Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 20 of 26 FirstFirst ... 1017181920212223 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 507
Like Tree164Likes

Thread: Fire Attack photo

  1. #381
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you consider that safe?

    Because no one was injured, yes, I do consider it safe. I was not there but knowing that the chief, and a lieutenant (my son) were there I am sure they decided that the situation called for an interior attack and that they could do it safely, knowing full well that additional help, from our own FD as well as 2 mutual aid FDs was en route.

    IC on the nozzle... I'm sure he was able to keep track of the complete scene from there.

    Ever read any incident command text books? This is called a working command and is in fact common practice in many locations where one rig arrives prior to others and immediate action is needed to mitigate the situation. Command would announce on the radio something similar to this "Engine 142 on location at 123 main street, 2 story wood frame home with smoke showing on the A side, Engine 142 is working command and we will be initiating an interior attack." Who is he supposed to command? Oh yeah, the attack crew, simple because he is part of it. No other companies are on scene for him to command and the next due officer will take command. It is right there in most incident command or tactics books. Try opening one instead of running for the vests while the house burns down and gramma dies.

    Safety tied to the pump panel.

    At that point he was more valuable running the pump and keeping water to the attack crew than he would have been wandering around in a bright colored vest. I know that doesn't fit your train of thought. Too bad, no one got hurt and the house is still standing. Wow! What an amazing defeat for safety!!

    No rapid intervention capability.

    But we did have 2 in 2 out, which meets OSHA Standards. Funny how that works.

    Ya, sounds like a good idea to me.

    Says the hypocrite uber safety freak that sees nothing wrong with violating child labor laws and placing children in hazardous situations on the fire ground. Honestly no one cares what you think is or isn't a good idea.
    Thanks for proving once again what a hypocrite you are. No one has to discredit you here, every time you post you do it to yourself.
    Chenzo and rm1524 like this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate


  2. #382
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    My biggest issue was that the IC was interior on the attack line.
    Obviously wasn't a problem, as no one got hurt and the house is still standing. What difference would it have made had the pump operator been IC? He couldn't see 2 sides of the house, including the back where the bulk of the fire was. It worked out just fine with me being IC inside on the nozzle, with 2 guys outside watching the exterior and relaying it to me. Sorry that you have an issue with it, but it worked out great.

    Attacking a fire interior, with a 4 man crew, depending on the fire, may not be that big of an issue. IMO putting the IC in that situation on the line interior, vs being, worst case, on the pump panel until he can be relieved is.
    See above, it worked out great. There was NO ONE to command other than the other interior firefighter until other crews arrived on scene.

    Honestly if you were the one on the pump.... I would not have questioned it.
    Yeah....... Okay...

    While it is not the best scenario, it at least gives you the ability to view the entire incident.
    I had an entire "view" of the incident. I had enough faith in the two people outside to watch the incident and relay any pertinent information, so that I could go interior and assess that. I guess you don't trust your guys or your skills as I trust mine

    And by the way Skippy, we had a building fire last week.... and knocked it down with 4 people as well.
    It takes 4 people to run a back-hoe now?
    You can say what you want, and justify it however, but the fact remains that we made an aggressive interior attack, put the fire out and no one got hurt, with limited man power.
    Last edited by Chenzo; 04-30-2013 at 03:20 PM.
    conrad427 likes this.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  3. #383
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    My biggest issue was that the IC was interior on the attack line.

    IT'S CALLED "WORKING COMMAND" AND IS A COMMON PRACTICE USED BY FIRST ARRIVING COMPANY OFFICERS WHEN IMMEDIATE ACTION IS NEEDED TO MITIGATE THE EMERGENCY. The next arriving officer will take over all command of the incident. Maybe you should take some incident command classes and learn how the fire service does things.

    Attacking a fire interior, with a 4 man crew, depending on the fire, may not be that big of an issue. IMO putting the IC in that situation on the line interior, vs being, worst case, on the pump panel until he can be relieved is.

    Honestly if you were the one on the pump.... I would not have questioned it.

    Frankly, who cares what you think? This is how we operate and so do many FDs in our area and it is taught in Incident Command courses. Command located at the pump panel would have been almost useless.

