Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 1118192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 507
Like Tree164Likes

Thread: Fire Attack photo

  1. #401
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    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
    You're still pushing that narrative about being completely "safe?" The conditions you demand to be completely "safe" never exist on any incident. Whether it is a volunteer or a professional operation. The difference is that firefighters (which isn't you) know how to do their jobs and minimize the risks to effect rescue and suppression.

    You're more concerned about everyone having the right vest on to look the part. I liked the IC system, but many like you used it as an excuse to avoid doing the actual work. Believing they could talk the fire out.
    SPFDRum, Chenzo and ATFDFF like this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."


  2. #402
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    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 ***!
    I am glad I had finished my drink brfore reading that... otherwise I would be buying a new MacBook!
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  3. #403
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by up&over View Post
    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.
    Bing_freaking_o!
    Chenzo likes this.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  4. #404
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    You're still pushing that narrative about being completely "safe?" The conditions you demand to be completely "safe" never exist on any incident. Whether it is a volunteer or a professional operation. The difference is that firefighters (which isn't you) know how to do their jobs and minimize the risks to effect rescue and suppression.

    You're more concerned about everyone having the right vest on to look the part. I liked the IC system, but many like you used it as an excuse to avoid doing the actual work. Believing they could talk the fire out.
    I fully understand that there are dangers associatted with every level of response and fire operations.

    That being said our members have the right to expect that will we not put the response or the operations above thier safety. That includes traveling at reasonable speeds, slowing down at all intersections including when we have the right of way and stopping at all traffic control devices while responding even though it may extend the response times. That means that we give them adequate time to gear up and not force them to shortcut when gearing up. It means giving them time to do a complete size-up. And yes, it means if the operation reasonably calls for a backup handline and a RIT team we will not make entry until tha is in place.

    This is not about filling vests, but it is about putting our members first and making sure that all the reasonable operating positiions are filled - attack, backup lines, ventilation (where needed) and RIT - are ready to go before we commit them interior. Yes, and it may include the safety officer position.

    The fact is we are trying to do the same job with 3 people on an engine company, or fewer volunteer responders than we did 20 years ago with 4 or 5 man engines, or many more responding volunteers, with fires that are burning faster, hotter and more likely to flashover in less structurally sound structures.

    Ya, we will never be completly safe. But let's be honest, how fdar are we from flat out unsafe? IMO, in many cases, not very far.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #405
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    I am glad I had finished my drink brfore reading that... otherwise I would be buying a new MacBook!
    It was funny.

    Not true, but funny.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  6. #406
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    It was funny.

    Not true, but funny.
    Truth, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder.... and the vast majority will see the paraphrasing of Heartbreak Ridge as accurate.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    FyredUp, Chenzo and conrad427 like this.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  7. #407
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,228

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I fully understand that there are dangers associatted with every level of response and fire operations.
    We're aware you understand, and we're aware that usually leads to standing in the yard. That may be fine for you, but that's not how we run things here, and that wouldn't sit well with 97% of the people on either of my department.

    That being said our members have the right to expect that will we not put the response or the operations above thier safety. That includes traveling at reasonable speeds, slowing down at all intersections including when we have the right of way and stopping at all traffic control devices while responding even though it may extend the response times. That means that we give them adequate time to gear up and not force them to shortcut when gearing up. It means giving them time to do a complete size-up. And yes, it means if the operation reasonably calls for a backup handline and a RIT team we will not make entry until tha is in place.
    Not one member complained about the response. Not one member complained about not having adequate gear. A size-up was performed. Not one member felt that the operation "reasonably called for a backup handline and a RIT team. Therefore, we made entry. If any of the other 3 members that responded with me had looked at me and said "Lt, I feel uncomfortable/unsafe/in fear of harm/etc etc if we do (insert task here, interior attack, etc)." Not one time was that said to be on the way, during, or after the incident. Just because my standards and the standards of my members are different than yours doesn't mean what I did was wrong.

    This is not about filling vests, but it is about putting our members first and making sure that all the reasonable operating positiions are filled - attack, backup lines, ventilation (where needed) and RIT - are ready to go before we commit them interior. Yes, and it may include the safety officer position.
    See above response. Reasonable operating positions for THIS call were filled, initially that was attack/IC, Pump, exterior/safety. Again, your definition of reasonable does not equate to the norm.

    The fact is we are trying to do the same job with 3 people on an engine company, or fewer volunteer responders than we did 20 years ago with 4 or 5 man engines, or many more responding volunteers, with fires that are burning faster, hotter and more likely to flashover in less structurally sound structures.
    The fact is, and while I don't agree with it, that's the way it is at the moment. Do I like it? No. Is it ideal? No. But that's what training and classes are for. I would LOVE to respond in with 2 engines full of 6 guys to every call right away. But it doesn't happen. I'm not gonna burn houses down because I can't have 12 guys there within 5 minutes of the initial alarm. I'm gonna do what I can with the people I have. If I feel I can make an interior attack with the crew I have, I will. If I feel I need to resort to something less aggressive I will. But I'm not going to sit there and watch houses burn and say to the homeowner "Sorry I can't help you, I only have 4 guys right now. Sorry you're gonna lose your irreplaceable family pictures and relics." Not gonna happen. I didn't sign up to burn houses down.

