Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - 6739264

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 70
76
SAMFS / Re: RECRUITMENT 2011
« on: April 19, 2011, 01:09:10 AM »
Just a curiosity here, why the obsession with the number of people failing/passing?

77
SAAS / Re: SAAS Motorcycle
« on: April 18, 2011, 10:20:59 AM »
Cert eleven?!?!

78
Country Fire Service / Re: Use of fire sirens
« on: April 18, 2011, 10:20:12 AM »
Although I can see both sides of the issue, and not to mention I believe that the Fire Siren is an outdated method of firecall notification, Operations Bulletin 12/2007: Siren Policy does state the following:

Quote
Notwithstanding the above constraints, use of a Brigade siren shall be permitted at any time where circumstances require:
  • Additional response of members, or
  • Warning of danger to the community

Further to that, in bold:

Quote
It is necessary for brigade to meet with the community and discuss the use of siren, and agree on the  use to meet the requirements of the SACFS and the community. It is encouraged these meeting are held each year prior to the start of the fire danger [sic], so the use of sirens can be reviewed.

I don't see any issue if the local brigade and community come to an agreement about the use of the local station siren. It's great to see it encouraged. I would have serious concerns if any discussion regarding its use was not coupled with the standard bushfire education message, eg: listen to 891 on a TFB, or other extreme day. If the use of the siren is causing particular concern and anxiety as Alex has mentioned, then perhaps Adelaide Fire need to pass this information on to the local brigade to ensure that the use of their siren, if any, is more aligned with community safety objectives during the summer months, rather than brigade turnout.


79
SA Firefighter General / Re: Truck Building Doco
« on: April 15, 2011, 08:02:53 AM »
We should totally film a CFS version...

It'd be like a whole series of blooper reels.

80
Introductions / Re: hey all
« on: April 12, 2011, 06:15:40 PM »
We are all good!

Welcome aboard, feel free to share your opinions and don't get too discouraged by some of the more interesting inhabitants of the board.

Also, don't take any post I make seriously... ;)

81
SA Firefighter General / Re: Old fire trucks-private ownership
« on: April 11, 2011, 06:14:57 PM »
It all depends on the manner in which it is used. Nothing wrong with them being used for booster testing, water carting etc. Even people using them for special events would be fine.

As long as they are very obviously non-operational appliances, it should be fine.

82
Country Fire Service / Re: Heavy Pumper
« on: April 10, 2011, 05:02:09 PM »
So how many true pumps in SACFS?, and who deserves to get one based on risk?

SACFS don't have a designation for a Heavy Pumper.

Anything "Type 2" Pumper and higher meets the requirements for an "Urban Pumper", according to SACFS. As Pip has said, its generally understood that a "Heavy" pumper can spit out 1000gpm. If you look around the country at other services "Ultra Large" and "Super Pumpers" they dwarf the capacity of anything the CFS calls a pumper. (Not that CFS need anything like that, its more for interests sake)

Does a 34P Tanker with Urban Stowage meet the CFS definition of an "Urban Pumper"?

Light Pumper - 1000L/m @ 700kpa
Medium Pumper - 2000L/m @ 700kpa
Urban Pumper - 3000L/m @ 700kpa
24P Tanker - 2000L/m @ [Unspecified] kpa
34P Tanker - 3000L/m @ [Unspecified] kpa
(All shamelessly ripped from the Oct 2010 SOP's Glossary, I really hope there is a better definition out there?)

I do love the manner in which CFS rate their pumps to the recommended operating pressure of the branch, rather than to a figure closer to 'normal' pump operating pressures, say 1000kpa?

83
Country Fire Service / Re: Heavy Pumper
« on: April 08, 2011, 04:17:24 PM »
So sounds like CFS may have brought 2 new pumpers. So who will be the lucky brigade? Who can justify one??

Notice I said "Aus" not "South Aus"

Hmmmm don't know about 2, but the NZ is sounding on the cars....as for who gets it, think who has the biggest jallopy pumper right now.....

Hmmm..... Lets think about that... hmmmm...

Further more, does anyone know of another order piggy backed of NSW for a type 2?

God, you'd hope so. Or maybe they should piggy back a handful of Class 3's?

84
Country Fire Service / Re: Heavy Pumper
« on: April 08, 2011, 09:35:39 AM »
Will we see one in Aus before we see a Rosenbauer AT?

