SA Firefighter
General Discussion => Country Fire Service => Topic started by: tft on July 20, 2009, 04:33:13 PM
-
The CFS is looking at having 2 BA levels .
Internal - This would be the same course that is being used now
External - BA for people who don't want to go inside a building, but would be
happy to have BA for car fires, Hazmat and other jobs that are external firefighting.
What are the thoughts of others??
I think that it is a good idea
-
Way too many issues with doing this, at a nice little car fire spreads to house oh sorry i can't do internal, let us burn the house down then.
-
This is a ridiculous idea if it is true... Its already hard enough to tell who has what qualification as an incident controller, why confuse it further by having some operators who cannot even do the whole job?
Also, to be brutally honest, if your not capable of going internal at a job [should the circumstances permit] then perhaps you shouldn't be a BA operator at all... I see no reason or this course to exist, especially when you consider almost all cars, rubbish fires, etc can be a surroud and drown from a distance anyway.
-
Why are they making things so hard, you either do BA or you don't...
-
They are turning us into a bunch of pansies. Either your qualified for BA or your not. They have enough trouble trying to fit people on BA courses as it is, let alone trying to run another one.
-
I agree with Fireygal and others.
This, if true should not happen.
If it happens it will cause issues for all, the same as the suggestion of "different" types of fire fighters that has had a run on another thread.
cheers
-
Next they will have two types of firefighters one's who get of the appliance and one's who stay on it.....It must be a JOKE.......
-
The CFS is looking at having 2 BA levels .
Internal - This would be the same course that is being used now
External - BA for people who don't want to go inside a building, but would be
happy to have BA for car fires, Hazmat and other jobs that are external firefighting.
What are the thoughts of others??
I think that it is a good idea
Where did you hear this??
As a CABA instructor I am not aware of this. I was instructing a course just last weekend and did not hear anything like this.
I would confirm that CFB is preparing to provide a CFB basic type course and a advanced course which will also teach tactical ventilation, but I believe it is in the early stages. Please dont quote on the names either as I think they are a bit more than basic and advanced.
The CABA course to my understanding is to remain the same to provide you basic training to become a wearer. You become an operator back at your station when you train with other operators.
-
Where did you hear this??
As a CABA instructor I am not aware of this. I was instructing a course just last weekend and did not hear anything like this.
I'm also a Trainer/Assessor and haven't heard anything of the sort. If this was true i am sure it would have been brought up a the BA Trainer/Assessor's seminar not all that long ago......and it wasn't.
-
The first part of my post was they are looking at having 2 BA levels .
At the end of the day CFS have been looking at tactical ventilation for the last 3 years as well.
One of the reasons for the lower level of BA was (don't shoot the messenger)
If you are at a car fire with no BA it is still dangerous eg smoke toxic gases.
So if you have a lower BA operator, why not have them use it in a safer environment.
Yes, there are more questions than answers.
But it is an idea to think about.
-
So there going to be........ sorta like bellybuttons.......some are innies, some are outties.....baaahaahaa I crack me up :-D
-
As long as the "Lower" BA...is ***PUSHED*** out into the CFS population like wildfire...it sounds good. None of this nomination business... Get every firefighter that meets medical requirements through this training. We all know that in some cases, BA does help in the wildfire environment so this is all the more worthwhile as say.... the Skills Maintainence Drills for Burnover...
Once they suck it in, they might be prepared to go for REAL BA, CFB & Hazmat.
A Good time to get firefighters into "Basic BA" would be after 1 Fire Ban Season. Want a Cost Effective solution? Only do new recruits. Keep all existing Firefighters on the Standard way of training.
-
The first part of my post was they are looking at having 2 BA levels .
At the end of the day CFS have been looking at tactical ventilation for the last 3 years as well.
One of the reasons for the lower level of BA was (don't shoot the messenger)
If you are at a car fire with no BA it is still dangerous eg smoke toxic gases.
So if you have a lower BA operator, why not have them use it in a safer environment.
Yes, there are more questions than answers.
But it is an idea to think about.
As I said, I do not believe your information has any validility, unless I am interpretating your post incorrectly.
I have spoken to STC today and their is no indication what you are indicating is going to occur.
If you believe you are correct PM me the source for clarrification.
-
The way this country is going in terms of OHS&W and liability, I can imagine it won't be long before the IC can be held accountable for any health problems fire fighters have after attending an incident, and as technically the only fires you can fight without BA are rural ones, that means BA for everything else. Would that then mean you can't get on the truck to a bin fire if you haven't been taught to fight structural fires? Or brigades in the sticks can't put out a car fire unless they're trained in how to drag a dummy out of a smoke logged warehouse?
I don't necessarily support the idea, but I can see good reasons to do it.
...to be brutally honest, if your not capable of going internal at a job [should the circumstances permit] then perhaps you shouldn't be a BA operator at all...
If you're not fit enough to wear BA, you shouldn't be dragging hose up and down slopes at a grass fire either. ..or lifting heavy hydraulic tools at an RCR...
I see no reason or this course to exist, especially when you consider almost all cars, rubbish fires, etc can be a surroud and drown from a distance anyway.
If you can breath the smoke, you technically need BA. Do you really think it's possible to properly put out a car fire without breathing any smoke? ...and under that logic, you shouldn't need BA at a house fire that doesn't have internal attack either...
Way too many issues with doing this, at a nice little car fire spreads to house oh sorry i can't do internal, let us burn the house down then.
As opposed to car car fire that spreads into a house when no one is wearing BA? There'd be no difference in outcome, except perhaps less chance of the fire fighters getting lung cancer.
-
So the conclusion of your post CFS_Firey is: Every able firefighter should have the BA Ticket as part of OHS&W. Now we know that wont happen till a royal commission tells the CFS to ey...
-
So the conclusion of your post CFS_Firey is: Every able firefighter should have the BA Ticket as part of OHS&W. Now we know that wont happen till a royal commission tells the CFS to ey...
Maybe that's why Euan wants to cut the CFS back to an only rural service... ;)
-
Thats why I can't believe CFS has a cap on BA operators, everyone should be able to do it if they want, only limit should be your SFEC member limit cap, why do you think MFS retained put everyone through BA!!
-
So the conclusion of your post CFS_Firey is: Every able firefighter should have the BA Ticket as part of OHS&W. Now we know that wont happen till a royal commission tells the CFS to ey...
Zippy I agree with the sentiments of your post and the with SA_Firey. I can see some merit in the having people able to use BA. Considering that I have been to many a structure fire and car fire or refuse fire wear I can't use BA as we don't have BA on the QAV. Using defensive fire fighting techniques to stop the spread of the fire to the neighbours or to other property is good but to those that have lost it all due to a brigade inability to respond properly to a fire that could of been contained to a room or rooms can bring the brigade and service into question by the community it supports.
Maybe that's why Euan wants to cut the CFS back to an only rural service... ;)
I have and along with the Brigade pushed for CABA to be part of our response but the head set in the service has literally some alternative idealogical plane of thinking. I remember an RC telling members of the Brigade that sorry you don't deserve BA because your houses burn to quickly. Well they certainly do if it takes nearly an hour for them to get to your town with a CABA appliance. Their assessment of the town that of owing to a lack of two story dwelling and a part time pub, school, service station and a national highway we didn't need CABA. All his information was based on incorrect information.
I remember at a group meeting not so long ago that we had a discussion about reducing the number of sets of CABA in the Group as we had more sets than operators. The main problems is getting to Adelaide or having the entire weekend off for the course which is one of the problems for the CFS. I am a firm believer that like in the SES where SFA is part of the required training so should BA in the CFS (mind you I also believe that SFA should also be part of the BF1 :-) )
-
So the conclusion of your post CFS_Firey is: Every able firefighter should have the BA Ticket as part of OHS&W. Now we know that wont happen till a royal commission tells the CFS to ey...
Maybe that's why Euan wants to cut the CFS back to an only rural service... ;)
So i guess we will then see Glen Osmond 441 respond to anything on High Street, Strathalbyn.
CFS should merely promote neighbours to buy lines of 38mm for there garden connectors...to protect exposures for going house fire's...
Tea cup party of pansies?? or a Serious Firefighting Organisation.
-
Maybe that's why Euan wants to cut the CFS back to an only rural service... ;)
Not only that, but apparentley Euan fixed the result on Masterchef so Julie would win! :wink: you heard it here first!
-
why do you think MFS retained put everyone through BA!!
cos they have 93 people to train......not 12,000???
-
why do you think MFS retained put everyone through BA!!
cos they have 93 people to train......not 12,000???
People CFS Needs to train about 150 as Trainers...and Regional Staff as Chief Assessors...then...the virus can spread for once...
-
why do you think MFS retained put everyone through BA!!
cos they have 93 people to train......not 12,000???
Always excuses......CFA have 54,000 vols and they manage to put a shite load more people through than we do. They also train up more local instructors for re-acreds rather than having to travel all the way to a main training centre. We seem to make it to hard for ourselves.
-
Always excuses......CFA have 54,000 vols and they manage to put a shite load more people through than we do. They also train up more local instructors for re-acreds rather than having to travel all the way to a main training centre. We seem to make it to hard for ourselves.
not an excuse at all.....just answering your question is all.
The MFS retained course is done on a shoe-string, and different to the career course done over 10 days (yeah...thats right 10 days....go figure what they really do for that period of time :S) but even with all of that....its easy enough for them to run a program that keeps their own staff (retained are looked after by their own cell of people) sorted - easy to do with stuff all numbers....
-
Ah well I guess the CFS will always remain mediocre..........Hey Rann give us some more money !!!!
-
Ah well I guess the CFS will always remain mediocre..........Hey Rann give us some more money !!!!
Isobel will fix it !!
-
Relying on a polly to fix it and the last time a polly fixes something other than an election is when.
-
Ok people, Let the Liberals win the next election, cos the next election after that...our demands *can* be met for once...Why?
Her Seat sits smackbang on the same land as some of the highest urban and rural risk area of the CFS. Wanna keep your seat isobel???
-
Ok people, Let the Liberals win the next election, cos the next election after that...our demands *can* be met for once...Why?
Her Seat sits smackbang on the same land as some of the highest urban and rural risk area of the CFS. Wanna keep your seat isobel???
Sorry, but Heysen is a safe Liberal seat. We can say peoples houses are going to burn down all we want, she's still going to get back in.
-
Ok, so back to the topic at hand...
CABA is a vital item of PPE for us as firefighters. If I had my way, it would be part of BFF1. Anyhow, this isn't, or ever will be the case.
Seeing as though the CFS doesn't teach anything related to strucutral firefighting very well at all (CFB is hit and miss, and CFS Tactical Ventilation makes me giggle) and they try to jam bits and pieces into the CABA course and the previous level three course, something does need to change.
What can be done? Not much sadly. With people wanting the already basic courses dumbed down, and complaining about their length, perhaps the current method of teaching is the best?
It would be great to have a CABA course, and then a week long or two weekend "Structure Fire" course, but again that will never happen.
All we can hope is that people operate within their ability on the fireground and that brigades take it upon themselves to attempt to enhance the abilities of their members.
Don't forget we are but the COUNTRY Fire Service... What do we need CABA for? ;)
-
Ok, so back to the topic at hand...
CABA is a vital item of PPE for us as firefighters. If I had my way, it would be part of BFF1. Anyhow, this isn't, or ever will be the case.
Seeing as though the CFS doesn't teach anything related to strucutral firefighting very well at all (CFB is hit and miss, and CFS Tactical Ventilation makes me giggle) and they try to jam bits and pieces into the CABA course and the previous level three course, something does need to change.
What can be done? Not much sadly. With people wanting the already basic courses dumbed down, and complaining about their length, perhaps the current method of teaching is the best?
It would be great to have a CABA course, and then a week long or two weekend "Structure Fire" course, but again that will never happen.
All we can hope is that people operate within their ability on the fireground and that brigades take it upon themselves to attempt to enhance the abilities of their members.
Don't forget we are but the COUNTRY Fire Service... What do we need CABA for? ;)
Hear Hear!
The dumbing down of courses is very much an insult to the ability, and potential the service has as a whole for urban AND rural protection.
Why would you need to differentiate? If you have an issue going anywhere near a fire, perhaps BA is not for you, not some halfarsed attempt at dividing BA. Its the same theory on wearing it, just different firefighting techniques once the PPE is in place (I say this loosely, mind.)
HAZMAT is just as bad. Having been to enough jobs with HAZMAT brigades where the operators understand VERY LITTLE of chemistry, and therefore have donned inappropriate PPE, as well as managed to misread plaques, and waste 24 hours due to not understanding that something was so dilute after a time, dumping TONNES of another substance into it was going to create more issues seems like a problem also.
How about we teach some ADEQUATE materials, and people who don't want the responsibility of acting as a BA operator in full stop putting up hands and wasting positions for those who do.
Requirements need to be seriously reviewed, BA operators should be prepared to wear if the situation requires it, more urban techniques need to be taught THOROUGHLY, as opposed to crammed into CABA and CFB courses, and the operators for HAZMAT need to have at least a basic grasp of chemistry.
-
Hear Hear!
The dumbing down of courses is very much an insult to the ability, and potential the service has as a whole for urban AND rural protection.
Why would you need to differentiate? If you have an issue going anywhere near a fire, perhaps BA is not for you, not some halfarsed attempt at dividing BA. Its the same theory on wearing it, just different firefighting techniques once the PPE is in place (I say this loosely, mind.)
HAZMAT is just as bad. Having been to enough jobs with HAZMAT brigades where the operators understand VERY LITTLE of chemistry, and therefore have donned inappropriate PPE, as well as managed to misread plaques, and waste 24 hours due to not understanding that something was so dilute after a time, dumping TONNES of another substance into it was going to create more issues seems like a problem also.
How about we teach some ADEQUATE materials, and people who don't want the responsibility of acting as a BA operator in full stop putting up hands and wasting positions for those who do.
Requirements need to be seriously reviewed, BA operators should be prepared to wear if the situation requires it, more urban techniques need to be taught THOROUGHLY, as opposed to crammed into CABA and CFB courses, and the operators for HAZMAT need to have at least a basic grasp of chemistry.
I agree with a little of what you said whitestuff, BUT are you now seriously suggesting that all HAZMAT operators need to have their high school diplomas in chemistry....if so I think you should have paid a little bit more attention in sex ed, not chemistry :wink:
You need a red helmet not a purple one.
-
the person that all of the CFS rely's on for Chemistry Knowledge is the Technical Advice Co-ordinator...whatever he or she passes on from the "Smarties" aka professors... Is the plan of action we should take.
Remembering its a 2-way information updating system...any changes in the situation...Let the TAC know.
CFS's job as hazmat combatants is to Effect Protective and Remedial Actions. Its nice to know and understand these things...but if we all had 20 hazmat operators with scientific know-how...we would actually spend 20 hours being nerds. Basic principals of chemistry apply for all of us...but nothing atomic mate...
As for the Hazmat course at present? Its "Satisfactory".
what should be happening? A Hazmat Incident Management Course.
-
Hear Hear!
The dumbing down of courses is very much an insult to the ability, and potential the service has as a whole for urban AND rural protection.
Why would you need to differentiate? If you have an issue going anywhere near a fire, perhaps BA is not for you, not some halfarsed attempt at dividing BA. Its the same theory on wearing it, just different firefighting techniques once the PPE is in place (I say this loosely, mind.)
HAZMAT is just as bad. Having been to enough jobs with HAZMAT brigades where the operators understand VERY LITTLE of chemistry, and therefore have donned inappropriate PPE, as well as managed to misread plaques, and waste 24 hours due to not understanding that something was so dilute after a time, dumping TONNES of another substance into it was going to create more issues seems like a problem also.
How about we teach some ADEQUATE materials, and people who don't want the responsibility of acting as a BA operator in full stop putting up hands and wasting positions for those who do.
Requirements need to be seriously reviewed, BA operators should be prepared to wear if the situation requires it, more urban techniques need to be taught THOROUGHLY, as opposed to crammed into CABA and CFB courses, and the operators for HAZMAT need to have at least a basic grasp of chemistry.
I agree with a little of what you said whitestuff, BUT are you now seriously suggesting that all HAZMAT operators need to have their high school diplomas in chemistry....if so I think you should have paid a little bit more attention in sex ed, not chemistry :wink:
You need a red helmet not a purple one.
hi Jaff,
Not by any means am I suggesting that matriculation-standard chemistry needs to be part of the course, but an understanding of what + what = "S**T IN THE AIR OH GOD WHY DID YOU PUT WATER ON THAT, I"M ONLY WEARING A SPLASH SUIT AAGH MY SKIN AND ORGANS!" etc would be helpful.
Perhaps part of the pre course assignment could incorporate some very basic reaction information. Its all well and good to read the plaque, but people walking in with insufficient PPE to incidents which probably require more protective gear and less "Dump disproportionately large amount of quicklime here" would be clever.
Never in my previous post did I suggest it needed to be a high level, that would choke ALL of the fun out of the course...