SA Firefighter
Equipment => All Equipment discussion => Topic started by: CFS_fire32 on August 12, 2005, 01:10:38 PM
-
What type/brand of structural fire-fighting glove does your brigade currently use.
Several months age, my group bought a box of CSI structure gloves. They are the top of the range, compartment fire fighting style glove with inner water and vapour barriers etc etc. (not cheap either!) However, after a few months of usage we have found that the inner liners are too easily pulled out of place when you take your glove off. This is due to the fact that the inner liners are not stiched to the fingers, as this would obviuosly break the water and vapour barriers. Anyway, it means that every time you use the glove and take it off, you spend 10 minutes jamming your hand and fingers in the glove trying to put the liner back into its correct place. Consequently, once you have got them on, you are reluctant to take them off, especially at an incident when you don't have ten minutes to spare.
The problem we are having is that because of this, our CABA operators are tending to be discouraged from using the structure gloves, rather using the standard leather fire-fighting gloves for CABA training and incidents. Not a good thing if you ask me.
-
Lion apparel also make a structure glove which are quite good, not sure of the cost but probably are alot.
Might be worth investigating.
-
green gloves for everything
-
We use the crossfire structure golves - same as Brukunga (at least last time I went there). They are a bit bulky and not real flash after they've been wet a few times but no real problems.
-
green gloves for everything
Have got a pair (or two) of these myself, but I only use them for general firefighting eg. grass fires, hose drill etc etc.
I feel that this is one of the things CFS is neglecting to crack down on or develop. We are getting the very best in "structural firefighting garments" eg. pbi gold, but we are not bothering to specify an equally protective glove that MUST be used in conjunction with it, nor for that matter level 3 nomex. (for structural fire fighting).
"A chain is only as strong as its weakest link."
(a similar arguement to that of the flashoods)
-
green gloves for everything
Have got a pair (or two) of these myself, but I only use them for general firefighting eg. grass fires, hose drill etc etc.
I feel that this is one of the things CFS is neglecting to crack down on or develop. We are getting the very best in "structural firefighting garments" eg. pbi gold, but we are not bothering to specify an equally protective glove that MUST be used in conjunction with it, nor for that matter level 3 nomex. (for structural fire fighting).
"A chain is only as strong as its weakest link."(a similar arguement to that of the flashoods)
Hopefully a standard will be made for gloves.
Exactly, that comment relates very well to the Flash-hood debate, as u stated. We get the best of one thing, yet something else is knocked back, or held up, for NO GOOD REASON!!
Get your act into gear CFS!
(My opinion only)
-
I've a bit annoyed with the inconsistencies with the CFS about issues like this. Had a recent BA reaccred and was told that it was CFS POLICY that you can not carry out offensive structure firefighting without having the Structural Gloves on. I think that safety wise it important to make change, but when I've tried to follow up the only statement I've found is on a DRAFT document yet to be approved. I also feel that if this policy is to be the case then every BA operator in the State should have the gloves personally issued!
-
Ahhh James, highlight the word structure, there is your answer. They don't care!! They have more problems getting all the rural stuff right due to pressure regarding the EP fires.
-
I've a bit annoyed with the inconsistencies with the CFS about issues like this. Had a recent BA reaccred and was told that it was CFS POLICY that you can not carry out offensive structure firefighting without having the Structural Gloves on. I think that safety wise it important to make change, but when I've tried to follow up the only statement I've found is on a DRAFT document yet to be approved. I also feel that if this policy is to be the case then every BA operator in the State should have the gloves personally issued!
bah.. and every BA operator should have PBI and flashoods personally issued, cant see it all happening though 9please no nomext stockpile comments or whatever)
-
It will only happen when it is too late :evil:
-
It will only happen when a directive comes out and Groups, Brigades and Individuals follow it! (Note to hard - Groups will ensure that every f/f who has BA will be equiped with PBI, Flashhood and structural gloves by **** - this sets a time line, allows budgeting and also covers the OH&S considerations - better still, do what was done in the 90's allocate $$$$ to the program and fix it - take it away from Groups and Brigades - maybe a $$$ subsidity)
Now I'd like to see that happen!
Groups and Brigades can't even follow basic policy and SOP's now!!! Can't have our cake and eat it too.
Although I do agree - it would be nice to have a clear statment - the new volunteer article on PBI et all is nice, but still it lacks any statement ofbout when it can and can't be worn! Nice to see a warm an fuzzy article, but better to see a directive!
-
Until that directive arrives we will have a dozen different rules from various groups. There is potential at a fire to have multiple types of PPE , feel sorry for the IC if something goes wrong, as usual there is no clear directive on what to wear.
-
What gloves are people using for "Structure Gloves"
I Have seen a few types, what have brigades used :?
What is good and what is not :?
I have heard the PBI gold gloves are bad :?
You think we could have STANDARD, like uniforms
-
Would be fine if those people who are OIC would enforce wearing PPE/PPC but hey life was not ment to be that easy :-o
-
Yep, its really easy to enforce that your people wear PPE they dont have. Its always fun conducting aggressive interior structural attack, with golves that *specifically* say theyre *not* to be used for it.