    While it is not the best scenario, it at least gives you the ability to view the entire incident.

    It is not the optimum position for command. They are stuck there while a mobile command can do what the LT did, stretch the line and while waiting for the rest to be laid out he did a 360. How would command at the pump panel have done that?

    And by the way Skippy, we had a building fire last week.... and knocked it down with 4 people as well.

    Before or after it became a smoldering pile of rubble?
    Some studying about incident command may be beneficial for you.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  4. #384
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Some studying about incident command may be beneficial for you.
    Actually the Chief and first arriving pump operator knocked it down at the stove and wall area with an ABC and a water extinguisher, and then cleaned up some extension into the attic through the vent when AMA arrived.

    The homeowner was also very pleased. I know this for a fact as it was one the volunteer's members at my combo department. He said she was quite happy.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 04-30-2013 at 03:27 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #385
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    You can say what you want, and justify it however, but the fact remains that we made an aggressive interior attack, put the fire out and no one got hurt, with limited man power.
    Sounds like you did a nice job.

    If i was in command of an incident, that would likely mean that I would not have my A team, as the interior experience in my VFD lies heavily at the top. We don't have more than one active non-officer with more than 1 or 2 fires, except for a daytime driver that has a lot of experience who no longer does much more than drive and pump.

    Given that situation, there is a strong possibility that I would not have committed to entry until the AMA arrived. yes, I could have gone interior, and yes, I am fully aware with the practice of combat or working command as I used it many times at my previous VFD, but that was a very different place with very different resources.

    Given the experience level at my VFD, I really doubt that I would feel comfortable not having a full view of the scene while in command.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  6. #386
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Given the experience level at my VFD, I really doubt that I would feel comfortable not having a full view of the scene while in command.
    And this statement right here loops right back around to the training argument from before. The guy who was on the nozzle with me? This was his second or third fire, first time being interior on the initial attack, taken FFI, but no certification as of yet. The outside firefighter? Been "in the business" for a while, but isn't the most experienced tool in the box either, has FFII.

    But we train, and we train aggressively, and while it is no comparison to real world experience, it was obviously enough aggressive training and schooling to accomplish a successful aggressive interior fire attack with limited manpower.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  7. #387
    Forum Member snowball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Just North of South Central
    Posts
    2,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Sounds like you did a nice job.

    If i was in command of an incident, that would likely mean that I would not have my A team, as the interior experience in my VFD lies heavily at the top. We don't have more than one active non-officer with more than 1 or 2 fires, except for a daytime driver that has a lot of experience who no longer does much more than drive and pump.

    Given that situation, there is a strong possibility that I would not have committed to entry until the AMA arrived. yes, I could have gone interior, and yes, I am fully aware with the practice of combat or working command as I used it many times at my previous VFD, but that was a very different place with very different resources.
    Just stay where you're at. You could not possibly handle anything bigger than a three piece response. The fireground is a dynamic environment that requires leaders to be just as dynamic as the scene they are working. Your textbook cookie cutter style would cause fire loss of epic proportions. The fire that Chenzo had sounded like it was ran efficiently and kept loss at a minimum. You seem to have a problem with that.
    If you were at my department with the same fire you would have less than six minutes before three rigs were there and eight minutes when the first alarm boots were on the ground. So in the time it took for you to dig around for your florescent vest, your clipboard, and collect passport tags from everyone, the only thing that would be coming out of that house would be steam, and firemen that you wouldn't be able to look in the eye.

    Now throw in something bigger with multiple alarms and exposures...your limited experience would not be able to keep up, and people would get hurt. So stay where you're at, you're as good as you are ever going to be.
    Chenzo likes this.
    IAFF

  8. #388
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Sounds like you did a nice job.

    If i was in command of an incident, that would likely mean that I would not have my A team, as the interior experience in my VFD lies heavily at the top. We don't have more than one active non-officer with more than 1 or 2 fires, except for a daytime driver that has a lot of experience who no longer does much more than drive and pump.

    Given that situation, there is a strong possibility that I would not have committed to entry until the AMA arrived. yes, I could have gone interior, and yes, I am fully aware with the practice of combat or working command as I used it many times at my previous VFD, but that was a very different place with very different resources.

    Given the experience level at my VFD, I really doubt that I would feel comfortable not having a full view of the scene while in command.
    Please don't ever leave your little town. Your experience is way to valuable there to be appreciated anywhere else.
    FyredUp and Chenzo like this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #389
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    Maybe he is getting at something. If all we do is complain about current or predicted staffing levels, and instead just let everything burn down maybe we could all get more money.

  10. #390
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SW Missouri
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    LA you make my head hurt.
    Weruj1 likes this.

  11. #391
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    POC, career, volunteer it does not matter. I have read about a bunch of career depts. that have had staffing levels slashed, like three on an engine. Truck companies closed. Heck, even "public safety officers". Instead of crying about staffing and making excuses to justify not doing their jobs they seem to find a magical way to keep going, as in putting fire out and saving lives. Then I hear volunteer depts. complain that they only get anywhere from four to fifty to fight a room and contents fire and that they don't have the time to get all fifty trained to go interior, and that they don't get paid to do the job, and that they have to go to work in 12 hours, and that thirty hours a year is too much, and that they don't have enough money to get fifty "I FIGHT WHAT YOU FEAR" t-shirts, and that they are just as good as the paid guys. I belong to a volunteer dept. that has members like this and it makes me want to puke at times. I stretched a line into a room and contents fire with just my captain backing me up, a senior firefighter on the pump, and a firefighter in the yard. Instead of waiting for mutual aid and seventeen battalion chiefs we paid attention to the conditions made an interior attack and put the darn fire out. That was my first interior attack. Hard to believe I had the confidence to go interior with out having watched thirty houses burn down from the outside. Hard to believe we did not wait for seventeen battalion chiefs so we could watch the house burn down too.
    Last edited by conrad427; 04-30-2013 at 10:41 PM.

  12. #392
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,673

    Default

    Interesting reading these last couple pages.

    As long as no one got hurt.....it's a safe operation.

    That's our "definition" now?

    And no FyredUp, this is not directed at you. Just making a general statement.

    Department near me runs 1 guy on an engine. He makes many attacks while waiting for the volunteer companies to arrive. He has not gotten hurt doing this. I don't think that's a safe operation in any way/shape/form.

    How low do we go in manpower and accept that as "safe" operations? FDNY, with more people on scene than anybody, fights for more than 4 guys on any given engine/truck. Pretty sure they are as well trained as anyone else. Are they wrong to fight for that level? Are we wrong to accept less than that level?

    Is the fire service the fire service's worst enemy?
    Last edited by Bones42; 04-30-2013 at 11:14 PM.
    "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?

  13. #393
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    I agree with you Bones. But they know we will still do the job as best we can.
    Last edited by conrad427; 04-30-2013 at 11:39 PM.

  14. #394
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Interesting reading these last couple pages.

    As long as no one got hurt.....it's a safe operation.

    That's our "definition" now?

    And no FyredUp, this is not directed at you. Just making a general statement.

    Department near me runs 1 guy on an engine. He makes many attacks while waiting for the volunteer companies to arrive. He has not gotten hurt doing this. I don't think that's a safe operation in any way/shape/form.

    How low do we go in manpower and accept that as "safe" operations? FDNY, with more people on scene than anybody, fights for more than 4 guys on any given engine/truck. Pretty sure they are as well trained as anyone else. Are they wrong to fight for that level? Are we wrong to accept less than that level?

    Is the fire service the fire service's worst enemy?
    There is absolutely a difference between safe and ideal. Was what I/we did yesterday safe? Absolutely, no one got hurt, nor did anyone fear bodily harm.
    Was it ideal? Absolutely not, more people would have definitely been better.
    But we still were able to make an aggressive interior attack, stop the fire before it destroyed everything, and sent everyone home with everything they came with, and uninjured.
    FyredUp and conrad427 like this.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  15. #395
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,937

    Default

    Just a slight modification of a quote from Heartbreak Rdige:

    FyredUp: Are you new to the firefighting, LA?

    LA: Yes, sir. Just came over from Pubed.

    FyredUp: Were you good at that?

    LA: Yes, sir!

