SA Firefighter

There are several stages between a full volunteer station and a fulltime staffed station, look at the CFA for example. In fact there was an interesting article last week in the Hills and Valley Messenger where the Sturt Group was asking for a paid daytime crew. This was in response to an article the week before by an independent politician whose argument was that the locals pay full ESL and thus deserve a fulltime staffed station both in the Sturt Group and another in Mawson Group's area.

Anyway the point here is that Sturt Group is pushing for a day time staffed crew, however the article didn't make it particularly clear that it would be a staffed CFS crew running CFS appliances not an MFS station. As we known, unlike the CFA (that the CFS basically follows and rips everything off), the CFS doesn't have such a system for retained or paid staff instead leaving that to the MFS. In the coming 2-5 years, the line between CFS and MFS will become so blurred you wont know which is which aside from the colour of their trucks. The first step in this process is CFS closing its operations centre and moving it across to the MFS in a couple of months time. Also its now looking like the CFS will start getting work done at the MFS workshops and a lot of the admin will go to a combined SAFECOM. So while at the moment there is a paid service and a volly service soon it will basically be one service with a range of crewing models.

Ever wondered why the SAFECOM logo looks so much like a service logo?

Oh what a shame...

3A.... belive the A to stand for alarm not the class of the building......

Well I don't know how macca intended it but as we are talking about an MFS incident, they state an alarm then class. In this case 3B not 3A, not just let 'A' stand for alarm.
But each to their own.

Maybe the future is an appliance that is fully manned by robots

So now your going to discriminate against humans getting into the fire service? (or just female robots?)

there will be no difference in pressure at the tip?

You started talking about constant volumetric flow rate "when you force 64mm worth of water into a 50mm hole" and the nozzle pressure "therefore giving you more pressure at the tip" previous answer was based on this.

ie the situation where the flow rate remained constant and in that case yes, the nozzle end pressure is the same no matter the hose size. Ie it takes the same pressure at the NOZZLE to drive the same amount of water out of it. However the PUMP pressure will need to be much higher with the smaller hose to get the same NOZZLE end pressure and flow rate.

(layman: smaller hose, same flow rate, same nozzle pressure, higher pump pressure)

However your question NOW relates to constant PUMP pressure. Which is a different situation. In that case volumetric flow rate will change. This is because in the smaller hose the water will travel faster and result in higher frictional pressure loss. So in this case NOZZLE pressure will drop which is what most would expect. But your initial post said "loses very little volume and increases pressure" which is wrong.

(layman: smaller hose, same pump pressure, lower flow, lower nozzle pressure )

It's a simultaneous equation type problem. As the operation point of the hose system is the match between the pump output and hose line impedance. Things get even more tricky when a TFT is involved as they generally have self adjusting variable geometry.

Your statement
"water speed up therefore giving you more pressure at the tip..."
confuses static and dynamic pressures. Think about a venturi like the ones used in the direct induction foam branches. They actually use a constriction to make the water flow faster and a pressure low enough to draw the concentrate up from the drum (lower then atmospheric). So yes the greater the velocity the greater the difference between the dynamic pressure and static pressure. But smaller hoses doesn't equate to more pressure at the NOZZLE.

Anyway when Ive got a moment I may knock up some diagrams and stuff and post them somewhere on SAFF that may be a nice reference for people.

You put your finger over the end of a 64mm, 50mm and 38mm hose line and tell me the difference. While your at it take a photo and post it to SAFF.

Your ill informed assumption is completely wrong. Smaller hose lines do not increase pressure at the action end.
You don't need any general solution to the Navier-Stokes equations. Just a simple energy balance. Perhaps consider Bernoulli's equation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli%27s_equation

Its all about pump output (Pressure vs Volume relationship) and hose line impedance. While the diameter of the hose is a limiting factor in pump output volume it is completely incorrect to say that reducing hose diameter increases nozzle pressure (both of you are completely wrong).
For the same material smaller hoses do have higher bursting pressure but this is a different matter all together.

The main issue here is a trade off between internal hose friction and pump end pressure vs ease of handling (both weight and flexability).


PS If you do have for mentioned general solution to the Navier-Stokes equations please get in contact with me.

This has been another public education message from RHIT (Royal Hicksflat Institute of technology). Making saff a slightly less stupid place to be.

Dear Admin:
My suggestion to improve this forum is to start up a second one called SE Firefighter (SEFF) so we can clear out 90% of the BS and letting SA Firefighter get back to talking about dealing with real emergencies.

Robert I'm currently negotiation with Sony for it to come out on the PS9 console in 2069. They are currently having problems with the purple ray drive so may be delayed to just into next century. But its coming and it will be worth the wait trust me.

I was in that group at the time

Small world isn't it.

