SA Firefighter

Technical Discussion => Hypotheticals => Topic started by: 6739264 on May 07, 2011, 10:37:51 PM

Title: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 07, 2011, 10:37:51 PM
You're fighting a fire in a medium sized commercial premises. The ceiling falls in on you and your partner. In the mess of ceiling tiles and assorted debris lies bundles and bundles of electrical, telephone, network, and other assorted cabling. The airconditioner ductwork has burnt through to its metal ribbing and has falling in on you as well.

You and your partner are stuck, and massively entangled. You've got a minimum amount of movement but its obvious that you're not going anywhere fast. Visibility is low, as always. You've been in there a while, and your cylinder is emptying by the breath.

What do you do?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: safireservice on May 08, 2011, 12:03:54 AM
If you've been there a while shouldnt your DSU have gone off by now alerting others there is something wrong?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 08, 2011, 08:29:01 AM
If you've been there a while shouldnt your DSU have gone off by now alerting others there is something wrong?

If you're not moving...

Not sure about you, but if I'm struggling to free myself, I'm usually wiggling enough to keep my DSU from going into alarm.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Pipster on May 08, 2011, 10:24:13 AM
But if you know you are in trouble, don't you just press the button on your DSU to activate it....?

Pip
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Alex on May 08, 2011, 01:06:34 PM
Activate DSU, and get to work with my knife [assuming i can get into the right pocket] whilst waiting for a miracle considering the training provided to CFS.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Darcyq on May 08, 2011, 05:09:23 PM
"....considering the training provided to CFS."

Exactly, this has long been my concern. What does MFS have in place in regard to "Rapid Intervention Teams". There are some very interesting articles on FireEngineering.com about what various US fire services are doing in relation to rescuing trapped fire fighters. I think about what we have in place and it comes down to a couple of Hooligan tools and axes, but if your lucky and one of the brigades attending might also be RCR they might have airbags.

Yes, we have a policy that states there must be two BA members ready to go in whenever there are BA crews inside, but how many are trained to carryout a rescue using these tools in a structural context or know how to make a forced entry, or more importantly a forced egress should the primary entry point become blocked.

I would be interested in seeing some stats on how often internal BA crews get into difficulty (lost, entangled, injured) in Australian fire services compared to what seems to be happening in the US.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

As for this scenario, I wouldn't be going in without a radio. A MAYDAY call quickly gets every bodies attention and you can then tell the OIC the reason for the Mayday and details such as amount of air supply left, injuries, etc. so that they can start managing and resourcing the rescue without wasting time or your air supply.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Alan (Big Al) on May 08, 2011, 10:25:33 PM
yeah have to wonder what state the BA system within the CFS is like when a brigade captain is told by supposed people in the know (dont know who they are) that a backup crew isnt required when going into a building that theres nothing wrong with a team going in alone without backup there or on the way  :|
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bittenyakka on May 09, 2011, 01:49:23 PM
Well everyone has stated what i would do. but as for the training issue.

I would propose that CFS doesn't train to think beyond the straight and narrow. eg why don't we learn on our BA course to start grabong axes, haligans and other tools to be ready. it is jsut Get ba set and hose and guideline...
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 09, 2011, 03:41:58 PM
Good discussion so far, although it'd be great to hear a little more about how you work through the Hazard with whats in your gear. I know we have one man that carries a knife, anyone else?

Additionally, if you hear a DSU set off and are outside, what are you thinking about? What course of action do you take?

Great pickup on the training areas, can you guess why I started this thread yet?

I'll let this run for a bit longer before I throw my $0.02 into the mix
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: tft on May 09, 2011, 05:30:57 PM
A knife, that will not help too much.
Now if you had a Leatherman will Pliers, it might help some more.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: tft on May 09, 2011, 05:32:41 PM
yeah have to wonder what state the BA system within the CFS is like when a brigade captain is told by supposed people in the know (dont know who they are) that a backup crew isnt required when going into a building that theres nothing wrong with a team going in alone without backup there or on the way  :|
One word
SACKED
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bittenyakka on May 09, 2011, 06:42:39 PM
Well i have noting in my normal gear that would help me. mainly because i am not one to put my own $$ into buying cool knives and tools to be carried on the person. Not to mention tools carried on the person seem to be generally discouraged in CFS.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Alex on May 09, 2011, 07:07:08 PM
A knife, that will not help too much.
Now if you had a Leatherman will Pliers, it might help some more.

Depends how good a knife it is mate. Most decent blades will go through light gauge wire easily.

A leatherman would definitely be a better option, but im not as trusting a person as i once was after both a shove knife and pocket knife dissapeared from my gear a couple of years ago. So i wont be leaving $100+ personally owned tools at the station anymore.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: misterteddy on May 09, 2011, 07:54:44 PM
Great pickup on the training areas, can you guess why I started this thread yet?


you work for Fire and Rescue Australia and are trying to flog their Structural Collapse procedural trainer??   :evil:
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: tft on May 09, 2011, 08:21:38 PM
A knife, that will not help too much.
Now if you had a Leatherman will Pliers, it might help some more.

Depends how good a knife it is mate. Most decent blades will go through light gauge wire easily.

A leatherman would definitely be a better option, but im not as trusting a person as i once was after both a shove knife and pocket knife dissapeared from my gear a couple of years ago. So i wont be leaving $100+ personally owned tools at the station anymore.
That's BS if someone has stolen it. But my life is worth more than 100 Bucks. I would like to see you cut through wire with a knife.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bajdas on May 10, 2011, 01:17:57 AM
A knife, that will not help too much.
Now if you had a Leatherman will Pliers, it might help some more.

Depends how good a knife it is mate. Most decent blades will go through light gauge wire easily....

Re cutting wire with a knife.... how do you know it is not a live electrical wire that you are about to cut through ?

Ethernet cable for computers is normally 8 core and telephone cables are normally minimum 4 core.

So yes your knife would get through some of the cores, but it would a few hacks before you got through all cores in a single cable.

If you had a major cable run in a false ceiling come down, then you could be dealing with 20 ethernet cables in a bundle. Anymore and I would hope that the cabler used a support tray.

Just some thoughts....
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on May 10, 2011, 08:18:15 AM
I have a Cunninghams special multi tool, I fixed up the dodgy cutting edge on the pliers and it works well. I have been caught in the wires of the air-con ducting and there simply was no way to get out of it, I called for a second team to come in with wire cutters.

As for training, there is none, CFS teach you how to wear a set, and thats it.
The CFS has forgotten about their urban risks.....and the arrogant people that you have to deal with in the BA section make you wonder what the point of being in the CFS is.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: mattb on May 10, 2011, 08:42:18 AM
Pumprescue is on the mark, one of the biggest hassles I have seen in your standard domestic house fire is the amount of air-conditioning duct cwire that get tangled around everything.

Your helmet torch and the cylinder valve assembly make great points for this stuff to attach itself to. I used my Leatherman at a job a month a go to cut my partner free, it aint no Cunnos $2 special, but it still worked.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on May 10, 2011, 09:09:12 PM
Hi im new.
Dont know that much about firefighting yet, but with getting trapped in a house or any other structure, why dosent the CFS do what the Mets do, and use designated RITs?
Have looked at their BA training area, and its fantastic, why cant we use it and get the professional Mets BA instructors to train us, at least then we would all be learning the same stuff.
Like i said im new, so please enlighten me! :-D
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on May 10, 2011, 09:33:46 PM
Mate, if we only knew.....there is nothing, its pretty much what we do down the street....
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Darcyq on May 11, 2011, 09:43:27 AM
...why doesn't the CFS do what the Mets do, and use designated RITs?

My question is "what do METS have in place in regard to RIT"? We first need hard evidence of what we should have, or be doing before we can request a change by the CFS Management. If METS have a formal training package that covers RIT I'd be interested to know why CFS brigades that also have an urban response don't have access to it. What makes our lives less valuable! Because really, that's what it comes down too.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 22, 2011, 02:42:32 PM
Ah yes, back to the coalface...

I'll try to stay away from the training discussion and slam all of that into the other Structure Fire training thread.

As I said previously, it's great to see that people are thinking outside the box and starting to equip themselves appropriately.

I would propose that CFS doesn't train to think beyond the straight and narrow. eg why don't we learn on our BA course to start grabong axes, haligans and other tools to be ready. it is jsut Get ba set and hose and guideline...

It's more that the Operate Breathing Apparatus, Open Circuit course is merely that. It teaches you to operate an open circuit breathing apparatus. Its not a Suppress Urban Fire course. It's CABA plus some safe working practices in low visibility. Really, this is not the fault of the CFS, its hard to pack much more into the weekend and we can't forget that some people struggle with the basics of putting an airset on, let alone the rest of the firefighting gig. Urban firefighting needs to be expanded, but there are numerous barriers to that occurring.

A knife, that will not help too much.
Now if you had a Leatherman will Pliers, it might help some more.

On cutting/self rescue tools, I carry a knife and a set of 10" Cable cutters. The knife is for Rescue work, or a last ditch effort to cut my CABA harness; the Cable cutters rip through anything else. I'm not a huge fan of relying on a small multi tool to perform rugged work with structural gloves on. My multi tool sits tucked away on my suspenders.

Well i have noting in my normal gear that would help me. mainly because i am not one to put my own $$ into buying cool knives and tools to be carried on the person. Not to mention tools carried on the person seem to be generally discouraged in CFS.

Some call them "cool knives and tools" but frankly, they're there to serve a lifesaving purpose and from numerous personal experiences, I'd rather have them on me than not. I'm yet to see personal tools discouraged in CFS, whats happened that you've noticed? Sure you might cop a bit of stick, but its your life that it's going to save, no?

you work for Fire and Rescue Australia and are trying to flog their Structural Collapse procedural trainer??   :evil:

Haha, I wish! But let's not forget that structural collapse (USAR) and downed firefighter rescue are two totally different things :evil:

Pumprescue is on the mark, one of the biggest hassles I have seen in your standard domestic house fire is the amount of air-conditioning duct cwire that get tangled around everything.

Your helmet torch and the cylinder valve assembly make great points for this stuff to attach itself to. I used my Leatherman at a job a month a go to cut my partner free, it aint no Cunnos $2 special, but it still worked.

Exactly, ducting is a pain in the arse. I'm also surprised that more brigades aren't moving to a helmet torch mounted under the brim (far less entanglement hazard), given the number of options that are often cheaper than the current "standard" UK torch mounting options.

...why doesn't the CFS do what the Mets do, and use designated RITs?

My question is "what do METS have in place in regard to RIT"? We first need hard evidence of what we should have, or be doing before we can request a change by the CFS Management. If METS have a formal training package that covers RIT I'd be interested to know why CFS brigades that also have an urban response don't have access to it. What makes our lives less valuable! Because really, that's what it comes down too.

Call me crazy, but why do we have to follow the lead of SAMFS? There are other agencies in Australia that have a decent RIT setup, although nowhere near what is being implemented around the US. Why don't we look at how the Yanks run their RIT operations?

Its not hard to have an assigned crew who then get the required equipment and standby only for firefighter rescue.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on May 22, 2011, 07:06:02 PM
All this expertise from non urban brigades is very enlightening.
If you have become entangled then what were you doing entering a structure when the integrity of it is questionable? Safety first remember!
You may not like asking the professionals for guidance for whatever reason, so look to the USA if you wish, but first try reading the stats on how many lives they lose, an Good Luck.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 22, 2011, 08:40:48 PM
All this expertise from non urban brigades is very enlightening.
If you have become entangled then what were you doing entering a structure when the integrity of it is questionable? Safety first remember!
You may not like asking the professionals for guidance for whatever reason, so look to the USA if you wish, but first try reading the stats on how many lives they lose, an Good Luck.

Wow, you're certainly living up to your user name.

Lets try this again, engage your brain, then post.  :wink:
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on May 22, 2011, 09:43:44 PM
My username relates directly to what i read on this forum.
And you numbers, illustrate this perfectly.Full of theories, pity you werent in a position to try them and then you may see just how amateur hour you sound.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 22, 2011, 10:10:44 PM
My username relates directly to what i read on this forum.
And you numbers, illustrate this perfectly.Full of theories, pity you werent in a position to try them and then you may see just how amateur hour you sound.

And we were just having this nice little discussion about fire fighting...

Sorry to offend you with my inexperienced, non-urban brigade amateur hour "theories" :)
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bittenyakka on May 24, 2011, 01:52:31 PM
Stop slagging of at each other.


unfknblvable  would you care to pleas explain yourself? It doesn;t take much to cause cables to drop from a cealing and i am sure it can happen well before the structure is unsafe.

Numbers, As for tools in my pockets it is usally the whole radiant heat on a metal tool not that this has ever been an issue for me.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 24, 2011, 06:41:07 PM
Stop slagging of at each other.

unfknblvable  would you care to pleas explain yourself? It doesn;t take much to cause cables to drop from a cealing and i am sure it can happen well before the structure is unsafe.

Numbers, As for tools in my pockets it is usally the whole radiant heat on a metal tool not that this has ever been an issue for me.

I can see the concern, but it's not something I have ever experienced myself (even in a CFBT cell) or read about occurring. If your tools are getting hot enough to burn you through your structural ensemble, I'd suggest you've got bigger problems than just your tools burning you.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: BundyBear on May 27, 2011, 02:58:11 PM
The initial thread described a suspended ceiling, which its frame work is made from light gauge steel or aluminium. The ceiling tiles are either a mineral fibre, vinyl wrapped plasterboard or heavier acoustic tiles with a plaster outer and fiberglass inner. If this fell on you it would be relatively easy to remove. If a plasterboard ceiling fell on you once again easy to break up and remove, the only concern is if the trusses lost their integrity and the ceiling, timber frame work, tiles or metal roof sheets came in on you all at once but you have to ask the question how well did you size up the incident before you committed crews offensively to an interior?

As for entanglement in wires etc if you lay on your side and get your arms out in front of you you can push the wires up and down to you knees and wriggle forward. Some fire services train their fire fighters in such scenario's.

As for getting help and setting off DSU's, why not use that VHF radio that you should have clipped to your CABA set's harness!


Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: jaff on May 28, 2011, 01:20:11 AM
The BA ready response crew needs to attach the snatchem strap around the entraped operators ankles in preparation for rapid extraction technique 2b!
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: jaff on May 28, 2011, 01:24:17 AM
Sorry should of mentioned 2b states that helmet chin straps may need to be tightened on structural helmets, before "rapid extraction is attempted"
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on May 28, 2011, 12:00:48 PM
Or you could read SAMFS SOP 14 Rapid Intervention Team, been in vogue for a couple of years.
Oh sorry forgot the yellow gang cant do what the Mets do!!! LOL
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 28, 2011, 12:24:55 PM
There are some reasonable points made here but...........

Do not compare the Australian fire services to the US services.

The US do things COMPLETELY different to us. They go into structures that are carparks when they arrive.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 28, 2011, 01:56:43 PM
Quote
Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
« on: May 07, 2011, 10:37:51 PM »  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You're fighting a fire in a medium sized commercial premises. The ceiling falls in on you and your partner. In the mess of ceiling tiles and assorted debris lies bundles and bundles of electrical, telephone, network, and other assorted cabling. The airconditioner ductwork has burnt through to its metal ribbing and has falling in on you as well.

You and your partner are stuck, and massively entangled. You've got a minimum amount of movement but its obvious that you're not going anywhere fast. Visibility is low, as always. You've been in there a while, and your cylinder is emptying by the breath.

What do you do?

I would.......first try to find out if my buddy is OK. Secondly, follow the 'mayday' procedure. I would then attempt to conserve my air.

I know what you are getting at numbers.

But, If you have had no training, then you should not be there in the fist place. If you do not know what the 'Mayday' procedure is ,then again, you should not be there.

If this was in MFS area, then there are problems using the CFS due to the equipment compatability with MFS equipment and Vice Versa.

I hope this has satisfied your fishing trip! The worms will come out of the can and dance to the sound of a broken record if you keep pushing.





Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on May 28, 2011, 02:47:55 PM
Those who are actually proficient in the use of BA are,during their annual reaccredit, including RIT scenarios to ensure all are proficient in RIT methods.
SO T. Cox is the instructor who no doubt can enlighten you!
 :?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 28, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Or you could read SAMFS SOP 14 Rapid Intervention Team, been in vogue for a couple of years.
Oh sorry forgot the yellow gang cant do what the Mets do!!! LOL

Yep, it's tough that services don't want to share information, nor do they actively seek out what other services, both in SA and elsewhere in the country, are doing.

There are some reasonable points made here but...........

Do not compare the Australian fire services to the US services.

The US do things COMPLETELY different to us. They go into structures that are carparks when they arrive.


Totally correct. Houses of ordinary burn differently, tilt slabs collapse differently, and firefighters get stuck differently. Are you sure about that?

Also to compare the "US" is rather difficult. Which departments are you referring to? Its like calling all Australian services the same. We certainly know that they're not.

The US, typically, are far more aggressive in their firefighting style, sure, and this does lend itself to some practices that are unsafe and do lead to line of duty deaths. But shouldn't we look to departments that are trying to mitigate the risks that their members are exposed to for ideas on how to mitigate these same risks here?

For example, say you have a Fire Service that has a house collapse, causing some deaths and injuries. It comes out in investigations that having a "Safety Officer" would have prevented the deaths/injuries by observing the signs of collapse. Now, should our Fire Service (that doesn't use a "Safety Officer") wait until it too suffers deaths and injuries too investigate and then learn that using a "Safety Officer" could have prevented them? Or should our Fire Service implement a Safety Officer based on what has occurred and been previously learn by the other Fire Service?

Why do we all insist on learning our own lessons, paying the price in deaths and injuries?

To say that we CANNOT compare, nor learn anything from the US phenomenal, given that they are lightyears ahead of us in terms of PPE and RIT. Let's not ignore them just because they have some different procedures to the Aus/European way of doing things.

I know what you are getting at numbers.

