+ Reply to Thread
Results 21 to 40 of 55
-
11-29-2011, 01:52 AM #21
-
03-25-2012, 12:17 AM #22
Robert Kramer
cell #901-494-9437
Management is making sure things are done right. Leadership is doing the right thing. The fire service needs alot more leaders and a lot less managers.
"Everyone goes home" is the mantra for the pussification of the modern, American fire service.
Comments made are my own. They do not represent the official position or opinion of the Fire Department or the City for which I am employed. In fact, they are normally exactly the opposite.
-
03-26-2012, 04:33 PM #23Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
Should have added that when I was assigned to the rescue, I'd just wear NFPA approved coveralls and a hood, helmet and gloves. We had an engine company for suppression if needed, so I didn't get oil, gas and blood on my turnout gear.
Honestly, I think vests are much ado about nothing. I haven't seen a recent incident in the last 6 months that I've paid attention to, where a vest would've made a difference in a LODD or serious injury. Seems to me that just about every firefighter that's been hit was hit by a drunk drivers that already disregarded lights/cones/reflective striping, or a vehicle that was already out of control that hit them. I want to rely more on a big hunk of something between me and the morons, along with a bit of situational awareness. Short of that, give me a spare guy with a bazooka. Vests are nice when we do fill the boot though.
-
03-26-2012, 06:43 PM #24
I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
-
03-27-2012, 08:35 AM #25
"This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?
-
03-27-2012, 09:32 AM #26
I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
-
03-28-2012, 06:30 PM #27Forum Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Posts
- 52
We go with whatever the scene dictates. Lots of times it's bunker pants, a denim coat, and a ball cap. But, like I said, it's whatever the scene dictates. As for the vests; if my company is on the highway, there will be at least four other companies, the highway is shut down, and will be for quite some time. If I thought it a good idea I'd wear it though.
-
03-28-2012, 09:18 PM #28Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
Before you see that vest with maybe 1.5 sq. ft. of material, would you not see the big 'ol truck with Chevrons and LED lights so bright they reflect of of street signs in broad daylight? Kinda my point. I think it just looks good on paper but in reality has about zero effect on an emergency scene. Kinda like turning on a keychain fob light, when you already have several quartz floodlights already on. If it makes guys feel safer, fine, I got no problem with guys who like them. I just don't put any faith in them any rely more on blocking vehicles and keeping a watchfull eye.
-
03-28-2012, 09:58 PM #29
Seeing the BRT might prevent a driver from running into the BRT -- it won't necessarily prevent that same driver from running over a far less conspicuous emergency worker. That's why we wear vests.
Conspicuity research disagrees.I think it just looks good on paper but in reality has about zero effect on an emergency scene.
Blocking vehicles and good situational awareness both help. So does making yourself more conspicuous.I just don't put any faith in them any rely more on blocking vehicles and keeping a watchfull eye.
Seriously, is it all that painful to put on a vest?"Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"
The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
-
03-29-2012, 12:52 AM #30
The problem is that folks ONLY see the big old red truck...
To say that the vest doesn't make you more visible is to ignore common sense and science.
If we never got off the big ol' red truck, you would have a valid point.
This reminds me of the arguments against SCBA use and booster lines for structure fires.I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
-
03-29-2012, 03:53 PM #31Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
My point is that I want the BRT to be between me and the morons, so they wouldn't see me anyway, at least not until they were passing. Some administrators focus on the vest and not the bigger picture. Maybe if they started yanking drivers licenses and crushing the cars into cubes and sending them to China, just maybe some of these people would get the message about driving safe. I just think it's redundant wearing a vest in a closed area when I have other reflective material on.
-
03-29-2012, 04:24 PM #32
How closed an area do you have in mind? I've seen drivers go to great lengths to drive around roadblocks and into "closed" areas. Despite our best efforts, there's always at least one idiot out there willing to test your idiot proof scene. The reflective material on bunker gear (if the nature of the incident has you wearing it) is notably less conspicuous than an ANSI traffic vest.
Ignoring for a moment that we're required to wear them by law anyway, I personally think that the greatly improved conspicuity is well worth the infinitesimal bit of extra effort it takes to put the vest on."Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"
The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
-
03-29-2012, 11:02 PM #33I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
-
03-31-2012, 01:43 PM #34Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
So what to you propose for the nozzleman and his backup who are NOT required to wear the vest by law? Do we need to have flaggers for them, to guide the morons around them? Even if you have a jumpsuit covered with LED's, some moron would still try to run you over. (BTW, I'm driving the engine today so I have my vest with me, because my sweat shirt isn't reflective.)
-
03-31-2012, 01:45 PM #35Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
-
03-31-2012, 02:05 PM #36
Not necessarily flaggers but, in addition to blocking off a buffer zone around them as well as practical, somebody should be watching their backs.
Probably true. But that's no reason not to wear a traffic vest anyway.Even if you have a jumpsuit covered with LED's, some moron would still try to run you over.
Everybody on the engine should have a vest with them regardless of what they happen to be wearing today.(BTW, I'm driving the engine today so I have my vest with me, because my sweat shirt isn't reflective.)"Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"
The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.
-
03-31-2012, 04:13 PM #37
Still haven't heard any good reason not to wear a vest....
I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
-
03-31-2012, 11:53 PM #38Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
-
03-31-2012, 11:57 PM #39Forum Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Posts
- 712
"Not necessarily flaggers but, in addition to blocking off a buffer zone around them as well as practical, somebody should be watching their backs."
I agree. To me, this is much better protection than a vest.
-
04-01-2012, 07:10 AM #40I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.
"The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."
"When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Turnout gear washing...questions
By sdff1520 in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 11Last Post: 08-19-2011, 11:38 PM -
New turnout gear configuration
By blaster668 in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 10Last Post: 04-19-2011, 06:02 PM -
Modifying/repairing turnout gear
By NobodyAnymore in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 12Last Post: 02-04-2011, 08:38 PM -
Turnout gear narratives
By firefighterford in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & FundingReplies: 8Last Post: 04-21-2007, 12:08 AM -
Help!
By TED1435 in forum Emergency Vehicle OperationsReplies: 5Last Post: 05-16-2006, 12:28 AM

LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks




