antiquefirelt

I'll venture a guess that although CAFS worked fine for rural places where water nust be tanked or shuttled, it is sismply not cost effective in a place like Boston where water is cheap, unlimited, and piped to the nearest streetcorner for you.
In my time I have seen a plethera of extinguishing agents come and go, not because they didn't work, but because after all is said and done, they didn't work as well as water. There was rapid water, slippery water, penetrating foam, high expansion foam (Now there'e a classic you were able to jump into this 8 foot layer of foam and breathe by breaking bubbles in front of your face. I tried it...yes you could breathe, but I tasted soap for three days).
All were sold on the premises that it uses Less Water and Less Manpower. "Sure, it's expensive, but just think...Less Water and Less Manpower!)
SO WHAT? I don't know about you, but I always felt that Water and Manpower were a hell of a good combination for putting fires out. And if the fire isn't going out, what do you need? More Water and More manpower.
Oh yes, the penetrating quality of these agents. "Time is saved in overhaul because the agent finds the hidden fire without you having to pick things apart to look." I never wanted a REKINDLE, so even though the salesman's magic potion was penetrating and extinguishing hidden fire, I never left a job without making sure all hidden fire was out, And that means looking and wetting and overhauling.
We are begging for more manpower on the job,but we are buying things like CAFS on the premise that we can reduce manpower using the salesman's magic juice. Let's stick with the begging instead of buying systems that are basically soapsuds and club soda at a great cost.

Montgomery County Maryland had purchased a CAFS fleet of fire engines. CAFS was thought to be so effective that they switched their whole fleet of fire trucks over to it. Word on the street is that one of the volunteer fire companies refused the county CAFS engine and people said things like "Oh they are not progressive" or "what are they thinking?" or "they just don't want to get with the times". Currently, there is a general order out to not use the CAFS system on the engines. Seems like when you run some fires on a regular basis the true colors of CAFS come out. The issues they experiences may seem like training issues, but believe me they have one of the best training divisions around. Issues were, but not limited to losing tools at building fires in the bubbles, not being able to see stuff and being covered in the solution, maintance issues on their engines,and a considerable amount of time it took to flush every connection and discharge after each CAFS use.
Technology is great and I'm all for stuff to make my life easier on the line. However it is an expensive tool that may work but at what cost?
The International City/County Management Assocication (ICMA) recently completed a study on the Sandusky, OH Fire Department. The study can be veiwed here: http://www.ci.sandusky.oh.us/documents/ICMAFinalReportSFDOperations2011.pdf
The study refers to CAFS and FIT-5 Fire inturrupters as options to reduce staffing or equipment on the road, and essentially says that this equipment can compensate for inadequate management or failure to properly fund public safety operations by politicians. We know what it takes to battle a fire, and we know what kind of resources we require, however, we have to always look at what the other side is thinking, is this what we would want for OUR Fire Service?

Wow, very salty...aw shucks, you make it seem so simple Lt. ....
Tell me, if the fire was bigger then the one pictured, would you suggest 3.5"?

Great stop guys.
I'm curious why you decided to go with 2.5" for this?

We're getting into the territory of probability again. Just because there are examples of exceptions to the rule doesn't negate the rule.
The FDNY has determined that there is a higher probability of the characteristics and attributes they want in their officers present in firefighters that have completed a college education. Does this mean they are all qualified for the position? No, but it certainly makes the assessment and evaluation process much easier. It's not the only qualification by a long shot, but the fact that it is one simplifies the process and attempts to ensure a certain level of quality.
As difficult as it may be to accept this concept, the fact is that the fire industry is a highly romanticized customer service business. The larger the business the more it must rely on standard practices and qualifications to maintain a certain level of quality in its resources. This is simply because the larger the business gets the more decentralized things like hiring and personnel management become. A small department in Westchester with a career department can probably stand to weigh each candidate for an officer position based on their individual merits (and without regard to education), but should Westchester consolidate this practice may not be possible because of the need to ensure all officers county-wide meet certain minimum standards.

Does a FF NEED a degree?
To be an officer, probably, just for teaching/writing skills and the like. For someone who wants to get into the Hazmat field, a degree in chemistry would certainly be useful. But for a FF? I say maybe...maybe not.
This thread talked about Doctors, Lawyers, Bill Gates, and so on. Then there are Rocket Scientists, Neursurgeons, and other genuses out there. Could any of them be FFs? Who do they call when they are scared, sick, have a basement full of water, have a tree through their house, mixed some chemicals together and now they are choking, or their house is filling with smoke? Right, they call 911 because somebody will be there in five minutes and will have a solution to their problem.
Does he need a degree? No. A good FF needs the ability to stuff volumes upon volumes about everything into his back pocket. Then, at two o'clock in the morning, getting up out of a sound sleep be able to reach into that back pocket, pull out the correct solution for the caller's problem.
So, Chiefs, If you meet up with a guy that wants a job and has the ability I just described, don't ask him if he has a degree. Just hire him.

Anytime someone is injured through no apparent fault of their own, I am unable to see humor. I too would enjoy hearing what part of this incident is 'comical'. I wonder what chance (if any) there is of the civilian contracting rabies (if the animal proves to be rabid & if the projectile actually had passed through the animal prior to striking the bike rider) ...

Personal Opinion: The way that the Arrow Sticks are used on emergency vehicles today makes them nothing more than just another flashing light with all the others. They get lost in the blur of all the other lights on the vehicle it is on and those around it. A good idea, but works better when it is isolated away from the other vehicles with minimal additional lighting turned on. You could always turn the rest of your lights off to make it more noticeable, but that probably isn't a good idea either. With the cost of these (over $1,000) I say put the $$ to good use with a decent (and not over the top) light package that will get the motorists attention and get them to slow down at which point they can determine how to proceed.

Is grabbing the attention of drivers what we actually want? Or do we want to warn them and get them to avoid the area safely. Ever here that you will walk or steer in the direction you are looking? Or how about how is the lighting going to effect other drivers vision on approach or passing the scene. I've been washed out and couldn't see anything in a light rain just from a LED strip in the rear window of a car not so long ago. You want good visibility? Sometimes more isn't the answer. Go with amber.

This an be said of most emergency responses be it over land or sea.

I am surprised that there isn't a delay on the transmission of the signal from the pull station. In many of the facilities that I am involved in, especially those with secure units, there is a delay that first alerts the nurses or supervisor's station while maintaining locked doors. If the nurse/supervisor doesn't override the pull station then the life safety door closest to the pull station opens in whatever the state mandated time is (20 seconds or so depending on location) and the alarms transmitted to the appropriate 911 center. The other life safety doors open shortly thereafter.
So, there should be ample time for staff to investigate and limit the dispatch of units if they aren't necessary.
Does Lincoln Hall have behavioral health beds or just juvenal delinquency residents

Find me a single story of a child predator using a tot finder decal. Most children are attacked by someone they already know.
The real problem is no one ever took them down. My neighbors house had them from when the kids were babies. They grew up and moved out but the stickers never came down. They finally came down when a new family with young children moved in. Go figure.

While there are many jokes to be made about this threat, there are many serious issues at work here.
1) It was stated in the article that plywood was on the windows, painted to look like curtains. This presents many complications including venting, egress, sizeup, etc.
2) Delays in getting water on the fire. It was not stated in this article, but I am sure the locks/doors were fortified heavily.
3) Entanglement issues. It was noted that there was a vast electrical system for the lights, etc. I am sure this was not installed by a licensed electrician, nor inspected by the BI. This could cause entanglement issues in the wires, plus electrical shock and the very hot bulbs could cause burns.
4) Traps/snares. People that make/grow drugs often booby-trap the houses where this is done as a form of security. Also, dogs and other animals are used for this purpose.
5) Preservation of evidence. Obviously this fire became a crime scene and Police officers do not like their crime scene upset too much (with good reason..). Making sure to document where things were, what order they were in, etc is crucial to a criminal investigation.
6) Know your buildings. Obviously this is an extreme example that no one most likely knew about beforehand, but take your time and look at the buildings around. At a wires down call, look (from the street) at the houses in the neighborhood. Look for multiple mailboxes, meters, heavy locks, etc. This stuff sinks in beforehand, and when the brown stuff hits the fan, we may have a slight lead.

No, no you haven't. You simply haven't been around long enough to have "seen this and seen that". I gotta tell you, Ike (I Know Everything) your boldness doesn't instill confidence. Be very wary of the person who says they've seen it and done it all....'cause they're in for a wake up call one day. You need to get real. I promise that if you walk into a firehouse in New Rochelle, Yonkers, The Bronx, ect. ect. where each individual Company responds to more emergencies in a year than your department (more importantly, you yourself) you'll have a difficult time finding anyone, regardless of time as a fireman, who will tell you they've seen it and done it all. Better yet, keep it close to home. Go to the senior guy in Harry Howard or Rescue 40 and tell them that, even though you've been around long enough for a cup of coffee, you've seen it, thought of it and done it already. That's surely not going to go over well.
Humility and common sense will keep you alive and learning in our profession. We have a great thing going. Who's better than us? We get to fight fire, help people on a daily basis and it's exciting. You never know what's going to be the end result of that run that just came in. You will never achieve a "know everything" status. That's just not attainable in our field and the smartest person out there learns something everyday in every situation and they also know when they're qualified to perform certain tastk.

I don't mean any disrepsect whatsoever, but if you want to be taken seriously when addressing older members of this forum, as well as convincing them to consider your competency, qualifications, and abilities, stay away from using phrases like "wat", "gunna", "ur", or "u". It shows your age, and unfortunately will keep anyone from taking you seriously.
On a second note, I don't think that anyone will argue that with age comes experience, and with experience comes ability and knowledge. I think every one of us at a young age thought that we were ready for anything; it's only as you get older, a little more experienced, and a little wiser does your attitude change about the "younger crowd", whether it be at work or in your personal life.. I know growing up, I used to cringe every time my parents would say to me, "One day you'll understand", and as depressing as it may be, now that I'm older, I do understand.

Departments shouldn't adopt their standards for driving based on who's available at 3 AM or 3 PM. They should have comprehensive screening processes, training (both formal classroom like EVOC and in-formal on the road training), and evaluations before being allowed to drive for an AFA or mutiple alarm fire.

While I completely understand the issue, I have a hard time sending 18 year olds off to war but withholding any other right for a more mature age. You can be trusted with all sorts of weaponry, but cannot be trusted to drink alcohol or drive big trucks? Now, should all FD"s be required to have a comprehensive driving program that ensures drivers of any age are mature enough and possess the proper attitude? Of course.
It's just a basic fundamental flaw in the US's attitude toward men and women of military service age, that I see.

While I completely understand the issue, I have a hard time sending 18 year olds off to war but withholding any other right for a more mature age. You can be trusted with all sorts of weaponry, but cannot be trusted to drink alcohol or drive big trucks? Now, should all FD"s be required to have a comprehensive driving program that ensures drivers of any age are mature enough and possess the proper attitude? Of course.
It's just a basic fundamental flaw in the US's attitude toward men and women of military service age, that I see.

And could this sign indicate a suspicious fire?

@ Goose: I just had a quick discussion on the topic with our QA Paramedic who noted her impression of the hypoxic drive issue was the longer term administration of high flow oxygen. In the cases regarding chest pain, I'm just wishing that the protocol be updated sooner to reflect current best practices so as proactive EMS personnel are not forced to choose between doing what is thought to be right or what is written in the little book that cover ye arse.

As far as the hypoxic drive - it does exist, but i spoke to a number of emergency room physicians and all said that a COPD patient would need to be maintained on 12/15 lpm over the course of a number of hours in order to knock out the respiratory drive. That said, i have surely given COPD patients high flow oxygen (NRFM, BVM via ET/OPA, or CPAP) when they need it.
As far as the chest pain you sited - i recall a group discussion at a CME or Audit recently where the physicians (two of them) were starting to lean away from giving every chest pain high flow oxygen. I haven't read much of any literature on it, but it had to do ( at least in part) with free radicals. They were pretty frank in stating that as long as their is no respiratory compromise and that they are showing good clinical signs of perfusion and spo2 is also within normal limits a NC is more than sufficient. In fact, they stated that they 99.9% of the time take off the NRFM and replace it with a NC (i've seen it happen, even in STEMI alerts).
Just thought those two bits were interesting.

You're right, you can't simply go against protocol but if you have findings supporting a deviation from that protocol, a simple phone/radio call to medical control can get you the approval to do it within the scope of your practice and with the protection of your medical control

My comments are not in relation to the reasearch. I caution against advising people to disregard the protocol. It's one thing if you are going to do it your self but there may be some impressionable people on here that can apply your advice in a wrong matter. Plus in any event their treatment was quetioned they are much better off having followed the protocol over advice they recieved on a bulletin board. If you feel strongly make your thoughts know to those who make the protocols.

Not to toss a negative into an otherwise positive thread, but I feel this warrants a word of caution. I'd be highly skeptical of using a dog leash or anything "clipped" to another person. If something happens to the partner with the loop like falling into a hole the FF with the clipped on end will not be able to release it. Similarly if there was a localized collapse between the two of you. A similar tactic can be to use a piece of webbing/line that each of you holds the end of. I'd be very careful clipping anything that could not be immediately released, under emergency conditions. At 5-6 ft. I think I 'd prefer to verbally communicate, as anything of any weight, even a coffee table or kitchen chair, will slow you up as you are forced to come together and figure out how to pass. There are times when "buddy lines" should be used and others where they can be trouble.

All the shiny trucks in the world cant fight fires without proper staffing.....