budgets cannot justify owning equipment that may sit in storage for years, yet the first thirty minutes of a severe incident demand exactly that capacity.
Regional caches help, but travel time still counts.
Wider pre-incident agreements and cost-sharing models could shorten the window between alarm and flow without forcing every operator to purchase full sets.
Water sourcing is another concern. Drought restrictions, ageing infrastructure, and climate-related low-river stages can all limit draft options.
Forward-looking plans should map secondary sources—storm-water ponds, reclaimed-water mains, even temporary pipelines—to guarantee supply even when traditional hydrants falter.
Coupling those plans with high-volume mobile pumps ensures that water reaches the fire line rather than remaining an unrealised figure on a schematic.
Finally, the insurance sector is beginning to demand clear evidence of response capacity, not just written mutual-aid clauses.
Facilities that show confirmed arrangements, complete with mobilisation timetables and equipment lists, are already seeing premium adjustments.
Meeting those documentation requirements will push agencies to formalise contracts with external providers and schedule joint drills well before an emergency tests the paperwork.