WHO KNOWS?!?!

Yes is the word.

Sounds like it'll come down to a delivery date race...

85
Country Fire Service / Re: Heavy Pumper
« on: April 07, 2011, 07:49:37 PM »
Will we see one in Aus before we see a Rosenbauer AT?

WHO KNOWS?!?!

86
SAMFS / Re: RECRUITMENT 2011
« on: March 30, 2011, 04:48:00 PM »
1000 applicants!! what a joke!! Why did they have to go and make it easier to apply? they were already getting 300 plus applicants for potentially only 18 positions. surely that was enough. People are going to get rejected for the smallest things now.

Isn't that the point? Get the best applicants from as wide a range as possible?

87
All Equipment discussion / Re: Standard Trucks
« on: March 30, 2011, 04:11:55 PM »
8x8m Filler Hose Lengths
Boosting, or used there the hydrant is literally beside the truck.

This is assuming that the Booster cabinet is within 8m of a hard stand area AND first arriving appliances/other vehicles have not parked the booster in. What happens when this is not the case? You're only carrying 4x30m of 64mm hose, thus you can't boost a 4/4 system if the booster hose doesn't reach. Unless you then fumble around connecting booster lengths up. Wouldn't it be smarter to use the space taken up by lots of small lengths with 30m lengths that you can actually use in a variety of ways?

2 Trays, EACH tray containing 2x30m 64mm hose, flaked in a "supply" lay (Total of 4 hoses)
Yep, enough hose to get you 120m away from the appliance, or dualheading of a hydrant up to 60m away. By the time you need more, more appliances would be on scene, with more hose. Where most (generally) urban appliances are, the next appliance would be on scene reasonably soon, most likely when the appliance is nearly about to change over from tank to mains water.

What happens when the hydrant is 120m away, and you need to get 64mm to work on an exposure? You've tied up all of your 64mm as supply lines, leaving none for fire attack use. You can only relay pump to a truck 60m away - a horribly inefficient use of fire ground resources. Juggling the numbers, you should be able to relay pump a distance of around 210m on level ground with a CFS Type 2 pumper, providing you have enough hose...

I still can't see why you'd want to limit yourself to only 4 lengths of 64m? That's fine for a Rural truck, but for an Urban truck, you should be looking at ATLEAST double, preferably triple the amount of hose. Even a basic defensive attack using 2 lines in, and 2 attack lines out, at 2 lengths a line, will require 8 lengths of hose.

And using your suggestion of making non-specialist brigades, a specialist brigade by holding more than normal hose...the 2nd or 3rd appliance, would have the amount of hose to reach 3 or 4 hydrants away.  Pseudo-Hoselayer appliances.

Mmmm I wasn't quite suggesting that it would become a hoselayer of sorts, but I see where you're going with it. I meant more that the appliances with specialist stowage would be carrying LESS hose than the standard for the given appliance design. Eg: Urban truck might carry 14 lengths of 64, 10 lengths of 38 and 6 lengths of 25mm, and the RCR version might have only 10x64mm, 6x38mm, 4x25mm, or can the 25mm altogether, given 90m hosereels. Pumpers ARE meant to carry hose, the CFS tends to forget this...

Meanwhile! 4WD appliances, should have 6 lengths of 64mm, to allow for a longer arrival time of further appliances.

You heard it hear first guys and girls, Rural trucks need more large diameter hose than Urban trucks. Don't forget that it's about being able to operate effectively on the fireground, not just barely surviving until the next appliance and it's 4 lengths of 64mm arrive.

6 x 38mm Delivery Hose.
2 lengths of 38mm per attack line. For two teams of two. 2 further lengths for an additional team or adding a length.

And when its a 2 storey house? That's 3 if not 4 lengths in a line, assuming you're pulling up outside the house and it's not a typically long Adelaide Hills driveway. What about large commercial premises?

Although if we actually start seeing "High Pressure" (2500-3000kpa, not the 800kpa 34P style) lines on Pumpers, then perhaps the 38mm stowage can be reduced, or we bring it inline with SAMFS.

Just trying to pose some thoughts...

88
All Equipment discussion / Re: Standard Trucks
« on: March 29, 2011, 11:32:30 PM »
Of late I have found myself involved in discussions about appliances a bit. The frequent occurance is that people want to see Standardisation so it is it easier to work and you can always find equipment on other brigades appliances.

What do you think?

What level of standardisation do you want or not want? is it just that hoses are stored on the right had side or should we all have the same Trucks?

Should we take a leaf out of the MFS and FRNSW appliance style where they are much the same each year but do incorporate new technology and improvements?


We really need to look at a modular system by which we have a basic, or reference, design around a few core trucks. For example we might have Urban, Urban/Rural, Rural, Light Rural, BWC. Similar to what Zippy suggested, but more inline with the SFEC document. Now, from this, lets say the Urban design is a 2wd truck with a 4000lpm pump (4 in/4 out). The Urban/Rural would be say, a 4wd truck, with a 3000lpm pump (best of both worlds with 4in, 4 out) the Rural truck a 4wd with a 2000lpm pump (2 out, 2 in). So, very basically you have three major reference designs that meet the basics of what each truck could be expected to do. The Urban truck can supply an Aerial appliance if need be, and thus is useful for CoQ. The Urban/Rural truck has enough plumbing and pump capability that it can boost 99% of installations it comes across, AND its 4wd. The Rural truck has enough to get to work in an urban environment, but is far better suited to Rural work. Of course you can dodge tank capacity and pump specs around, but can we all see what I'm getting at?

So from these handful of basic designs, we then have a modular system of stowage that allows individual brigades to configure the lockers themselves (eg: a consultation process that involves region, I&L and the Brigade). Need an Urban truck with Rescue stowage? Then the N/S 1 locker gets a "Rescue" fit-out, so that it can stow what it needs to. Need Hazmat on an Urban/Rural truck? Then O/S 2 gets a "Hazmat" fit out, etc etc... If the trucks are made so that the lockers are easily setup, then when it gets moved to another brigade, there is little problem with reconfiguring it.

This would also mean that a truck with no specialization could well be configured to carry a HUGE amount of hose, or other assorted things that the Brigade sees fit. Use a heap of 25mm hose on your rural truck? Then you get a hose locker that is configured to carry 10 lengths, rather than 4. Certainly the location of some things between trucks should stay as similar as possible, (eg: hose stowage) to ensure that people can function off other appliances within reason.

If we give Brigades a set of options (within a clearly defined number of modular changes) then I believe that a large number of appliance "problems" will suddenly vanish. Brigades will feel like they are being included in the discussion and hopefully the service won't end up with single trucks costing near on $1million, like both the Dennis and Stirling's Pumper.

some quick notes to start.

- Hose on the passenger/safe side.
- Only Four classes of appliaces: Urban, Rural, Light Rural and BWC.

Amount of Hose:
Urban: 8 Lengths of Filler Hose, 2 Trays (60m) of 64mm Collecting Hose, 6 Lengths of 38mm.
Rural: Very much the same as a 34P and 34, and with 6 lengths of 25mm
Light Rural: Pretty much a 14 with 6 lengths of 25mm. 1 Length 64 and 2 length 38.

- A Rule: stick to a standard, very much like the old Hino's, till it fails to work in its working environment, then and only then, create a new long term standard.

Is the fire always on the passenger side? Is the passenger side always safe? Why is the driver not parking in a fend off position to cover the crew?

I would really like to hear the rationale behind your Urban hose stowage suggestion.

Just to ensure I have it correct, you are suggesting:

8x8m Filler Hose Lengths
2 Trays, EACH tray containing 2x30m 64mm hose, flaked in a "supply" lay (Total of 4 hoses)
6 x 38mm Delivery Hose.


89
SA Firefighter General / Re: Hydraulic couplings changeover
« on: March 28, 2011, 07:49:56 AM »
Wow...

Why would you not get ALL of the couplings changed over at once? Yes it might cost a little bit more, but isn't the point that you then have a system that you can do anything with?


My point exactly, we only have 2x10m lines for ours and if we dont get the pump done thats what we are limited to is those, bit if we get the pump done as well then if the need arises and i am sure it will one day we can run a single 20m line!!

Especially if you have the money for it why not get it done

If you get them all done, I'll bet you never use them. Get only one end done and sure as anything you'll need to run a single 20m line the next day :D

The other issue we all have is have we jumped the gun by getting this done if CFS are looking into replacing all our RCR gear.....

Not sure what brand of tools you guys are using, but I can't see a huge benefit on going to stremlined couplings over duo, unless you're buying a new bit of kit that ONLY comes with a streamlined coupler?

I mean, they're nice and all - don't get me wrong, but certainly a "Nice to have" rather than a "need to have", especially if you're on such a tigh budget to only get half of your hoses done.

90
All Equipment discussion / Re: Do we use them.
« on: March 27, 2011, 01:46:14 PM »
I think that we would see a vast increase in the use of breaching pieces if they were gated. Currently they are difficult to use unless you already have the two hoselays ready to go. If they were gated, it would allow you to set up the single hoselay with the provision for the second line to be added later.

Dare I ask who the meeting was with? Was it an official V&E meeting or just an idea being bandied around at a lower group level?

If anything we should be adding to and improving our already woefully inadequate stowage.

91
SA Firefighter General / Re: Hydraulic couplings changeover
« on: March 27, 2011, 11:46:30 AM »
Wow...

Why would you not get ALL of the couplings changed over at once? Yes it might cost a little bit more, but isn't the point that you then have a system that you can do anything with?

92
SA Firefighter General / Hydraulic couplings changeover
« on: March 26, 2011, 09:26:44 AM »
:59:55 25-03-11 RCR equipment out of service from Sunday 0830 for approximate 2hrs. So don''t have a crash, in this time slot! Due to coupling change over. - CFS Waikerie Info

2hrs only took 45 mins to get ours done on station....

Yeah, it shouldn't take too long, but perhaps the brigade should still be sourcing a spare set for the time being...

93
Country Fire Service / Re: New AIRS Reporting forms
« on: March 21, 2011, 01:26:19 PM »
What exactly is AIRS IN & AIRS OUT?

The reports for attending a call IN your primary response area, or OUT of your primary response area.  What used to be called Primary and Support.

Response area for what? This is not defined... Fire/Rescue/Hazmat areas are all so vastly different, and could all be counted as a Brigades "Primary" Response area.


If you actually bother to read the reference guide it does specify that "IN" is for jobs in your primary 'fire' area and "OUT" is for jobs in other brigades primary fire area. It does also state that IN/OUT is based on fire response area only, not RCR or HAZMAT responsibilities.

RCR/HAZMAT areas of responsibility have never been considered a brigades primary area in terms of reporting, so lets not stir the pot unnecessarily.

Very correct...

I skipped through the reference doc, which makes no mention of anything beyond "Your response area" rather than Update doc. where it is VERY clearly staed that it is the area for Fire response, NOT RCR/Hazmat.

Consider my original post edited...


94
Country Fire Service / Re: New AIRS Reporting forms
« on: March 21, 2011, 07:09:23 AM »
Also, as an interesting aside, the CFS appear to be "doing their own thing" as per usual, as they are not listed as being a contributing agency to AFAC's AIRS data collection - unlike every other major fire service, volunteer or paid, in the country. No wonder there is no need to adhere to the AIRS core data standards outlined by AFAC, when you don't actually do anything useful with the data.

Oh SACFS, you crazy thing!

EDIT: Too early and too simple to be posting. Note to self, read docs first, comment later. Cheers Alex.

95
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New Rescue van for CFS
« on: March 20, 2011, 08:09:03 PM »
am I the only one that has an urge to grab those little cars, pull them backwards and let them go and then watch them race away?

God, I hope they make a little siren noise too!

Don't tell Arthur, he might need to go to Germany to investigate how to strip an already pathetic RCR kit, and install it into a Smart Car.

Hey new Chief, have you worked out how bad things are yet....

I think Arthur has been watching far too much MacGyver and trying to apply those principles to our Rescue stowage. All you need on a Rescue is a Swiss army knife, some chopsticks, a paperclip, rubberband and 3 socks.

A Heavy Rescue adds but a bigger Swiss army knife, a box of matches and a break-apart-McLeod tool!

96
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New Rescue van for CFS
« on: March 20, 2011, 10:32:21 AM »
No no, we have to continue our moves to become an environmentally conscious emergency service.

Surely the Smart ED is the Rescue Vehicle of choice? A staggering range of 135km on a single charge should be perfect to get you to the incident and back! Just in time to plug her into the chargers back at station.

Although we may have to replace the Combi Tool with some Tinsnips and a claw hammer.

97
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New Rescue van for CFS
« on: March 20, 2011, 08:50:39 AM »
RCR is not the be all and end all of Rescue, contrary to what CFS would have us believe. But hey, I guess if we continue to downgrade our capability, then a station wagon with a combi tool and mini ram in the back will be fine. Ok, maybe without the ram. To keep costs down.

don't really need a station wagon..... A little Brumby Ute with 2 people would be fine (makes response numbers/defaults and driver availability better) - smaller carbon footprint too to be topically politically correct.

Scrap the brumby, I think the Combi Tool will fit in the boot of a 2 seat Smart Car! Just gotta get the charging stations installed about the response area...

98
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New Rescue van for CFS
« on: March 19, 2011, 09:42:34 PM »
Thinking about the sort of gear that RCR vehicles carry,
and watching the way they work, I'm not sure a van is the
best place to start the build.

A 3T cab/chassis might be a better basis, with compartmented box.
All items directly accessible from exterior of the vehicle.
All 'heavies' on low-level slide-out trays, 'smalls' in labelled tubs.
Something like what this lot make. http://xl.com.au/index.php

Or maybe, god forbid, we look at the Rescue appliances that nearly every other fire service in the country builds, and build one to a similar spec? The core issue here is that we are using the already sub-standard CFS "Rescue" stowage as a starting point and thus it leads us to a small vehicle. The Rescue stowage itself is abysmal, so why do we not work that out, and then find a vehicle that stows a full Rescue kit properly.

RCR is not the be all and end all of Rescue, contrary to what CFS would have us believe. But hey, I guess if we continue to downgrade our capability, then a station wagon with a combi tool and mini ram in the back will be fine. Ok, maybe without the ram. To keep costs down.

99
SAMFS / Re: RECRUITMENT 2011
« on: March 19, 2011, 07:58:10 PM »
Quote
Insert Quote
Quote from: 6739264 on Today at 09:05:17 AM
Quote from: flyonthewall on Yesterday at 09:29:18 PM
Every thing is pass/fail, if you can't do it - bad luck, no bending for anyone.


Except PAT 2...


And interview

You have misread my reply. As has been mentioned, some people seem to be asking questions that are answered on the SAMFS site!

I'm really surprised that they let you re run the PAT 2. Anyone know why there is this leniency for PAT 2?

100
Emergency Vehicles / Re: New Rescue van for CFS
« on: March 19, 2011, 02:47:05 PM »
So the SOP say.
1xRescue
1xTANKER (for fire cover)

But in the real world where the CFS is short of crews and drivers. A CFS rescue van is a waste of time. How many brigades default? So a rescue appliance needs a pump(fire). It just make basic sense and could help save lives. How many times do rescue brigades respond with only 4 or 5 and 1 driver?
Yes other resources are responded often with delay.
 
Check the CFS pager site and listen to the scanner over the next few weeks. To see how many times crews default or have a slow response.

Why is it a waste of time? If anything it removes the slower response time. If the theory was applied correctly it would require seat only a crew of 3 (min crew as per SACFS SOP AND RCRRD). Lets not forget that a rescue van should require only a C class license, not an MR like current Rescue appliances. This eliminates common issue of not having a truck driver.

You have a larger pool of drivers, only requires 3 crew, has extinguishers on board, just needs a hose line from the Fire Appliance. As per SOP, a Fire Appliance will be responding, be it from the same brigade as the rescue van, or from an adjoining brigade. In your example of 4 or 5 person and 1 driver, why not have 3 take the Rescue van and get to work, while the other 1 and driver, wait a few minutes for crew, if not, then go mobile to provide fire protection? That is without considering the arrival of any other resources.

Does anyone have a photo of the Victorian rescue vans?? are they RCR vans or just CABA refill vans??? CFA dont have these van's and wont as they like their big rescue trucks and they have more gear on them than we do....

If it was just a CABA refill van, would it be called a "Rescue Van"??

A quick googling of Rescue Van brings up links to the NSWFB Rescue Van seating 2 persons on a Merc Sprinter chassis. Can't find any links to any Victorian Rescue Van via google.

Let's not get started on the fact that CFS doesn't stow any Rescue gear beyond the BASIC MVA Rescue Hydraulic gear. It's shameful.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 70
anything