    FyredUp: Well then, stick to it because you're a walking cluster fluck as an Fire officer. My men are hard chargers, LA! Leutenant Chenzo took a handfull of young fire ****ers, exercised some personal initiative and kicked ***!
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  16. #396
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    I just played the scene in my head with your slight modifications. Almost had an accident laughing, kind of an uncomfortable laugh, you make a convincing Gunny Fyred-Hiway.
    Last edited by conrad427; 05-01-2013 at 01:29 AM. Reason: getting old and gray
    FyredUp likes this.

  17. #397
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    I probably have no business posting on tactics threads because of how little experience I have in the fire service, but I get kind of fired up about the attitude some people have in the fire service. LA, my dept. is pretty much the same as yours. We have some really great guys that respond all the time though, one being the Chief who has thirty five years and the Asst. Chief who has over twenty. A captain who has over thirty years responds a lot too along with quite a few firefighters with a lot of experience. The problem comes down to the members who don't have the dedication or the drive to be better. Those members always come up with "we are only volunteers" and it is "too dangerous". In a way that kind of mentality is the same as enablement, as in they are enabling others to not live up to expectations and standards. People held to the lowest standard will often achieve it. You also mentioned that the community is pleased with the level of fire protection, maybe because they don't know any better. The community is also enabling that poor attitude as well. I am not saying you should tell the community that your department is crap, but they might appreciate it if you held yourselves to a higher standard because the community and your department deserve better. My community enabled me to go through life fat, drunk and stupid but I got to the point where I could not stand it anymore, so I quit drinking.

  18. #398
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by conrad427 View Post
    My community enabled me to go through life fat, drunk and stupid but I got to the point where I could not stand it anymore, so I quit drinking.
    I took a different approach. I quit being fat.
    conrad427 likes this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #399
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    There is absolutely a difference between safe and ideal. Was what I/we did yesterday safe? Absolutely, no one got hurt, nor did anyone fear bodily harm.

    No 2/2 In 2 Out that would not have committed your pump operator. No backup line. No exterior command. No, that's not safe. That's making a fire attack by the skin of your teeth.

    Was it ideal? Absolutely not, more people would have definitely been better.

    No. More people would have made for a SAFE operation with enough resources on scene to protect us in case things went bad.

    Protecting for our safety should not be IDEAL. Protecting for our safety should be the MINIMUM.

    But we still were able to make an aggressive interior attack, stop the fire before it destroyed everything, and sent everyone home with everything they came with, and uninjured.
    So you put the homeowners needs ahead of our safety.

    I am not chastizing you in great part because this has become what is expected of the fire service by the fire service itself. Operate with less and still do the same job and perform the same interior operations . Operate short staffed and make interior attacks dispite the fact that we don't have the resources to do it safely. Do it dispite the fact that we don't have the resources on scene to rescue our brothers and sisters if things go bad.

    Sorry, but this an issue with me.

    I'll do what I can with the staff and the resources I have. Property isn't worrth taking risks where I don't have the resources to take them safely and garunteer that my folks will come home.

    If that means I have 4, or even 5 folks on scene, and they don't have the experience IMO to operate safely interior until more manpower arrives, that may very well mean that the fire will burn until those resources arrive.

    And cetainly I will make no interior attacks with 3 people. And that may very well include rescue operations.

    Safety is not "nobody got hurt". Safety is having enough folks to perform all required operational tasks and respond to realistic firefighter emergency situations
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #400
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Nothing we do is safe. I get tired of hearing the reference. If what we do is safe, people wouldn't flee. People wouldn't be injured. People wouldn't be killed. But that's not the case. I fully understand that "safe" is a relative term. I'm quite sure that what I thought to be unsafe the first day out of fire school is vastly different than today. Training and experience has moved that threshold.

    I'm not sure of the when and why our job has changed. I have my opinions. But what I do know is that if we don't correct the track of the fire service in the near future, it will be lost forever. And that, will be the greatest UNSAFE act in the American fire service history.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cal Fire Photo
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-03-2009, 04:40 PM
  2. Looking for photo of rare fire apparatus
    By blueeighty88 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 06:46 PM
  3. Now that is a nice fire photo...
    By CALFFBOU in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-31-2005, 11:55 PM
  4. New from Fire Photo
    By firephotonews in forum Meet and Greet
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-18-2003, 08:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts