[JeremyMorgan]

Valid question, and I hear it all the time. Most of the time it's due to preparedness and staffing. By having those 4 people on a fully equipped engine, if something big (structure fire, vehicle extrication, rescue) happens, they can jump in and go with a vehicle full of tools. (provided the ambulance crew can take over).

Otherwise if they're in a car, they'd have to drive back through traffic to the station, move their gear to the new vehicle, and drive back to the scene. It can cost valuable time. Fire engines carry a surprisingly large amount of tools and equipment for a variety of purposes.

That being said, many larger departments are trying out "cars" (usually an SUV) with two people and a med bag to go to medical calls. While the engine/truck and crew stay at the station. This is fairly expensive with the new vehicle, equipment and extra staffing. However it is being done now with success in urban areas.

[piva00]

I think this video from the Not Just Bikes channel shows quite well the major difference in approach between fire departments in the USA vs the Netherlands (which is quite similar to many other European countries): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2dHFC31VtQ

Fire engines in Europe are as well equipped as the American/Canadian ones while not depending on these massive and expensive bespoke rigs.

[niffydroid]

In the UK the NHS/local health trusts actually have a few fast response cars which contain at least a paramedic but more often someone who is trained higher. Even the fire service will have a small car as part of an incident response team.

I've also seen more ambulances that are based on a transit/mini bus platform for call outs that aren't major, think old person falling over. They save the big boxy ones for more serious issues.

[M95D]

In my country, no fire truck is called unless there's a fire. Extracting people from a mangled car isn't the job for a fire truck. All the needed tools fit in an ordinary van.

Also, going back to get the tools or change the vehicle is incredibly stupid because: 1) crews already know what they're going to be dealing with before they leave, 2) just suppose they forgot to pack the tools - we have mobile phones, you know...

[xoa]

>Also, going back to get the tools or change the vehicle is incredibly stupid because: 1) crews already know what they're going to be dealing with before they leave

They have precognition and can see into the future and know that a house fire is going to start while they're out at a non-fire call in your country? That's amazing! And by "amazing" I mean "bullshit". Now it's perfectly possible in your specific region of your specific country that they have sufficient resources, or face a some what different problem space given local details like types of construction etc, which lets them allocate things differently. But you shouldn't be so quick to lob around accusations of "stupid" at proven emergency response forged through hard lessons and ruthless practical local realities from your limited perspective and thinking.

>2) just suppose they forgot to pack the tools - we have mobile phones, you know...

Did you really just suggest that an extra 20-45min wait is no problem in a life/safety critical situation, or that there will necessarily be someone who can go bring it from a volunteer fire department? Or do think that there is nowhere further then a few minutes from a fire dept? Either way you are in a serious, serious bubble.

[insane_dreamer]

but the ambulance crew already has a paramedic, so why do they also need one from the fire department?

[_moof]

Because the fire department can usually get there faster. The goal is to get medical help there as quickly as possible.