bad box

No matter how critical the patient is, airbags or proper chocking are integral to preventing further injury and in the end would have resulted in a faster extrication. Spend seconds to save minutes. Isn't that why we don't run into situations. You move quickly without rushing. These officers rushed when at the very least they should have waited for the cribbing to be in place before the lift. Motorcyclist hit by a car and dragged 30'. I've seen enough pedestrians and motorcyclists to take a pretty educated guess at the injuries and I'm sure the kid was circling the drain. This is where professionalism matters most. To react calmly and think clearly. He needed to be extricated quickly, stripped and properly immobilized for rapid transport.
This goes along with why perps do better than cops in shootings. The cops are shoved in the back of a car and hauled off to the ER with no treatment enroute. The perps are left on scene where they're treated by EMS. A while ago in the Bronx PD threw the victims of a fire into the RMP and dumped them at Jacobi. Too bad the medication they needed most, hydroxycobalmin had been exhausted and the hospital had to contact FDNY for more. While that took a couple of hours, every paramedic unit, EMS command car, and MERV in the dept carries at least one dose and could have had treatment initiated faster.

Just watched that video and all I have to say is What the ??????? obviously. Yes I understand that there is a time and place for certain types of tactics with tools, especially spreaders but quite honestly that spreader was misplaced and was not on the car's frame, nor should have that tactic been executed until all cribbing was in place and the car stabilized. NYPD's ESU member did a very wrong tactic, granted it could have happened to anyone of us. But there is a time and place for anything, this was not it.
Goes to show you rushing is not going to accomplish anything.

The first 13 years that I was on the job we wore 3/4 length (pull up rubber boots), a 40" long nomex turnout coat, a leather 'New Yorker' helmet (the kind that was actually fitted to the shape of your head) and OSHA approved gloves (when I was first hired we wore hardware store yard work gloves: leather palm, cloth back). There were lot's (and lot's and lot's ...) of burn injuries every year but most were 1st & 2nd degree (ears, neck, thighs, knees). Often, the nozzleman was the one who would get burned due to the scalding water and debris that would come down and get his thighs (the coat would ride up and the top of the boots would bow out while advancing the line into the fire area and 'duck walking'). Of course there were occasions where a catastrophic event would result in critical or fatal burns but that was the exception and quite frankly similar injuries would have resulted even if bunker gear was in use.
When word came that we would be issued bunker gear and hoods, we weren't as concerned about our own ability to sense how deep to go when conducting a search as we were about that of newly appointed firefighters who had never operated at fires prior to the entrance of bunker gear into the job. We knew from experience what the fire was doing because we had operated for so long wearing the 'old gear' where we had been afforded the opportunity to feel as well as see changing conditions where the new firefighters started their careers wearing the 'snowsuits'. The incidents of minor burn injuries went down while the number of serious and fatal burn injuries went up. The fatalities were sometimes due to folks venturing in too deep due to being insulated from their environment (other times they were the result of catastrophic, unforeseen events such as structural collapse caused by faulty building renovations). The non-fatal but serious burn injuries (requiring a stay in the burn center) were often due to the newer firefighters not flushing the floor prior to advancing the line after knocking down fire coupled with them crawling rather than 'duck waking'. Flushing the floor cools the superheated debris that has landed there after the stream has dislodged it from the walls and ceiling. Crawling rather than 'duck walking' causes the layers of fabric in the knee area of the bunker pants to become compressed which eliminates the air that's trapped between each layer of fabric thus defeating the insulating protection offered by the layers of material.
The problem of firefighters being trapped in flashover's seems to have increased dramatically. I believe that much of this is caused by inadequate ventilation, ventilating prior to the charged line being in position and ready to advance on the fire, ventilating too late and failure to ventilate at all coupled with the stretching of inadequate sized attack lines, failure to 'chase all kinks', failure to provided the proper nozzle pressure, failure to keep the nozzle open fully when attacking the fire, fog nozzles getting clogged with sediment and debris during the attack which limits the GPM's and in general failure to know the requirements of the type nozzle that's being used as well as the friction loss of the particular brand and model of hose that is being used (yes folks, friction loss in fire hose can differ greatly!)

Anyone interested - A comprehensive report comparing Akron & Elkhart Brass Smooth Bore & Automatic Nozzles by the West Metro Fire Dept (Co. 1 B Shift) including a number of great articles written by Andy Fredericks.
Great read if you have some time to kill:
http://api.ning.com/files/Q0-pPg6YaoW*e7QTk3IsuHe8QL-uEheNl1fEiNmlBiE5BN6WFH6*85-6qlkJ6lk*cI009DO70GaSArSYXAZyh-lE6Ylz3CsW/WMFRNozzleStudy.pdf
It's a shame that Andy isn't here today to make his arguement for smooth bore. RIP.
Here are some great videos that show the dangers of debris in combo nozzles.


Be safe!

I guess to save any confusion I'll say I favor smoothbores for most fire attack applications, while knowing the fog is a better choice in a few circumstances. But, to fair, we must address some of the issues that cause us to "misspeak" about either type of nozzle tip. In many recent test from around the country, in head to head comparison the fog either equals the SB or exceeds it in reach. Now this doesn't include loss of actual water due to heat or wind, but just straight up, matching gpm for gpm, they are fairly well matched. Again, in a typical non commercial structure fire the reach differences will not be a factor.
EFFDCAPT: I can only surmise the reason so many fog nozzles continue to see frontline use is that those people making the key decisions of today came up during those years that we used smaller 1.5" lines with fogs flowing less than 100 gpm (thought we had more!) and literally pushed the fire from the unburned to the burned side and out windows and doors. At the same time we were shown how the fog nozzle could be opened to keep cool air coming in from behind to reduce the heat we felt, and to help push the heat, fire and smoke away from us. Houses we not nearly as tight so the effects of fog and steam were not felt as soon as in today's ultra energy efficient homes/buildings. So of our older guys started just as SCBA were coming out and went from no SCBA, thin bunkers and boots, rubber gloves and armed with smoothbore to fully dressed out in bunker gear, with an SCBA and a fog nozzle and were able to get all the way to the seat of the fire that they would have previously knocked down from the hall. They were sold that this was the only way to go. Today we can readily see and scientifically show the effects of energy efficient structures, fire and how a fog pattern vs. smoothbore changes the environment for us and any would be victims.
Just because smoothbores were around before fog, doesn't mean they weren't the best choice all along. One must really separate the BS reasons from the real ones to have valid debate. To me it comes down to the size of the droplets. Andy Fredricks was showing us this in terms everyone could understand before he was taken along with 342 more of our Brothers.

The first 13 years that I was on the job we wore 3/4 length (pull up rubber boots), a 40" long nomex turnout coat, a leather 'New Yorker' helmet (the kind that was actually fitted to the shape of your head) and OSHA approved gloves (when I was first hired we wore hardware store yard work gloves: leather palm, cloth back). There were lot's (and lot's and lot's ...) of burn injuries every year but most were 1st & 2nd degree (ears, neck, thighs, knees). Often, the nozzleman was the one who would get burned due to the scalding water and debris that would come down and get his thighs (the coat would ride up and the top of the boots would bow out while advancing the line into the fire area and 'duck walking'). Of course there were occasions where a catastrophic event would result in critical or fatal burns but that was the exception and quite frankly similar injuries would have resulted even if bunker gear was in use.
When word came that we would be issued bunker gear and hoods, we weren't as concerned about our own ability to sense how deep to go when conducting a search as we were about that of newly appointed firefighters who had never operated at fires prior to the entrance of bunker gear into the job. We knew from experience what the fire was doing because we had operated for so long wearing the 'old gear' where we had been afforded the opportunity to feel as well as see changing conditions where the new firefighters started their careers wearing the 'snowsuits'. The incidents of minor burn injuries went down while the number of serious and fatal burn injuries went up. The fatalities were sometimes due to folks venturing in too deep due to being insulated from their environment (other times they were the result of catastrophic, unforeseen events such as structural collapse caused by faulty building renovations). The non-fatal but serious burn injuries (requiring a stay in the burn center) were often due to the newer firefighters not flushing the floor prior to advancing the line after knocking down fire coupled with them crawling rather than 'duck waking'. Flushing the floor cools the superheated debris that has landed there after the stream has dislodged it from the walls and ceiling. Crawling rather than 'duck walking' causes the layers of fabric in the knee area of the bunker pants to become compressed which eliminates the air that's trapped between each layer of fabric thus defeating the insulating protection offered by the layers of material.
The problem of firefighters being trapped in flashover's seems to have increased dramatically. I believe that much of this is caused by inadequate ventilation, ventilating prior to the charged line being in position and ready to advance on the fire, ventilating too late and failure to ventilate at all coupled with the stretching of inadequate sized attack lines, failure to 'chase all kinks', failure to provided the proper nozzle pressure, failure to keep the nozzle open fully when attacking the fire, fog nozzles getting clogged with sediment and debris during the attack which limits the GPM's and in general failure to know the requirements of the type nozzle that's being used as well as the friction loss of the particular brand and model of hose that is being used (yes folks, friction loss in fire hose can differ greatly!)

The first 13 years that I was on the job we wore 3/4 length (pull up rubber boots), a 40" long nomex turnout coat, a leather 'New Yorker' helmet (the kind that was actually fitted to the shape of your head) and OSHA approved gloves (when I was first hired we wore hardware store yard work gloves: leather palm, cloth back). There were lot's (and lot's and lot's ...) of burn injuries every year but most were 1st & 2nd degree (ears, neck, thighs, knees). Often, the nozzleman was the one who would get burned due to the scalding water and debris that would come down and get his thighs (the coat would ride up and the top of the boots would bow out while advancing the line into the fire area and 'duck walking'). Of course there were occasions where a catastrophic event would result in critical or fatal burns but that was the exception and quite frankly similar injuries would have resulted even if bunker gear was in use.
When word came that we would be issued bunker gear and hoods, we weren't as concerned about our own ability to sense how deep to go when conducting a search as we were about that of newly appointed firefighters who had never operated at fires prior to the entrance of bunker gear into the job. We knew from experience what the fire was doing because we had operated for so long wearing the 'old gear' where we had been afforded the opportunity to feel as well as see changing conditions where the new firefighters started their careers wearing the 'snowsuits'. The incidents of minor burn injuries went down while the number of serious and fatal burn injuries went up. The fatalities were sometimes due to folks venturing in too deep due to being insulated from their environment (other times they were the result of catastrophic, unforeseen events such as structural collapse caused by faulty building renovations). The non-fatal but serious burn injuries (requiring a stay in the burn center) were often due to the newer firefighters not flushing the floor prior to advancing the line after knocking down fire coupled with them crawling rather than 'duck waking'. Flushing the floor cools the superheated debris that has landed there after the stream has dislodged it from the walls and ceiling. Crawling rather than 'duck walking' causes the layers of fabric in the knee area of the bunker pants to become compressed which eliminates the air that's trapped between each layer of fabric thus defeating the insulating protection offered by the layers of material.
The problem of firefighters being trapped in flashover's seems to have increased dramatically. I believe that much of this is caused by inadequate ventilation, ventilating prior to the charged line being in position and ready to advance on the fire, ventilating too late and failure to ventilate at all coupled with the stretching of inadequate sized attack lines, failure to 'chase all kinks', failure to provided the proper nozzle pressure, failure to keep the nozzle open fully when attacking the fire, fog nozzles getting clogged with sediment and debris during the attack which limits the GPM's and in general failure to know the requirements of the type nozzle that's being used as well as the friction loss of the particular brand and model of hose that is being used (yes folks, friction loss in fire hose can differ greatly!)

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Discussing the events of a recent call, talking about ways which could of made the run smother or safer, opening other people’s ( or my ) eyes to other opinions, thinking outside the box and looking at it from another stand point is one of the things I believe have helped me and the guys from WECO, that I have worked with for years…
How is this toxic ??? what I believe, what is really toxic is the guy who believes “ what I do is right and that’s that !! “ and can not take criticism from other’s who may have done it differently…I have found the guys with an OPEN MIND, are the best ones to work with, and together a team can excel.
One of the major problems which can come from this, is just how someone brings it up, if it is NOT broadcasted properly, it will come across as an insult, and part of being an adult, is that we learn to listen to others and respect others feelings…. I am not 100 % sure, but I believe this is what JFlynn always means when he says QTIP… and I have started to agree with this…. We need to stop being babies and man up…. ( no disrespect to the ladies out there … )

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Nobody is "Monday Morning Quarterbacking" in this thread. Most of the discussion has been based on the scenario. HFD and YFD both did great jobs, and NO ONE is questiong that. Additionally, it's not your job to tell other members "end of story". If your bored with a thread, don't read it. If you have an issue with a thread or member, contact a staff member. It's our determination. This has been a constructive discussion, and nobody is criticizing the incident or speculating on the incident itself. People need to stop criticizing this forum and discussions, this is, for the most part, an excellent example of two threads this week that EMTBravo is all about.
With that said........
Car fires aren't as simple as they used to be. With a variety of cars out there using a variety of fuel or electricity to propel them, along with safety features that can become dangerous when on fire, puts a whole new spin on car fires.
Additionally, here in Central Texas, we are experiencing a major heat wave, with temps above 100 for over 70 days now, and a exceptional drought that has left everything bone dry-including large fields and heavy brush. A simple car fire here can cause massive damage to the surrounding area....and I'm talking in square miles in some cases. So it needs to be extinguished quickly. Some of the hills out here make Yonkers look flat, so containing any fuel runoff is critical in those areas.
Remember, most gasoline brands contain about 5-10% ethanol in their regular fuel, if not more. Whereas gas floats to the surface, it is eventually extinguished by water. Sometimes,depending on the weather, spilled gasoline will evaporate quickly. Ethanol continues to burn, because it mixes with water.
E85, which is 85% ethanol, and can be seen by the "Flex Fuel" label on most vehicles, presents a whole new problem, making car fires much more hazardous.
Ethanol also doesn't always produce visible smoke or sometimes flame, so it could be burning without you knowing.
To effectively extinguish an ethanol fire, you need an alcohol resistant foam.
Just something to look out for at a stubborn car fire.

Come on Capt.....I thought you were around a while! Some guys on this job definitely know everything. Ask'em, they'll tell you! LOL, anyway...this certainly was, "just a car fire", but that doesn't mean that there were a few curveballs involved. Multiple agencies, terrain gradient, gasoline and exposure to name a few. Thanks to the miracle of You Tube (for better or worse) we are given the opportunity to critique. Nothing wrong with kicking tactics around and looking at what was right and what was wrong. My company covers an area that is plagued by car fires. Still, something is different each time and we get them a lot. I don't always wear my mask. Maybe I should. I've been caught not paying attention and opening the line facing the building, rather than the street. Dumb sh!t happens....good things too. It's nice to talk it out. I definitely was caught wondering why there were, at times, 5 hand lines putting water on a vehicle fire. Maybe there was an explanation, what do I know? I wasn't there, but we can all ask questions and read answers from those in the know.

Hi Mike,
I didn't consider my comment to be a criticism. When I was on the job we frequently would sit around the kitchen table after a working fire or an unusual emergency and do an informal critique. It was never used as a method of pointing fingers or attaching blame, rather it was used as a learning tool to help us to find the best methods for dealing with the myriad of situations that we as firefighters frequently encounter in our profession. Our goal was to always be prepared to do the best, most efficient job of protecting civilian lives and property while maintaining safe practices at the same time. IMHO the photos and videos of fires and emergencies that appear on this website can prove to be a valuable learning tool. Posters should show respect when making suggestions as well as make sure that you are suggesting procedures, equipment, etc. that is 'tried and true' as opposed to something you have dreamed up and never put to the test at the drill site. Other than that, I think we all need to admit that none of us know it all, always do everything right and can't benefit from a good suggestion now and then. If we want to continue to improve as fire rescue personnel, we'll have to be open to the real world experiences of Brothers who have been there and done that enough times that they have something to offer to the newer generation of folks on the job.
Stay safe ...

I know this is '20-20 hindsight', but I think I would have assigned most of the excess personnel on the scene to grab shovels to build a dike using the readily available earth at the scene in order to contain the flow of fuel & apply a foam blanket to the pool of flaming liquid. This would be done rather than using charged attack hose lines to create the dike.

Capt Glover
I dont know you from a whole in the wall but I must say you sound like the voice of reason and I appreciate you taking the time in spite of some of the silly remarks to CRITIQUE the video so those of us who wish to learn do learn from your expertise.
I'm 40 years old with 14 years of volunteering and and I cant stand people who "know it all" and arent willing to listen.
Thank You Capt

IMHO dirt would do in lieu of other absorbent materials. Creating the dike, letting the gasoline pool and simultaneously lathering a foam blanket to keep the pool from igniting would be the most environmentally friendly way of tackling it.
After my job had a similar situation, like Bad Box pointed out, we sat around afterward and critiqued what we could have done better with our call; because we lost who knows how much product into the driveway drainage, which in turn emptied out into a small creek behind the structure.
Good question 129!

Excuse me Brother but please explain how the gasoline was "contained"? Were the storm drains diked and we just didn't read about it? Please remember, this discussion has evolved only so that the next fire crew that handles something like this might have another idea as to how to contain a hazardous material without a wash-down; last I remember that isn't done anymore. Once again, it is not intended to disrespect or demean the crews that were there who did their jobs. And it certainly isn't MMQB'ing, it's trying to teach and learn from an actual event that we are fortunate to view.
~Respectfully yours,
Captain George Glover (ret)

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Glad to see you back posting here Capt.. Clearly you are not continuing this discussion because you are 'excited' by vehicle fires, rather you [as do I] fully realize that when firefighters start to get comfortable [complacent] with so called 'routine' responses the potential for injuries, uncontrolled fire extension, etc. is increased.

Another "routine" vehicle fire for you Bull in case ya forgot....
youtube credit: elag777

Holy Moly!!! Gotta agree with you on that one. 35+ posts over a routine car fire??? LOLZ

Hi Mike,
I didn't consider my comment to be a criticism. When I was on the job we frequently would sit around the kitchen table after a working fire or an unusual emergency and do an informal critique. It was never used as a method of pointing fingers or attaching blame, rather it was used as a learning tool to help us to find the best methods for dealing with the myriad of situations that we as firefighters frequently encounter in our profession. Our goal was to always be prepared to do the best, most efficient job of protecting civilian lives and property while maintaining safe practices at the same time. IMHO the photos and videos of fires and emergencies that appear on this website can prove to be a valuable learning tool. Posters should show respect when making suggestions as well as make sure that you are suggesting procedures, equipment, etc. that is 'tried and true' as opposed to something you have dreamed up and never put to the test at the drill site. Other than that, I think we all need to admit that none of us know it all, always do everything right and can't benefit from a good suggestion now and then. If we want to continue to improve as fire rescue personnel, we'll have to be open to the real world experiences of Brothers who have been there and done that enough times that they have something to offer to the newer generation of folks on the job.
Stay safe ...

Hi Mike,
I didn't consider my comment to be a criticism. When I was on the job we frequently would sit around the kitchen table after a working fire or an unusual emergency and do an informal critique. It was never used as a method of pointing fingers or attaching blame, rather it was used as a learning tool to help us to find the best methods for dealing with the myriad of situations that we as firefighters frequently encounter in our profession. Our goal was to always be prepared to do the best, most efficient job of protecting civilian lives and property while maintaining safe practices at the same time. IMHO the photos and videos of fires and emergencies that appear on this website can prove to be a valuable learning tool. Posters should show respect when making suggestions as well as make sure that you are suggesting procedures, equipment, etc. that is 'tried and true' as opposed to something you have dreamed up and never put to the test at the drill site. Other than that, I think we all need to admit that none of us know it all, always do everything right and can't benefit from a good suggestion now and then. If we want to continue to improve as fire rescue personnel, we'll have to be open to the real world experiences of Brothers who have been there and done that enough times that they have something to offer to the newer generation of folks on the job.
Stay safe ...

Absolutely, if the IC from Hastings had asked YFD to protect the exposure, and then H-O-H shut down two or three lines.....
Like Bad Box said, this is NOT a criticism. My job had one of these years ago, only problem was the vehicle was pointed downhill TOWARDs the exposure. We filled the driveway 3 feet deep with foam to extinguish.
Think about the "wash-down" run-off that goes into the storm drain. Where does it go? Does it accumulate to explosive levels someplace else? Or being Hastings, does it just flow into the Hudson....
Something to think about for the next time. Every job is a learner. Takes nothing away from the effort the Brothers made there.