And I WAS told NOT to go out and fundraise

Which indeed you were because of the leagal/accounting things that needed to be addressed which I told you about before. Unless you wanted members breaking the law for a bit of scratch.

PR, though, has apparently continued unabated

Correct and so has fundraising. It would have been less then 12 months when fundraisng wasn't happening due to the accounting matter.

as an EDUCATED professional, and volunteer

Well hello Professor Footy

The idea of vollies being paid is a tough one, should they be reimbursed for their time?

No because the moment you reimburse them for their time they are not volunteers, they are staff. Should you reimburse staff for their time; of cause.
Should some vollies become staff? well yes if they can get into the MFS.

If you are able to be a member of CFS and MFS, then why not?

Why not join the SES, Surf Life Savers and every other service so you can let all but one down in a time of need as you pick and choose what you think is going to be the most exciting thing to do for selfish reasons.

It's like saying that someone can't play indoor cricket on a Friday night and Grade cricket on a Saturday.

Right... The fire service is a game to you. Good thing I live in hickflats and not where you think your protecting.

Some kids at school want to learn, others need special rewardsto keep them their, some need incentives to get them there. Sound Familiar?

School kids and cricket... try to make the parallel more relevant by using cucumbers next time.

Who cares what sex the fire fighters are

Obviously equal opportunity people http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,21285614-2682,00.html

Its because of that that there are programs such as this in government organisations. Without it would there be any fulltime female firefighters in the MFS?
So why not start advertising that the MFS have female firefighters by focusing on the number in Mt Gambier which has more than other stations. If it gets females attention and attracts them to the service (even if they start as retained before moving to fulltime) then im sure it will satisfy the government and those who cry for equal opportunities.

It therefore should be asked that as a female firefighter in the MFS Blue, do you support the removal of this program meaning that you and other females would (if you wanted to become a fulltime firefighter) have to fight for a place against the many hundreds of males that apply for what is a physically demanding job and therefore, in most cases, would make it extremely difficult for women to join and entirely possible that none would "make the grade".

I doubt that saving a few pennies will bring an influx of new recuits, but so what if it does

Then we get some people that aren't there for the right reasons. If they were truly interested in being in that service they would have joined prior to any concessions being introduced by the government.

It was just a way that vollies can receive a token thank you for their efforts

Pride should be your pay. Knowing you helped should be your pay. Knowing you did your best should be your pay. Maybe you don't feel the pride, or that you helped or that you did the right thing and need such heartless "tokens". Perhaps the CFS isn't for you. Do you measure your self worth by your net worth? If that's the case go do something else.

Have you ever read a thank you letter from the public? Id take that over a generically issued token from the government any day.

My brigade has a 24, and ok the shed isn't all that rusty

Oh now were back to talking about your CFS brigade. Two services, two helmets, numerous uniforms, and yet the thing that actually matters (the person) cant be in two places at once which bring me to what do you do when both the mets and your cfs brigade are responded to the same incident at the same time. Which station do you respond to? Do you evenly share your responses to each service? Do you favour the mets over cfs or vice versa?

God forbid the complexities involved should ever be discussed with the brigades   Involve people and they will understand. Be open in your communication and decision making and people will more likely follow (especially important where we are managing voluntees). I think the decision ignored the extra benefits from fund raising that I mentioned peviously, and that was a sad loss that has recently been rectified for polling day.

Maybe you didn't talk to your brigade (as shown in another topic), perhaps your brigade didn't talk to you (speculation why removed), maybe they did and you just didn't listen or understand. But looking at it you have been in R1, R5, CFA, MFS, Forestry and probably a number of other things all in 5 years. Sounds like you haven't been anywhere long enough to get truly involved and learn what is going on.

The decision of that group didn't ignore the extra benefits as brigades WEREN'T told to NOT go out. Brigades still got out and about into the public and did things. Crews DID do school visits, crews DID go to craft/markets, crews DID do PR exercises. They may not of done anything specific on polling day but that's only one day every 2 years or so; fairly insignificant in the scheme of things PR wise. Maybe they didn't do all the things you wanted them to, maybe you had something else on when they did stuff, maybe you were left out for a good reason I don't know.
But its hardly a case of the roller doors came down and the community was ignored by that group.

OK there are a fair number of follow ups to my follow up. So here goes in no specific order replies to those that justify a reply.

would it be possible to share some of the sturt groups reservations

Well I'm sure that each person in the Sturt group management committee had their own specific take on it. But the consensus of the elected committee was to hold off on it. So really the explanation doesn't need to go much further than that. Should members of that group have any questions about why or which way their elected captain voted on the topic should be directed to that captain who would know the full story.

There would have been multiple lengthy discussions covering many many points so really I'm only speculating here on why they took the point of view they did from what I hear.

Firstly there may have been consideration that there has been NO suggestion that the current uniform used by the Sturt group (nomex) has not performed adequately in training and operation. To my knowledge within the Sturt group there has been no injuries or near misses (or even suggestion there of) have been made that the current nomex was inadequate in anyway at anytime. So the urgency of getting it out there may have been tagged reasonably low and it was better to have the full story on the use, operation and management of the uniform BEFORE rolling it out. As seen in the latest posts on SAFF you lot after having the uniform for 6 months or so are still arguing over what you should or should not wear it too.
Indeed mengcfs suggested "Check with your Region as it seems each region has a different view on the wearing of PBI gold" to which the Sturt group did in writing and did not get a reply. The more cynical in the Sturt group management may have considered the issuing of the uniform more politically then operationally based. We all remember Mike Rann in front of two koalas (the choppers) with two fire fighters (one male, one female) announcing this to the public just before the election right (before there had even been and announcement or significant discussion inside the CFS). I believe there is still question of this uniform got a critical assessment and the thumbs up by any of the state technical committees.

Secondly without a flash hood and structural gloves the PBI provides minimal extra protection. I believe the Sturt group lobbied very hard on both of these points. Indeed all the external heat issues logged with the nomex uniform (mainly from the compartment course) would not have been mitigated by the material or cut of the PBI. Indeed these issues continued after PBI was introduced (to the compartment course). So the thinking of the Sturt group may have been that without the complete package (PBI, gloves, hood) you are getting minimal extra protection against external heat. One hold up may have been getting approval, sizing, tender and supply of this additional PPE to obtain the protection PBI claims to have against external heat sources.

Medevac buying riggers gloves for personal use in the garden from banner backwood may take a week or so to do. But to obtain the correct glove for structural fire fighting takes time. You need to get a number of gloves from different suppliers. Then these demo models need to go to the brigades for comment. Lets say one week at each station there is 5 weeks there. Then you need to collate the feedback and have consensus from the management committee on the best glove considering cost. Then you need to get sizing pairs and size everyone up. Lets say another week at each station. Then you may need to put out a tender for the supply of the selected glove. Then the gloves may need to be shipped in then there is Christmas. Then people may have other things to do like combat large fires. To say it only takes a week is just foolish. If it did only take a week you would probably be on here complaining about how the Sturt group didn't give brigades a say and how they selected the wrong glove and it cost too much. (Which you will probably do anyway)

Thirdly groups have had it drummed in to them the purchase or modification of equipment has to have an adequate risk assessment, completed, accepted and filed. The group may have believe it was following policy by awaiting this paper work on what is front line life critical PPE. Seems odd that the state would buy $4M of the stuff without doing the mandatory paper work groups need to do for something much less or life critical doesn't it? (Like if someone in the heat on an election just announced it for spin). Some of you will continue to run the line "(whine) but state said it was good". Safety is everyones responsibility.

Fourthly the group may have been considering racking and storage options in the station for the proper stowage. Some issues may have been identified with the strength of the current hanging hooks and how to have easy access to two sets of uniforms without having trip hazards such as crew bags all over the place.

Fifthly, some may have considered a uniform just that. Not one person has this and another person has that. Nomex is currently used across the board in the Sturt group. This simplifies equipment management and a conformity among members. (I know your all going to have a shot at this and I agree this would not be a particularly strong argument)

Sixthly, the group may have been waiting on further info from state on how cleaning, repair, annual inspection and replacement would be funded. Why would a group accept an extra cost with no extra funding particularly in light of the first point that the PPE currently in service was adequate.

Seventh the group may have been after more info generally from state on maintenance and management (other then the washing instructions on the
label) of the uniform and SOP on its use.

So generally the Sturt group may have felt state was excessively hasty giving out equipment (if they even had a choice) without addressing the issues that are involved in what is a very important bit of equipment. But thats all speculation based on what I hear back from Sturt management meetings. I also hear that other than flash hoods and gloves (gloves decided on by the group and purchased from the groups funds) state has not addressed any of the above. So now that the gear has been given out I would assume that the captains voted to distribute the gear anyway. Why that was I don't know. So personally there is better justification on not handing it out then why they eventually chose to do so. But I can tell you one thing it would have had nothing to do with posts on SAFF.

This holds off parallels that of other CFSHQ roll outs that the Sturt group has held off on until it was done properly or things further clarified. So don't think the PBI was the first or last instance of this. I think the word for it is prudent.

I hope that give some insight (rightly or wrongly) of only some of the issues that may have been involved for those people who asked "why".

Now on to you medevac.

I was going to grab your quote about buying the group line and how the group officers are proud of me but you edited it out before I grabbed it.

On the first point maybe I used some critical assessment of my own. Not just jumping on the PBI gold fanboy group think line that bought Mike Ranns election spin line (I hope you ended up voting for him). Can you cry "But I want it now" any more like a child?

I don't recall saying that I agreed or disagreed with the groups line on this (but you probably read between the lines correctly). I do support a groups right to make such a decision. I think without groups and people at the coal face making decisions, the CFS, its members and the community would be much worse off.

On the second point I can only hope that my colleagues at any point on the chain of command are proud of me (well probably not for posting on a forum). I would have thought it was something everyone would aspire to (having people be proud of them not the posting on a forum part). I would like to think my commitment was respected by those within the CFS and the hundreds of people I assist every year who don't even know me. Like anyone I make mistakes but over all I'm proud of the work I do and hope to be able to do it for as long as I can. I believe the Sturt group should be proud of its progressive approach on may fronts. So their is a lot to be proud of.

the protection offered by PBI over nomex is superior in its ability to protect from radiant heat and also the firies gettin steamed...

You know because you read it on the box right? And that it may well be but as pointed out there are many risks other then radiant heat. Ive had no problem with the neck line on the nomex that would be solved with the PBI cut. But hoods may solve what issue there is; be it with the PBI or the nomex.

but you should know this as i get the impression that your a paid firie (or at least wish you were) and possibly wear it regularly.

I don't know if thats a complement or not. Either way you know the Sturt group catch phase. (If I remember correctly from back in the day) "Professionalism is a state of mind not a rate of pay" or something like that.

short of walking around in some kind of futuristic bubble i am not sure what would protect you from...

Indeed look at the risks (and the injury stats) and look at the extra protection the PBI provides. For the extra cost and extra risk of internally generated heat injuries I don't think it stacks up. But thats a point of contention.

firies are at more risk than necessary in nomex than PBI at structure
fires

Once again because you read it on the box right? or was is Mr Rann's press release? Look at the stats more fire fighters are treated for and put at risk by internally generated heat/heatstroke. Something that the pbi gold gear is notorious for increasing not decreasing. I think you even admit it.

it would be downright stupid to wear it to a prang on a 40degree day (or even a 22degree day Wink )

Oh yes there you go admitting that internally generated heat is worse in PBI then the nomex and I know that more people are treated for heat stroke from internal heat then that of burns from external heat. So why would anyone make a major problem worse? So I refute you risk claim, based on that you are looking at only the flame risk not all the risks.

so the large stockpile of nomex came from where??? sure wasn't bought to go straight on any hooks at stations... id say it definitely lead to more nomex being bought

What do you call a stockpile? There is a surprisingly high turn over of the stuff involved when your talking about looking after some 120 fire fighters, plus the need to have different sizes in stock. etc. So any group probably has a fair bit in storage as involved with running any group equipment store.

The purchase to which you may be referring had nothing to do with the PBI issue. Remember you will still have nomex when you get PBI and you will/should be wearing the nomex to 80% of calls. PBI IS NOT A REPLACEMENT TO NOMEX it is a supplement. So if you'd say it definitely led to the purchase Id say your definitely wrong and need to improve your logical assessment and critical thought process. If that purchase didn't take place you would most likely be going back to wearing proban and kicking up a stink about it on SAFF.

the nomex treatment may be superior to the Proban treatment

good thing the Sturt group has and issues nomex then isn't it?

however the nomex gear in use currently by CFS does not conform to australian standards

Neither does your house, your car or just about anything you own.
Standards change every couple of years and some times yearly. Just because its not to the current standard doesn't mean it needs to be chucked. More generally just because something improves doesn't make the previous thing is defective. Also note there is a difference between meeting the current standard, tested to the current standard and certified to the current standard. My understanding is that the current Nomex is only not to the standard as it doesn't have the two tone reflective striping and the manufacturer wasn't ISO9000 certified at the time. Anything other than that is all to do with certification paperwork and test requirements. But as mentioned in the previous post CFSHQ is likely to head the nomex direction. Its just a matter of certification taking place (which may have happened by now).

why has my personal issue gear been sitting in the sturt store rooms

Its not your personal gear its the property of the state. It was measured up for you, but its not yours and its not to be used as you see fit. Like any CFS equipment it is to be used when appropriate, in accordance with State, Group and Brigade guidelines. The why question is answered above.

I fail to see how the issue is now dead...

I don't know what you are getting at here. If this means, how this issue was dealt with is going to determine your vote at the next brigade election then you have the right to do so.

actualyl mate ATH does get paid to wear it.... but you know that cos your a long time reader first time poster?

Yes I know that ath is retained MFS at Mt Gambier. I don't know if he is still a CFS member at compton? If he is, does he have 3 sets of PBI?

As to a couple of questions from other people

Anyone hear a whip crack

I cant tell over the sound of medevac's banjo emanating from the valley.

Are you guys saying that we should be issued with nomex for things like MVA even if we are not BA?

Yes. Better protection, more comfortable and (from what ive been
hearing) cheaper in the long term as it wares better (at least in frequent responder brigades)