But, If you have had no training, then you should not be there in the fist place. If you do not know what the 'Mayday' procedure is ,then again, you should not be there.

If this was in MFS area, then there are problems using the CFS due to the equipment compatibility with MFS equipment and Vice Versa.

I hope this has satisfied your fishing trip! The worms will come out of the can and dance to the sound of a broken record if you keep pushing.

I'm not trying to "get" at anything beyond trying to see what people are thinking about in an area that has been largely ignored by CFS. If we learn some bits and pieces along the way, then that's a bonus.

Certainly no fishing trip, I was looking forward to the discussion, but sadly it seems as though its turned into a SAMFS vs SACFS cock measuring contest.

Those who are actually proficient in the use of BA are,during their annual reaccredit, including RIT scenarios to ensure all are proficient in RIT methods.
SO T. Cox is the instructor who no doubt can enlighten you!
 :?

Could you enlighten us as to these "RIT Methods" you speak of?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 28, 2011, 05:30:37 PM
Quote
For example, say you have a Fire Service that has a house collapse, causing some deaths and injuries. It comes out in investigations that having a "Safety Officer" would have prevented the deaths/injuries by observing the signs of collapse. Now, should our Fire Service (that doesn't use a "Safety Officer") wait until it too suffers deaths and injuries too investigate and then learn that using a "Safety Officer" could have prevented them? Or should our Fire Service implement a Safety Officer based on what has occurred and been previously learn by the other Fire Service?


The MFS would have a safety officer at this particular incident, so I'm not sure about the CFS?


Quote
Certainly no fishing trip, I was looking forward to the discussion, but sadly it seems as though its turned into a SAMFS vs SACFS cock measuring contest.

No one turned this into an MFS vs CFS cock measuring contest.



Quote
If this was in MFS area, then there are problems using the CFS due to the equipment compatability with MFS equipment and Vice Versa.

Can you tell me if the CFS log onto their airsets?
Would their DSU work and show up on the tablet that was being used at this incident as a personal activation?
If an entry control board was in use (which I'm presuming it would be), do the CFS set tallies fit into an MFS enrty control board?
Or would an MFS tally fit into a CFS board?

Sure, you can pull out your leatherman and try to cut yourself free but there is a procedure that should be followed which would be part of my escape plan.

This is not a CFS vs MFS post. You have asked what would the firefighter do. If an MFS firefighter was stuck, I would hope that they would do the same as a CFS firefighter. All that I have said is that I would instigate a 'Mayday" and take it from there, once again, this is what I would do.

Quote
Could you enlighten us as to these "RIT Methods" you speak of?

As per a RIT team, a crew (of 4)is put aside and designated as a RIT team that is only used for an emergency rescue with a complete set of rescue resources eg. stretcher, tools, cutting gear and anything that may be needed to effect a rescue. This team is not used for any firefighting.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on May 28, 2011, 05:53:06 PM
Or you could read SAMFS SOP 14 Rapid Intervention Team, been in vogue for a couple of years.
Oh sorry forgot the yellow gang cant do what the Mets do!!! LOL

More like not allowed to....need to re-invent the wheel
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on May 28, 2011, 05:58:13 PM
Further more, this comes back to my post under training " CFS have no urban firefighting courses"

EVERYTHING we talk about here is learnt on the job, and its a freakin joke!!

Thankgod some of us learn our craft elsewhere.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 29, 2011, 09:46:07 AM
Quote
For example, say you have a Fire Service that has a house collapse, causing some deaths and injuries. It comes out in investigations that having a "Safety Officer" would have prevented the deaths/injuries by observing the signs of collapse. Now, should our Fire Service (that doesn't use a "Safety Officer") wait until it too suffers deaths and injuries too investigate and then learn that using a "Safety Officer" could have prevented them? Or should our Fire Service implement a Safety Officer based on what has occurred and been previously learn by the other Fire Service?


The MFS would have a safety officer at this particular incident, so I'm not sure about the CFS?

You've totally misunderstood my point. I'm not talking about any services in particular, merely trying to ask why is it that we can't learn from the mistakes made and lessons learnt by other services in the world, rather than wait for the same set of circumstances to occur in our own service. At the end of the day we all do a similar job, are exposed to similar risks, and one would think that we could mitigate these risks in a similar manner. It was an example. You could substitute "Coffe Truck" for "Safety Officer".

It also goes without saying, if you read CFS Operational Management literature, that the CFS should have a safety officer at incidents, although as we all have experienced, how often does this actually happen?

Quote
Certainly no fishing trip, I was looking forward to the discussion, but sadly it seems as though its turned into a SAMFS vs SACFS cock measuring contest.

No one turned this into an MFS vs CFS cock measuring contest.

Are you sure about that? I'm getting a very hostile CFS vs. MFS feeling from certain people.

Quote
If this was in MFS area, then there are problems using the CFS due to the equipment compatability with MFS equipment and Vice Versa.

Can you tell me if the CFS log onto their airsets?
Would their DSU work and show up on the tablet that was being used at this incident as a personal activation?
If an entry control board was in use (which I'm presuming it would be), do the CFS set tallies fit into an MFS enrty control board?
Or would an MFS tally fit into a CFS board?

I'm slightly confused here, as you've quoted yourself and then argued against a point that was never made, but anyhow:

(Obviously you well know the answers)

You essentially "log in" to a CFS airset when you fill out a tally tag. No, its not a telemetry system as MFS run, but assuming you have a  switched on ECO/BACO it works.

Of course CFS DSU's work, but you well know that they won't show up on the tablet that is monitoring a system that they aren't part of. That's like asking will an Incident Report that you hand write show up on CRIIMSON if you wave it in front of a PC monitor. Of course not.

In a perfect world we would all use one system, but in the meantime, doesn't the system still work using different tally boards? Can't one ECO/BACO monitor multiple boards? It's a basic skill, but the issue should be rectified.

This is perfect example of where CFS can implement a procedure without having to endure a costly lesson. We know that BA tally's don't fit MFS to CFS or even between CFS Brigades in certain groups. Why not work to resolve this before something happens, like we lose a tally, that person gets lost and is thus missed in an accountability check?


Sure, you can pull out your leatherman and try to cut yourself free but there is a procedure that should be followed which would be part of my escape plan.

This is not a CFS vs MFS post. You have asked what would the firefighter do. If an MFS firefighter was stuck, I would hope that they would do the same as a CFS firefighter. All that I have said is that I would instigate a 'Mayday" and take it from there, once again, this is what I would do.

I wasn't suggesting that you were getting into a CFS vs. MFS post, although small parts of it do read that way. Can't we discuss different methods, including RIT here? Actually having people share personal experiences and what their agency manages to do? God forbid we might all learn something here, both the "professionals" and the "amateurs".

Of you original post, the only part I disagreed with was your assertion that we should not compare ourselves to what occurs in the USA, and we cannot learn anything from their mistakes and the changes to firefighting equipment/policy and procedures that some parts of the USA has implemented. Totally agree with your suggestion of entrapment procedure, etc. Although I'd say that given you follow you agencies SOP for entrapment procedure, there is no reason you can't attempt to effect self rescue, rather than lay like a limp fish in what may end up being an easily escapable entanglement.

Quote
Could you enlighten us as to these "RIT Methods" you speak of?

As per a RIT team, a crew (of 4)is put aside and designated as a RIT team that is only used for an emergency rescue with a complete set of rescue resources eg. stretcher, tools, cutting gear and anything that may be needed to effect a rescue. This team is not used for any firefighting.

I was asking the ever so enlightened name dropper unfknblvable to help us through these MFS RIT methods, but thanks for jumping in. It seems a pretty standard RIT setup, although I'm assuming the RIT officer is completing their own RIT specific size-up and appropriate staging etc etc?

Wind me up and watch me go!
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 29, 2011, 02:35:00 PM
Can I ask how many of you have been into a serious structure fire?

I know this is going be taken the wrong way but it's a genuine question.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on May 29, 2011, 03:48:30 PM
Can I ask how many of you have been into a serious structure fire?

I know this is going be taken the wrong way but it's a genuine question.


It's also a very valid question.

It'll be interesting to see the varying definitions of "serious". Is a room and contents "serious"? Or is going in for a marginal S&R run "serious"?

And to answer the question, oddly enough, yes.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 29, 2011, 04:41:46 PM
Fair enough question about "serious".

 A medium sized commercial premises. Partially involved.

Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: CFS_Firey on May 30, 2011, 10:12:29 AM
Quote
Could you enlighten us as to these "RIT Methods" you speak of?

As per a RIT team, a crew (of 4)is put aside and designated as a RIT team that is only used for an emergency rescue with a complete set of rescue resources eg. stretcher, tools, cutting gear and anything that may be needed to effect a rescue. This team is not used for any firefighting.

When is the RIT set up?  Is this only for commercial fires, or all fires where crews are inside a structure?  If you have a relatively small domestic fire where you only have 2 operators committed, would the standby crew outside have tools ready in case something goes wrong? (or would you have a 4 member RIT at the ready?)

Also, does anyone know where one can get a copy of the SAMFS SOPs?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 31, 2011, 10:07:02 AM
I'm at a loss for words.

Obviously there is something missing from your Command and Control at incidents and who is enforcing it.

Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: CFS_Firey on May 31, 2011, 11:09:17 AM
I'm at a loss for words.

Obviously there is something missing from your Command and Control at incidents and who is enforcing it.


Que?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Alex on May 31, 2011, 11:54:09 AM
Quote
Could you enlighten us as to these "RIT Methods" you speak of?

As per a RIT team, a crew (of 4)is put aside and designated as a RIT team that is only used for an emergency rescue with a complete set of rescue resources eg. stretcher, tools, cutting gear and anything that may be needed to effect a rescue. This team is not used for any firefighting.

When is the RIT set up?  Is this only for commercial fires, or all fires where crews are inside a structure?  If you have a relatively small domestic fire where you only have 2 operators committed, would the standby crew outside have tools ready in case something goes wrong? (or would you have a 4 member RIT at the ready?)

Also, does anyone know where one can get a copy of the SAMFS SOPs?

For MFS, generally at B or A risk greater alarms only.

For CFS, never seen it done properly.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 31, 2011, 02:32:20 PM
I wouldn't be in there in the first place.......... :-o


Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bittenyakka on May 31, 2011, 02:54:52 PM
I think it is a fair question to ask a question and get a proper answer. Rather than take a dig at eh CFS for not having much of a RIT plan how about suggesting what brigades can do with what is currently available to them.

Unfortunately for multiple reasons we haven’t considered RIT a high priority to allocate resources to implement. Rightly or wrongly this is the fact and what Ideas can you offer other Fire-fighters to improve the status qou
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: misterteddy on May 31, 2011, 09:06:24 PM
I wouldn't be in there in the first place.......... :-o




ahhh well...I hear the Salvos are always looking for volunteers for the lunch wagon, so you can still feel involved
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 31, 2011, 11:32:40 PM
Quote
I think it is a fair question to ask a question and get a proper answer. Rather than take a dig at eh CFS for not having much of a RIT plan how about suggesting what brigades can do with what is currently available to them.

Unfortunately for multiple reasons we haven’t considered RIT a high priority to allocate resources to implement. Rightly or wrongly this is the fact and what Ideas can you offer other Fire-fighters to improve the status qou

Not having much of a RIT plan? If you have crews committed to a larger fire such as numbers hypothetical incident, Why is it so hard to have a crew as a designated RIT team? I have already described what they do. There is nothing magical about a RIT team. All the equipment needed is on the fire ground. This should all be part of the IC's IAP.


Quote
When is the RIT set up?  Is this only for commercial fires, or all fires where crews are inside a structure?  If you have a relatively small domestic fire where you only have 2 operators committed, would the standby crew outside have tools ready in case something goes wrong? (or would you have a 4 member RIT at the ready?

At a domestic fire, the backup BA crew could be used as a RIT team (only on a smaller scale) I'm sure that if something happened at a domestic fire, it would be on a much smaller scale than at a commercial premises. This is all at the discretion of the IC of course and once again, it should be part of the IAP.

Quote
I wouldn't be in there in the first place..........





ahhh well...I hear the Salvos are always looking for volunteers for the lunch wagon, so you can still feel involved

I don't know how much of or if you get any structure fire training but along time before the ceiling collapsed and the A/C ducts fell down, it would be pretty obvious that it would be unsafe.

If you happened to be in there when it happened then someone was a bit too keen to be a hero.

A safety officer is designated at K99 incidents ASAP (A K99 is an automatic upgrade or higher if requested - so there will be enough resources to have a crew for a RIT Team if required - once again, at the discretion of the IC

What is so hard...........

The bigger the job, the greater the safety risk. If you guys can't get trucks or crews to turn up at incidents, then there is the start of your problems.........
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on May 31, 2011, 11:41:15 PM
Quote
Quote from: flyonthewall on Today at 02:32:20 PM
I wouldn't be in there in the first place..........





ahhh well...I hear the Salvos are always looking for volunteers for the lunch wagon, so you can still feel involved

I did forget to mention, I have helped the Salvos before and they were a nice bunch of people. Who knows, I might have even served you.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on June 01, 2011, 12:06:42 AM
Quote
I think it is a fair question to ask a question and get a proper answer. Rather than take a dig at eh CFS for not having much of a RIT plan how about suggesting what brigades can do with what is currently available to them.

Unfortunately for multiple reasons we haven’t considered RIT a high priority to allocate resources to implement. Rightly or wrongly this is the fact and what Ideas can you offer other Fire-fighters to improve the status qou

Not having much of a RIT plan? If you have crews committed to a larger fire such as numbers hypothetical incident, Why is it so hard to have a crew as a designated RIT team? I have already described what they do. There is nothing magical about a RIT team. All the equipment needed is on the fire ground. This should all be part of the IC's IAP.

As has been said, and flyonthewall is basically spot on, RIT isn't hard. All of your tools are on the trucks, it's merely a matter of assigning a crew, or more if required, to RIT duties, and then as part of the RIT start to formulate plans based on your size up.

Quote
When is the RIT set up?  Is this only for commercial fires, or all fires where crews are inside a structure?  If you have a relatively small domestic fire where you only have 2 operators committed, would the standby crew outside have tools ready in case something goes wrong? (or would you have a 4 member RIT at the ready?

At a domestic fire, the backup BA crew could be used as a RIT team (only on a smaller scale) I'm sure that if something happened at a domestic fire, it would be on a much smaller scale than at a commercial premises. This is all at the discretion of the IC of course and once again, it should be part of the IAP.

I tend to stick to the rule of thumb that at 2nd Alarm and greater you should be thinking about turning out a pump specifically for RIT duties. Again, its no hard and fast rule (unless its in you ARP Schedule) but the IC needs to be thinking about it.

Quote
I wouldn't be in there in the first place..........

ahhh well...I hear the Salvos are always looking for volunteers for the lunch wagon, so you can still feel involved

I don't know how much of or if you get any structure fire training but along time before the ceiling collapsed and the A/C ducts fell down, it would be pretty obvious that it would be unsafe.

If you happened to be in there when it happened then someone was a bit too keen to be a hero.

A safety officer is designated at K99 incidents ASAP (A K99 is an automatic upgrade or higher if requested - so there will be enough resources to have a crew for a RIT Team if required - once again, at the discretion of the IC

What is so hard...........

The bigger the job, the greater the safety risk. If you guys can't get trucks or crews to turn up at incidents, then there is the start of your problems.........

Frankly, I don't tend to agree. The ceiling and other assorted furnishing can start to fall down WELL before a building is unsafe and is threatening to collapse. If you honestly think that furnishings, ceiling tiles, suspended ceilings and other bits and pieces of the interior of a building falling down are hard and fast signs that you're "too keen to be a hero" and shouldn't be in there, then I guess you're going to be a great builder of carparks.

But then again, what is the building that you're in made of? Is it brick and tile or of lightweight construction? Did the ceiling fall in because the steel frame its hung off has expanded? Does the CFS get taught building construction? Of course not.

Lightweight building materials, adhesives, attachment devices and fixture mountings can all be effected by heat in a negative fashion and they then tend to fail. Odd that.

It comes down to reading the structure that you're operating in and understanding how the fire effects the building's construction. There are a handful signs of structural collapse, but they need to be weighed up against the building you're actually in.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on June 01, 2011, 08:13:39 AM
The entanglement I experienced was in a house where the roof stayed intact, just the covering over the ductwork melted and like a slinky the wires fell through the vents.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on June 01, 2011, 09:04:52 AM
The entanglement I experienced was in a house where the roof stayed intact, just the covering over the ductwork melted and like a slinky the wires fell through the vents.

Exactly. I'd happily assume that the building was structurally intact, even though you experienced some debris falling onto you. Certainly not a case of "...along time before the ceiling collapsed and the A/C ducts fell down, it would be pretty obvious that it would be unsafe. [sic]"
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: unfknblvable on June 01, 2011, 11:02:53 AM
Is it not the responsibility of the Incident Controller to decide upon incident strategy?
Is it not the role of Safety Officers to take corrective actions where "personnel are taking unacceptable risks"?
Oh but of course all you highly experienced and far more knowledgeable types on this forum are much wiser.
ROFL
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: CFS_Firey on June 01, 2011, 11:22:47 AM
Is it not the responsibility of the Incident Controller to decide upon incident strategy?
Is it not the role of Safety Officers to take corrective actions where "personnel are taking unacceptable risks"?
Oh but of course all you highly experienced and far more knowledgeable types on this forum are much wiser.
ROFL

Some members of this forum are trying to have a serious discussion about urban fire fighting because they know the CFS training provided is inadequate.
If you're an experienced urban fire fighter, how about you contribute to the discussion positively, so that members on here can learn from your experience?  How about explaining what you would do as an incident controller, or describing what actions you would take after being entangled rather than saying "it's not hard, follow SOP"?

Snide, passive-aggressive remarks are not helpful, and will be removed from now on.

If you have something helpful to say, please contribute.  If you don't, feel free to read but don't post.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: bajdas on June 01, 2011, 11:59:59 AM
People state that enough tools exist on a fire truck to equip a RIT team. I am not part of a fire service so would be interested in what specific tools you would lay out on a tarp for quick access ?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: Darcyq on June 01, 2011, 02:22:31 PM
...so would be interested in what specific tools you would lay out on a tarp for quick access ?

I would be thinking of the "Holligan Tool, Axe, and Sledge Hammer, for a start if it was just a case of making an forced entry or egress. Like what has alresdy been posted, a good set of wire cutters would be handy for removal of wires etc. I suppose it all depends on what "what if's" you could potentially be faced with. Worse case you could require Hydraulic tools, air lifting bags, shoring blocks. Then if there is a height access issue (fall through floor) ladders may well also be needed.

All this RIT work takes time, what is the recommended (read SOP) response for maintaining an air supply to a trapped fire fighter whose cylinder has become depleted?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: 6739264 on June 01, 2011, 04:22:13 PM
People state that enough tools exist on a fire truck to equip a RIT team. I am not part of a fire service so would be interested in what specific tools you would lay out on a tarp for quick access ?

Halligans, Axe, Sledge Hammer, Spare CABA, Ceiling Hooks, Hydraulic Door Opener, QuickCut Saw as a start. This will all fit into a Stokes Litter as a start. The RIT should have at least one Thermal Imaging Camera and both small access and large extension ladders.

Believe it or not, this is all available to the CFS, as we speak. In some areas this possible with either regional of SAMFS assistance.

...so would be interested in what specific tools you would lay out on a tarp for quick access ?

I would be thinking of the "Holligan Tool, Axe, and Sledge Hammer, for a start if it was just a case of making an forced entry or egress. Like what has alresdy been posted, a good set of wire cutters would be handy for removal of wires etc. I suppose it all depends on what "what if's" you could potentially be faced with. Worse case you could require Hydraulic tools, air lifting bags, shoring blocks. Then if there is a height access issue (fall through floor) ladders may well also be needed.

All this RIT work takes time, what is the recommended (read SOP) response for maintaining an air supply to a trapped fire fighter whose cylinder has become depleted?

Pretty much spot on, although your heavy hydraulic tools/airbags etc, are generally only going to be able to be used one the area around the trapped firefighter is made same from fire. If you need that gear, then you're looking at a very protracted rescue, if not body recovery.

Maintaining an air supply to a downed CFS firefighter is very difficult given that the Sabre Centurion airsets currently issued do not have the ability to buddy breath in a standard configuration. Best method I can think of is to haul a spare airset in and swap demand valves over at the facemask. This should leave the facemask/helmet/hood intact.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on June 01, 2011, 10:44:57 PM
All the info about RIT teams and Safety Officers is in SAMFS SOP 12 - Command and Control Procedure at Incidents.
More information is in SAMFS SOP 14 Breathing Apparatus and Respiratory Protection Procedures.

Quote
Maintaining an air supply to a downed CFS firefighter is very difficult given that the Sabre Centurion airsets currently issued do not have the ability to buddy breath in a standard configuration. Best method I can think of is to haul a spare airset in and swap demand valves over at the facemask. This should leave the facemask/helmet/hood intact.

I am glad this has been brought up ........

In my original post where I was talking about Tablets and Entry control boards,
I mentioned the incompatability. The Alpha Network sytem that the MFS run with their airsets has the capability of being remotely monitored. I don't know what you guys know about this system but ......... If an MFS firefighter was trapped, they can set of their set so that the ECO monitoring the tablet will know they are in trouble. The ECO can also monitor their air supply and relay this information back to a RIT team or IC. If the firefighter is motionless, it will also set of an alarm. All of this is info is given in live time data.
An auxillary facemask can also be run off the MFS BA.

If it was a CFS firefighter, everthing would have to be a guesstimation. Of course a rescue would be as quick as possible but there is no way of monitoring what is actually going on, sure you can use the radios but if someone is incapacitated, how do you know? .......... So it was not a dig at the CFS.

Quote
Quote from: bajdas on Today at 11:59:59 AM
...so would be interested in what specific tools you would lay out on a tarp for quick access ?


I would be thinking of the "Holligan Tool, Axe, and Sledge Hammer, for a start if it was just a case of making an forced entry or egress. Like what has alresdy been posted, a good set of wire cutters would be handy for removal of wires etc. I suppose it all depends on what "what if's" you could potentially be faced with. Worse case you could require Hydraulic tools, air lifting bags, shoring blocks. Then if there is a height access issue (fall through floor) ladders may well also be needed.

All this RIT work takes time, what is the recommended (read SOP) response for maintaining an air supply to a trapped fire fighter whose cylinder has become depleted?


At a domestic fire, there would be enough equipment and manpower around. At a large commercial/factory incident, the IC could call on the Heavy Rescue pod to be dropped of, specifically for a RIT team. There would also be enough small gear around to use, eg a thermal camera.

Once again..........

The IC is responsible for co-ordinating an incident. Safety Officers and RIT Teams, and all other resources are at the discretion of the IC . This will all be part of their risk assesment and IAP.

This info is all in the SOP'S mentioned.

Quote
Frankly, I don't tend to agree. The ceiling and other assorted furnishing can start to fall down WELL before a building is unsafe and is threatening to collapse. If you honestly think that furnishings, ceiling tiles, suspended ceilings and other bits and pieces of the interior of a building falling down are hard and fast signs that you're "too keen to be a hero" and shouldn't be in there, then I guess you're going to be a great builder of carparks.

But then again, what is the building that you're in made of? Is it brick and tile or of lightweight construction? Did the ceiling fall in because the steel frame its hung off has expanded? Does the CFS get taught building construction? Of course not.


.......... I respect your opinion numbers, however if there was nobodys life at threat, I wouldn't be risking mine. If things are falling, would you be able to tell what it was in a smoke filled environment? Some people probably think it is like the movies where everyone can see eachother and see what is going on around them. If the A/C slingy has fallen through the roof (through it's duct?)-I would be asking myself, What's going on above my head that I can't see? What else is up there that might come down?

You can't save what is already burnt. I've never seen a ceiling come down without any prior compromise or unless I have pulled it down. All ceilings that I have seen come down in fires have had whatever has been above following close behind including roof trusses, beams, hotwater systems, A/C ducting, tiles and insulation. I have been entangled in electrical wires, although not during the fire. Has anyone tried using a small hand tool with structure gloves on? A leatherman would be useless.

(By the way, You never mentioned in your hypothetical if there were persons reported?)
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: CFS_Firey on June 02, 2011, 09:41:09 AM
All the info about RIT teams and Safety Officers is in SAMFS SOP 12 - Command and Control Procedure at Incidents.
More information is in SAMFS SOP 14 Breathing Apparatus and Respiratory Protection Procedures.

Is there some way us mere volunteers can get hold of these SOPs?  It might help us put systems in place at incidents given that our SOPs don't cover it...


An auxillary facemask can also be run off the MFS BA.

Just to clarify, the Centurions do allow for auxiliary masks to be run, it's just that the CFS does't stow the fittings required.  Likewise you can also attach an external air supply to the sets, but we don't stow the fittings/hoses for that either.

You can't save what is already burnt. I've never seen a ceiling come down without any prior compromise or unless I have pulled it down. All ceilings that I have seen come down in fires have had whatever has been above following close behind including roof trusses, beams, hotwater systems, A/C ducting, tiles and insulation. I have been entangled in electrical wires, although not during the fire. Has anyone tried using a small hand tool with structure gloves on? A leatherman would be useless.

You're right that you shouldn't risk your life for nothing, but remember in this hypothetical case the ceiling came down once crews were already inside, not before they went in. It's possibly for a small smouldering fire in the ceiling space to build up enough heat to melt aircon duct, but still not show up as a large fire from the outside.

Would you personally refuse to go in to a smoke logged room (with no persons reported) because the structure would be weakened?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: pumprescue on June 02, 2011, 01:11:00 PM
Interesting that you wouldn't go into any structure that had no life threat, you may as well just ask on the 000 call is there anyone home, if not then say call the demolition company...

Firefighting is dangerous, there is stupid and there is calculated risk.
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on June 02, 2011, 07:35:32 PM
CFS_Firey,
Quote
Is there some way us mere volunteers can get hold of these SOPs?  It might help us put systems in place at incidents given that our SOPs don't cover it...

... Sorry, I can't help.

Quote
[Just to clarify, the Centurions do allow for auxiliary masks to be run, it's just that the CFS does't stow the fittings required.  Likewise you can also attach an external air supply to the sets, but we don't stow the fittings/hoses for that either.

... That dosen't help if you need to supply someone with air then.


I have been into plenty of smoke logged rooms with a knowledge that no one is in them, have you heard of scene preservation. If someone is reported then of course, I would do what I have been trained to do.

I find it ironic that there is alot of complaining about lack of training and yet, I keep getting questioned about my personal risk management by people who supposedly don't have the training?

pumprescue,
Quote
Interesting that you wouldn't go into any structure that had no life threat, you may as well just ask on the 000 call is there anyone home, if not then say call the demolition company...

Firefighting is dangerous, there is stupid and there is calculated risk.

.......... calculated risk - exactly, and I didn't say I wouldn't go in. I have been saying that I would be erring on the side of safety.

I say again,

I find it ironic that there is alot of complaining about lack of training and yet, I keep getting questioned about my personal risk management by people who supposedly don't have the training or the SOP's that,
Quote
don't cover it...




Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: jaff on June 03, 2011, 09:48:08 AM
When I grow up, I want to be just like Flyonthewall and maybe even have a cape as well....non flamable of course! :wink:
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: CFS_Firey on June 03, 2011, 10:08:36 AM
Quote
Just to clarify, the Centurions do allow for auxiliary masks to be run, it's just that the CFS does't stow the fittings required.  Likewise you can also attach an external air supply to the sets, but we don't stow the fittings/hoses for that either.
... That dosen't help if you need to supply someone with air then.

No, it doesn't :(  (but it's a failure of the system, not the sets)

I find it ironic that there is alot of complaining about lack of training and yet, I keep getting questioned about my personal risk management by people who supposedly don't have the training or the SOP's that,
Quote
cover it...

Maybe because they see you as someone who has been trained, and want to learn from you, so they ask you questions?
Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on June 03, 2011, 01:47:54 PM
Quote
Posted by: jaff 

When I grow up, I want to be just like Flyonthewall and maybe even have a cape as well....non flamable of course! 

I'ts this kind of mentality that lets some people down.

I've tried to give some detail into the thinking of an urban firefighter (this is only my opinion of course)along with some of the things that might happen at an incident.
It is quite obvious that there are some things that you guys didn't know or were unfamiliar with because of the difference in training and core buisness.

........ stay safe at the next structure fire you attend.

Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: misterteddy on June 04, 2011, 01:04:23 AM
It is quite obvious that there are some things that you guys didn't know or were unfamiliar with because of the difference in training and core buisness.


lmao at the "core" business comment. So, do you thing grassfires are our core business??? You really have no idea sometimes do you??

Title: Re: Structure Fire Entanglement Hazard
Post by: flyonthewall on June 04, 2011, 10:53:45 AM
Quote
Posted by: misterteddy  

Quote from: flyonthewall on Yesterday at 01:47:54 PM
It is quite obvious that there are some things that you guys didn't know or were unfamiliar with because of the difference in training and core buisness.



lmao at the "core" business comment. So, do you thing grassfires are our core business??? You really have no idea sometimes do you??



 

My apology, core business - was a poor choice of words. Substitute core business with - how often you attend these incidents ie. on the job experience). I also am aware that some guys have structure fire experience and have worked alongside them with no issues of capability.......

Anyway, I didn't mention grassfires and in actual fact, the MFS responds to more anyway. Check the stats 09/10......

CFS total 09/10 - 1996
MFS total 09/10 - 2151

Quote
You really have no idea sometimes do you??

?......

I have no intention of turning this into a stats. thread so back to numbers hypothetical..........