Author Topic: NASTY NASTY  (Read 75675 times)

misterteddy

  • Guest
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #125 on: January 23, 2009, 11:07:54 AM »
Quote
Mt Barker do not have RIV, it was asked for when the old rescue was taken away, RIV to be put on dennis at the time and now the 34P, region said not required....

Entrapments job Morphett St, Mt Barker   > Stirling  Rescue

which would default to Burnside or Blackwood during the week  :roll:

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #126 on: January 23, 2009, 11:40:14 AM »
Pfft, nah...lobethal would be close enough, but they wouldnt know what hit them if they were called for a rescue job in Mt Barker's area.

Offline JamesGar

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Belair CFS
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #127 on: January 23, 2009, 01:40:02 PM »
Meadow and Strathalbyn would be quicker than Lobie, Blackwood and Burnside would they?
James Gardiner
Belair CFS

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #128 on: January 23, 2009, 01:54:27 PM »
I would think:

Quickest to Slowest: Mt Barker, Stirling, Lobethal, Meadows, Burnside, Strath, Blackwood.

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #129 on: January 23, 2009, 01:57:19 PM »
NTPA: Nuri 24 Mobile To Grass fire, Nuri 24P responding Going Priority 2 (in case) 23/01/2009 3:18:55 PM

Thats great thinking!

Offline chook

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,191
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #130 on: January 23, 2009, 02:06:52 PM »
Just a question re: Road Crash Rescue Arrangements SA.
Do CFS operators understand the equipment standard for RCR?
Rapid Intervention Equipment i.e combitools do not meet this standard in SA - period!
So it does not matter if you have ten trucks & Nine of them carry Rapid Intervention, if your rescue is not available (with the correct equipment) then you can't respond as rescue.
Now I know that some don't like it & this particular subject has been discussed too many times before but to suggest purchasing more equipment (which does not meet the standard) just so your particular brigade can get to the job is just a waste of money!
Simple solution - default! It's just not that hard!
And if your brigade/group/service sends rescue appliances to a non rescue job (yes I know some aren't stand alone), then that is good ammunition for stand alone rescue appliances or a seperate rescue service :wink:
Alternatively get a tri-service working group together to change the rules, mind you I don't think that is the way to go - considering the requirements for modern rescue techniques IMHO.
Cheers
Ken
just another retard!

Offline Bagyassfirey

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 891
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #131 on: January 23, 2009, 02:08:29 PM »
NTPA: Nuri 24 Mobile To Grass fire, Nuri 24P responding Going Priority 2 (in case) 23/01/2009 3:18:55 PM

Thats great thinking!


yea they went priority two to truro base..than on tot he fire as they were needed

Offline bajdas

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,745
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #132 on: January 23, 2009, 03:33:09 PM »
Pfft, nah...lobethal would be close enough, but they wouldnt know what hit them if they were called for a rescue job in Mt Barker's area.

What, because it is a SES Rescue truck & SES RCR equipment being driven in the Mt Barker area...maybe by CFS PPE people could be the saving grace....oh noooo...(yes this is tongue in cheek comment).    :evil:   :lol:    :-D
Andrew Macmichael
lives at Pt Noarlunga South.

My personal opinion only.

Offline big bronto

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #133 on: January 23, 2009, 04:23:28 PM »
The point of having rapid intervention is to be able to respond a 2nd truck with rescue crew to a job as well as the 2nd rescue, if you get there and it is a small job and you can do a cut out with RIV and the person is extricated then you can stop the rescue. To the public it looks like a rescue resource is on scene quickly rather then wait 30 mins for help.

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #134 on: January 23, 2009, 04:24:11 PM »
nah mate, its CFS RCR response in merely a SES vehicle...wouldnt mind it being rebadged to be a duplicate of Aldinga beach rescue.

Offline bittenyakka

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #135 on: January 23, 2009, 04:52:25 PM »
Just a question re: Road Crash Rescue Arrangements SA.
Do CFS operators understand the equipment standard for RCR?
Rapid Intervention Equipment i.e combitools do not meet this standard in SA - period!


I think the answer is know one does, and 90% of the time it depends on how keen you brigade is on getting the stuff they want.

Offline chook

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,191
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #136 on: January 23, 2009, 07:31:40 PM »
Why Zippy? CFS didn't pay for it - at least those 4 brigades swallowed a bit of pride & found a good solution to their needs :wink:
Yep mate that's what I thought, what certain individuals want (toys for the boys/girls) & stuff everyone else (who miss out on the basics - just because they don't make as much noise).
Bronto I know how the RIV gear can be used (used it myself Hurst Roadrunner), however thats not what guys on this forum were talking about. The way I read the post, if a combi tool was available the other rescue resources wouldn't be needed. Of course this would be true as long as its not a difficult rescue and involving inline extracation.
This one of my two greatest fears of a combined service, high profile brigades getting everything they want while everyone else gets the basics (including a combitool instead of proper hydraulics).
Anyway think I've got my point across.
cheers
Ken
just another retard!

Offline big bronto

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #137 on: January 23, 2009, 08:14:48 PM »
Why are you so worried doesn't your name say EX-SES member so you don't have to worry.

Plus you may find conbined services will just show where resources are not needed like berri, i think 3 red trucks is enough.

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #138 on: January 23, 2009, 09:00:00 PM »
Upgrading it early to a 2nd alarm was appropriate, then once a reassessment was made with the threat reduced, brigades were stood down quickly.

I don't know about you, but having upwards of 10 brigades responding to an incident is by no means a '2nd Alarm'. ;)

LOL...the amount of rescues they do...it is required.  More so when the Rescue gear goes in for servicing. etc.

So pretty much right now the situation is:

Entrapments job Brukunga                 > Mt Barker Rescue
Entrapments job Morphett St, Mt Barker   > Stirling  Rescue

If rescue gear goes in for servicing, there should be a replacement set on the truck.

As far as who goes where, yes as others have said, according to the green book you have the responses correct. Rapid intervention will not change that, all that have Rapid Intervention capabilities on a truck allows is a more immediate (rapid) rescue (intervention) if required.

Quote
Mt Barker do not have RIV, it was asked for when the old rescue was taken away, RIV to be put on dennis at the time and now the 34P, region said not required....
Entrapments job Morphett St, Mt Barker   > Stirling  Rescue
which would default to Burnside or Blackwood during the week  :roll:

Pfft, nah...lobethal would be close enough, but they wouldnt know what hit them if they were called for a rescue job in Mt Barker's area.

Meadow and Strathalbyn would be quicker than Lobie, Blackwood and Burnside would they?

I would think:

Quickest to Slowest: Mt Barker, Stirling, Lobethal, Meadows, Burnside, Strath, Blackwood.

Ok. Lets put aside all this bickering and play a scenario, according to the book, to demonstrate how Rescue responses, and RIV works.

Mt. Barker gets turned out to a job, at Nairne, with entrapments. Barker Rescue turns out for rescue response and Nairne 24P turns out for fire cover. Crew get to work. As crews are working, there is another rescue job on the Mt. Barker Freeway exit. More entrapments.

CURRENTLY: The 2nd rescue (Stirling) would turnout, meaning there was no rescue resource on scene for atleast the time it takes to drive from Stirling -> Mt. Barker. This means that any need for an immediate release of the patient must wait a substantial amount of time. Mt. Barker 34P turns out for fire cover, and sits around waiting for Stirling to arrive, unable to effect any release.

WITH RAPID INTERVENTION STOWAGE: The 2nd Rescue (Still Stirling) turns out as the initial 'Rescue Resource' to the incident. Mt. Barker 34P turns out, and are able to provide fire cover, like before, but more importantly they are also able to begin getting tools to work on the vehicle to extricate the patient as necessary. If they encounter problems, thats ok, the Rescue is still en route. If they encounter no issues and get the patient out of the vehicle, thats awesome and they can stop call the Rescue.

Rapid Intervention Capability is not about replacing the Rescue resource, but allowing more versatility for responses within the response area of a Rescue brigade. For a Brigade like Mt. Barker, this also allows their Rescue/Pumper to be plumbed into an incident, yet still have rescue coverage in their area.

Just a question re: Road Crash Rescue Arrangements SA.
Do CFS operators understand the equipment standard for RCR?
Rapid Intervention Equipment i.e combitools do not meet this standard in SA - period!
So it does not matter if you have ten trucks & Nine of them carry Rapid Intervention, if your rescue is not available (with the correct equipment) then you can't respond as rescue.
Now I know that some don't like it & this particular subject has been discussed too many times before but to suggest purchasing more equipment (which does not meet the standard) just so your particular brigade can get to the job is just a waste of money!

CFS Rescue Operators SHOULD understand the equipment standard to be listed as a Rescue Resource, but you are right many don't.

Why can't their be two standards, like the good old days that allow the provision of 1st/2nd/heavy Rescue? Just add RIV into the mix ;)

You should know as well as I do that for 90% of rescue jobs a Combitool is more than enough and is often more versatile and faster to use than the larger and heavier hydraulic equipment. I don't believe, unlike some assumptions and suggestions made here, that a Combitool and pump are enough to qualify as Rapid Intervention as there are a few other items, eg: small rams, that have have specific uses that you cannot replicate with a single combitool.

As I have tried to point out above, having Rapid Intervention Equipment on a truck is not by any mean meant to replace a rescue resource. It is meant to compliment the rescue stowage, on a separate appliance, to allow an already qualified brigade to provide a better level of service to their rescue area. It's not all about empire building.

Bronto I know how the RIV gear can be used (used it myself Hurst Roadrunner), however thats not what guys on this forum were talking about. The way I read the post, if a combi tool was available the other rescue resources wouldn't be needed. Of course this would be true as long as its not a difficult rescue and involving inline extracation.
This one of my two greatest fears of a combined service, high profile brigades getting everything they want while everyone else gets the basics (including a combitool instead of proper hydraulics).

If you're making your judgement of "RIV gear" on the Hurst Roadrunner, I would suggest you look at something a little more modern ;)
The fact that the Roadrunner had incorporated parrot beak blades, rather than the straight blade certainly effects it's performance as a combitool, and severely limits its use in an RCR scenario. I'm also a bit worried that you refer to a single tool as RIV gear, when the combi tool really should not be relied upon as the be all and end all of RIV gear, do you even know what would/should constitute RIV stowage? As i keep saying, RIV is not meant to replace the appropriate fully stowed rescue resource being turned out.

For the whole Rapid Intervention system to work, there would need to be a clearly defined stowage list for "Rapid Intervention" as well as a listing for brigade/appliances that can be turned out with RIV capabilities.

Finally, "High Profile" Brigade, or the brigades that do the work, push the envelope and actually require the gear?

</wall of text>
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #139 on: January 23, 2009, 09:13:51 PM »
Numbers, The Phil Spectre of SAF  :wink:
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #140 on: January 23, 2009, 09:17:07 PM »
Numbers, The Phil Spectre of SAF  :wink:

Hey, I haven't killed any... actresses, recently.
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #141 on: January 23, 2009, 09:25:39 PM »
Big week next week 26th Jan onwards temps into the high 30s and possibly hitting 40,..........is it time for a upgrade to NASTY NASTY NASTY or will the current NASTY NASTY suffice, I wouldn't want to be accussed of upgrading unecessarily and tying up too many NASTY's.
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #142 on: January 23, 2009, 09:26:30 PM »
3rd Alarm NASTY with Rescue considerations?
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #143 on: January 23, 2009, 09:31:02 PM »
3rd Alarm NASTY with Rescue considerations?


I will notify RDO of the third alarm NASTY, as per the SOPs!
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #144 on: January 23, 2009, 09:38:15 PM »
3rd Alarm NASTY with Rescue considerations?
I will notify RDO of the third alarm NASTY, as per the SOPs!

Atleast SOMEONE follows SOP's around here. These forums could do with some posting/general usage SOP's.

EG: 6739264 is banned from posting re: Rescue
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline Alan (Big Al)

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,609
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • CRUMPETS
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #145 on: January 23, 2009, 09:50:15 PM »
Am surprised with all the RCR work Barker does that they don't have a RIV set on secondary appliance let alone a second set of "heavy" gear.
And was it posted elsewhere that they put in for funding for a RIV set and were knocked back? :?
Would have thought for brigades like Stirling/Barker/Nuri (yes i know Stirling have a set) RIV kit would be almost mandatory on secondary appliance. :|
Lt. Goolwa CFS

misterteddy

  • Guest
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #146 on: January 23, 2009, 10:47:21 PM »
3rd Alarm NASTY with Rescue considerations?


I will notify RDO of the third alarm NASTY, as per the SOPs!

is that based on an NDI of over 50?

Offline CFS_Firey

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,250
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #147 on: January 23, 2009, 11:03:40 PM »
Upgrading it early to a 2nd alarm was appropriate, then once a reassessment was made with the threat reduced, brigades were stood down quickly.

I don't know about you, but having upwards of 10 brigades responding to an incident is by no means a '2nd Alarm'. ;)

Actually, the initial page responded 4 brigades, which is well and truly equal to a second alarm. (3rd alarm if all the brigades send 2 trucks each! :P )

For the whole Rapid Intervention system to work, there would need to be a clearly defined stowage list for "Rapid Intervention" as well as a listing for brigade/appliances that can be turned out with RIV capabilities.

What do you mean "would need to be"?  The stowage difference between rapid intervention and CFS heavy rescue are already clearly defined in the standard stowage lists.

The difference between the two being that no lighting or backup pump are required, and the hydraulic tools are all replaced with the omni tool.  An "extrication board" is also optional, but EVERYTHING else is the same.

I thought rescue was your thing! :P


Offline big bronto

  • Forum Senior Firefighter
  • ***
  • Posts: 70
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #148 on: January 24, 2009, 10:18:25 AM »
One big reason Heavy Rescue was removed from the green book is nearly all CFS/SES vehicles do not meet the true criteria for a "Heavy Rescue" truck. Look at rescue in QLD, NSWFB, MFB, and CFA vols who have dedicated rescue trucks, no Dyna's or canters, big trucks..These brigades carry a large variety of rescue gear, multiple hand tools, multiple airbags and heavy lifting jacks for trucks and trains, heaps of chocks and blocks, timbers and cribbing, and other means of rescue tools. What does most SA rescues carry, CFS will not even replace airbags now because they are once again "NOT REQUIRED", sorry for that guy trapped under his tractor, so all these people saying we have a heavy rescue are merely saying their truck is over weight not because of the gear they carry.

misterteddy

  • Guest
Re: NASTY NASTY
« Reply #149 on: January 24, 2009, 10:25:06 AM »
sorry for that guy trapped under his tractor,

or helicopter  :wink: