Welcome to EMTBravo.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

antiquefirelt

Members
  • Content count

    1,581
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

About antiquefirelt

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran
  • Birthday 12/08/1969

My Web Presence

  • Website URL http://www.rocklandfd.com

Profile Information

  • Location Rockland, Maine
  • Gender Male
  • Interests apparatus

Recent Profile Visitors

9,731 profile views
  1. Never criticize for getting the job done? So as long as we put the fire out, anything goes? I know that's not what you meant, but discussions like this should be broad based and allow use to discuss limits, situations, parameters, and practices. If you do $300k damage to an aerial while extinguishing a fire in a $200k home, with no life hazard, is that justified? Anything we do seems fine in the name of getting the job done, until someone is hurt or killed or we destroy property (there's or "ours"). The point isn't to be frozen with fear of "breaking a rule" but to understand how to employ a tactic while minimizing risk. As has been noted in numerous posts, apparatus are just tools, but let's not forget that there are proper and improper ways to utilize tools, so a video like this can be a valid opportunity to review what our people know think, understand and know about using an aerial to vent.
  2. Hadn't watched the video before, but I'd want to be sure my operators understood when it was OK and how it was done. In this case with the aerial mostly retracted it would seem far less likely to be damaging than if that had been at full extension. Aerials are not meant to be sideloaded, or torqued in any manner. This is exactly the type of use the aerial engineers feared when we talked about this. Again, maybe the situation called for this and the risk was worth the reward...
  3. I assume by Commissioner Finn's comments that these engine will have roof/bumper or similar mounted foam guns? I'm not convinced foam handlines would provide much difference with regard to the proximity of the firefighters directing the stream. In fact the set up pictured in the story would require getting even closer than a standard water based stream? Also, with no disrespect to Commissioner Finn or any Boston Jakes, but the only reason dumpsters and car fires would be the most hazardous to firefighters health would be if said firefighters failed to use all their PPE, including SCBA. One can likely assume this was just a poorly constructed article using some of the easier points to lay out on why the new engines have foam systems.
  4. The Chief of Dept. when I started was convinced that this was a valid thing to do when venting was necessitated, and couldn't be quickly or safely performed by personnel. His take was the aerial was a tool and far less important than firefighters lives. It was/is hard to disagree. I know of one fire where our old Maxim aerial was utilized to open up multiple windows covered in plywood on a tire warehouse, as the IC felt putting FFer's on the tip to remove plywood would have been too slow and very dangerous given the flammability of the exiting smoke. Not an option any more for us as we only have a TL. Some years later (2005) while we were having dinner with a few factory engineers, our salesman and a nationally recognized apparatus consultant this topic was brought up. Everyone agreed this was a valid tactic, but of course the manufacturer would have no control over how it was done, thus no way they'd sanction it. Noted was the fact that most new aerials have a bolt on tip section, and damage to the end could be fixed as long as the rest of the aerial was not damaged in the maneuver. Clearly, you need to be certain the tip clears any structural members. Questions of whether it should be lined up then lowered in vs. extended into the window remain a source of contention. I know of one "old" story from Auburn, Maine where the aerial was extended in and was driven into the ceiling above which then blocked the window as a means of egress which was the original intent, and firefighters suffered burns as a result.
  5. I though ti t would be odd for an FDNY chief to have taken a Lt's position in Dallas, but nowadays who knows...
  6. The article gives credit to a Lt. from Dallas Fire/Rescue?
  7. A 110 ft. RM tower with a single set of outriggers, no other stabilization required? Will be interested to see the rating charts.
  8. I don't know, I'd say there is a lot of things that can go wrong: rollover? damage to the undercarriage? undesigned stress to the frame? I'd want to be damn sure that what I was doing was absolutely necessary for life or limb. In the case above, it would not appear to have been necessary, but of course we only have a 1/1000 of a second snapshot, so who's to say?
  9. It appears someone at the Big "R" doesn't understand the chevron concept.
  10. Sadly I know this all too well, as this is the system I've been working for 20+ years now. My point in noting that above was that some of the higher salaries maybe attributed to working more hours. All other things being equal, the added hours would make pay 40% higher than the average taxpayer working 40 hrs a week.
  11. Big OT number are almost always a result of failure to properly staff a department. With enough staff to ensure minimum staffing and cover some anticipated OT they would not see these "windfalls". Also, the article notes their numbers are total compensation (salary+benefits+OT) which is different than how much actually money the individuals take home. One must wonder the cost of health insurance and other similar expense in CA vs. other places. I know our City adds roughly 40% to any wages to figure benefits. In many places the pension systems are very different, some pay based on your total best year or years, other only on base wages. Also, while some FD's in CA run 42 hr weeks, many (most?) still run 56's? which is 40% more hrs. As noted above someone's math has to be way off, to say that every $1 of OT costs $1 to the pension system. That would be a 100% contribution and would be basically make overtime cost 3 times straight pay instead of 1.5?
  12. The reality is there are two fire services when it comes to most (of these types) rules and regulations, municipal departments and then all others. Most municipalities have strict rules to protect themselves from liability and grievances. While the fire chief's son could be treated like anyone else in reality, just a mere perception can create problems. Most of the time it's something petty and stupid, not the big promotion or preferential assignments. But, in reality, does the Lt. worry he cannot discipline this FF in the same manner as he would otherwise? Can the crew complain about admin without offending the bosses son? Why did he didn't he get forced for OT? The list of ways for other firefighters to be aggrieved is endless, add in that you're closely related to a boss and that just multiplies.
  13. Thinking it might have been a bit better with a MM than the RM? That front overhang is killer. Of course the MM tailslap is an issue, but I'd bet a MM could make it in one shot.
  14. It certainly seems like time the building codes began to review the height and area limitations of Type V construction. Most large scale buildings must meet these rules, but are granted allowances ofr open perimeter and sprinklers, thus you can build a much larger/taller structure than may be practical. Given the wood frame construction materials available (engineered and lightweight) the height and area limitation should likely be reduced to account for the lack of structural mass and the the reduction in time to structural failure under fire conditions. Even if the national code sets don't change (or not quickly enough) the state of New Jersey has enough evidence to pass their own restrictions, and the rest of us should take note.
  15. Don't see a medic helping fire staffing, in fact it would likely be a greater burden on the company and result in poorer fireground staffing and more logistical down time. I say this as on a comparatively microscopic level, we run medics on both EMS and fire apparatus every shift and there is very little continuity day to day, making other tasks very difficult to schedule and complete. I realize other places do this, but the level of success is harder to measure, as in most cases EMS is used to bolster staffing for fire companies who may not have a comparable workload without it. As for Community Paramedicine: until it's paid for, it too is a burden on the system, adding a service that may reduce long term medical costs to the taxpayers as a whole, but the rub is that it costs more upfront to add staff, vehicles and such, with no direct return. Our City wanted to study that model, but again, with no way to defray the upfront costs, the interest waned very quickly.