Disagree. My department just purchased 40 new engines, all of which where outfitted with CAFS. Just recieved a directive from the higher ups telling us not to use, as its effects are minimal, and the costs are too great. Sure, it works a little better than water on car fires, but there is no justification for spending the extra money. Not to mention the compressors themselves have proved to be a nightmare. Didn't really like them either, because the hoselines would kink too easily..... Whats wrong with water? We have used it for the past 300 years and it has done fine....

Trust me I'm not a big CAFS fanboy, but I don't mind it. And to have a quick attack pumper like for a race track in this case I think it would be beneficial. Have I ever had trouble with water? No. Have a I had trouble with CAFS? Actually yes, but not while we were putting it on a fire. I can't believe that they bought 40 engines with CAFS, at $100 per 5 gal. Bucket, and 40 gallons per apparatus, the costs associated with it all are incredible, while water for all intents and purposes is free. If flames are out the roof, putting foam on the fire is a big waste, but for a room and contents its works pretty well. I could get the same results by putting water on it, it just maybe a few gallons more. Different strokes for different folks I guess.