    Ya, we will never be completly safe. But let's be honest, how fdar are we from flat out unsafe? IMO, in many cases, not very far.
    Maybe it's your area that's unsafe. Maybe it's your area that refuses to improvise, adapt, and overcome, and chooses to stand in the yard and burn houses down. Maybe that's good enough for you, but it's not good enough for me.
    I'll tell you what. You keep making excuses for burning houses down, and we'll keep training and fighting fire and making interior attacks and saving houses and possessions.

    Your signature should say "Train to apologize the best you can."
    Weruj1 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

  8. #408
    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
    I fully understand that there are dangers associatted with every level of response and fire operations.

    You understand it but refuse to accept the reality that NOTHING involving firefighting can ever be 100% safe. NEVER.

    That being said our members have the right to expect that will we not put the response or the operations above thier safety. That includes traveling at reasonable speeds, slowing down at all intersections including when we have the right of way and stopping at all traffic control devices while responding even though it may extend the response times. That means that we give them adequate time to gear up and not force them to shortcut when gearing up. It means giving them time to do a complete size-up. And yes, it means if the operation reasonably calls for a backup handline and a RIT team we will not make entry until tha is in place.

    Um, and who here is saying purposelly expose members to unnecessarily dangerous situations? We take calculated risks, and analyze the benefit of that risk. Lt Chenzo did just that knowing full well additional help was en route. We all know you wouldn't do it, yet there you were bragging in this very topic how your volly FD with 4 guyssuccessfully knocked down a stove fire...So which is it? It's safe or it isn't? Where was you RIT, or back up line?

    Are you saying you allow guys to bunker out in the rig while it is en route? Now that sounds pretty safe...NOT!


    This is not about filling vests, but it is about putting our members first and making sure that all the reasonable operating positiions are filled - attack, backup lines, ventilation (where needed) and RIT - are ready to go before we commit them interior. Yes, and it may include the safety officer position.

    You talking about ventilation is hysterical...For you it is entirely about filling out your Incident Command protocol, and every fireground position, while gramma's house and gramma burn up. Well unless YOU are bragging about knocking down a fire with extinguishers, not even pulling a line, with 4 guys. Then suddenly it's all good. Hypocrite.

    The fact is we are trying to do the same job with 3 people on an engine company, or fewer volunteer responders than we did 20 years ago with 4 or 5 man engines, or many more responding volunteers, with fires that are burning faster, hotter and more likely to flashover in less structurally sound structures.

    The fact is the longer you stand around wringing your hands and trying to figue out who to put vests on, wishing you had more interior firefighters, and writing off another house, the more likely flashover is to occur and property and lives will be lost. You don't like that LT Chenzo took a calulated risk and the building is still standing. Tough schidt, frankly it isn't any of your business now is it?

    Ya, we will never be completly safe. But let's be honest, how fdar are we from flat out unsafe? IMO, in many cases, not very far.

    Not any farther than your guys with no RIT, no back up line, heck, not even an attack line, no Safety Officer, and whatever else you are demanding we had at out fire. Good gref man you are a hypocrite of epic proportions.
    Try again you look foolish in this post of yours.
    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

  9. #409
    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
    It was funny.

    Not true, but funny.
    Depends entirely on perspective. What you post here makes the majority here believe it is 100% true and indisputable.
    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

  10. #410
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Try again you look foolish in this post of yours.
    I just want to say that I was not critizing the LT per say. It was not directed at him.

    It was directed at the fire service that somehow has accepted the fact that it really is ok to make interior attacks with a total of 3 or 4 members because "that is what we have" "or that is what is expected of us".
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  11. #411
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    You talking about ventilation is hysterical...For you it is entirely about filling out your Incident Command protocol, and every fireground position, while gramma's house and gramma burn up. Well unless YOU are bragging about knocking down a fire with extinguishers, not even pulling a line, with 4 guys. Then suddenly it's all good. Hypocrite.

    The small fire on the stove was hit from the far end of the kitchen with an extinguisher while a line was being pulled.

    The line was never used in kitchen beyiond a few gallons to knock down a small bit of fire on the wall. it was then pulled to hit asmall amount of fire in the overhead vent area.


    Are you saying you allow guys to bunker out in the rig while it is en route? Now that sounds pretty safe...NOT!

    That is one of my pet peeves, and one of the things that we should not do. It happens and my combo department, and is somewhat common in theis area and is DEAD wrong.

    It is an example of the fire service trying to shave thaose 40 or 60 seconds off the response and is a prime example of us putting the response ahead of the crew.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  12. #412
    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
    I just want to say that I was not critizing the LT per say. It was not directed at him.

    It was directed at the fire service that somehow has accepted the fact that it really is ok to make interior attacks with a total of 3 or 4 members because "that is what we have" "or that is what is expected of us".
    Nonsense, you directly criticized his actions...
    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

  13. #413
    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
    You talking about ventilation is hysterical...For you it is entirely about filling out your Incident Command protocol, and every fireground position, while gramma's house and gramma burn up. Well unless YOU are bragging about knocking down a fire with extinguishers, not even pulling a line, with 4 guys. Then suddenly it's all good. Hypocrite.

    The small fire on the stove was hit from the far end of the kitchen with an extinguisher while a line was being pulled.

    So do you know the size of the fire that LT Chenzo saw initially? How do you know it wasn't initialy a smal fire that they hit from across the room? You see, you banketly criticized my LT for his actions and then justified the actions of your guys with facts not originally in evidence here.

    The line was never used in kitchen beyiond a few gallons to knock down a small bit of fire on the wall. it was then pulled to hit asmall amount of fire in the overhead vent area.

    Yet they arrived on scene with 4 guys. Who was IC? Who was Safety? Who was the pump operator? Where was your 2 in - 2 out? Where was RIT? Where was your back up line? You see this is what makes you a flaming turd of a hypocrite. You made a stink because LT Chenzo had none of those and yet neither did your 4 man crew. So what makes them right and that they did a great job while Chenzo was wrong and unsafe in your eyes? Well, other than your standard hypocrisy.


    Are you saying you allow guys to bunker out in the rig while it is en route? Now that sounds pretty safe...NOT!

    That is one of my pet peeves, and one of the things that we should not do. It happens and my combo department, and is somewhat common in theis area and is DEAD wrong.

    So what happened to your demanding seatbelts be on before the vehicle goes in motion? More BS and lies? Because it certainly seems so.

    It is an example of the fire service trying to shave thaose 40 or 60 seconds off the response and is a prime example of us putting the response ahead of the crew.


    No, it seems like just more of your nonsense saying something out of one side of your face while the reality is so totally different as to make what you say absurd.
    Just shaking my head at you once again.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 05-01-2013 at 06:28 PM.
    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

  14. #414
    Forum Member conrad427's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Just south of Canada
    Posts
    536

    Default

    I get kind of a kick out of the whole ICS discussion. When it comes to the vol. world the IC does not even have to be an officer, it can be the senior man and often is. I have been the IC with only two years on, granted it has only been wildland fires, but out here anything under 2000 acres is considered minor. To criticize LT. Chenzo for what he did is absurd, he may not be the chief sitting in a command car but his department thought enough of him to make him a LT and Fyred's comparison to the Heartbreak Ridge sounds pretty accurate, furthermore a squared away Lt on the scene is a heck of a lot better than a Chief working in the next county over. Without the flexibility that is built into the ICS system in regards to command the whole volunteer system would fall apart. It sounds like it already has in some states. You cant use the ICS system to hide behind and to make excuses for your own shortcomings.
    FyredUp and Chenzo like this.

  15. #415
    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 conrad427 View Post
    I get kind of a kick out of the whole ICS discussion. When it comes to the vol. world the IC does not even have to be an officer, it can be the senior man and often is. I have been the IC with only two years on, granted it has only been wildland fires, but out here anything under 2000 acres is considered minor. To criticize LT. Chenzo for what he did is absurd, he may not be the chief sitting in a command car but his department thought enough of him to make him a LT and Fyred's comparison to the Heartbreak Ridge sounds pretty accurate, furthermore a squared away Lt on the scene is a heck of a lot better than a Chief working in the next county over. Without the flexibility that is built into the ICS system in regards to command the whole volunteer system would fall apart. It sounds like it already has in some states. You cant use the ICS system to hide behind and to make excuses for your own shortcomings.
    Pardon the theft of your catch phrase Gonzo, but if a post ever called for it, this one does!


    Bing Freaking O!!
    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. #416
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,567

    Default

    Yet they arrived on scene with 4 guys. Who was IC? Who was Safety? Who was the pump operator? Where was your 2 in - 2 out? Where was RIT? Where was your back up line? You see this is what makes you a flaming turd of a hypocrite. You made a stink because LT Chenzo had none of those and yet neither did your 4 man crew. So what makes them right and that they did a great job while Chenzo was wrong and unsafe in your eyes? Well, other than your standard hypocrisy.

    Never said he was WRONG. It sounds like he had a little more fire and a lot more smoke then "my fire", however, I was using his fire as an example of how we have gotten into the habit of making attacks with minimum manpower and somehow considering it a "safe" operation.

    AS far as my incident the extinguishers were used to knock down the small fire on the stove by the chief from basically the laundry room which was less than 10' from the door. The fire was a good 20' from where he was and there was so little smoke that an SCBA wasn't even needed. The handline was, as I understand it was in the process of being pulled by one of our captains and being charged while that was occurring (the backup line to the extinguishers). At that point the AMA department arrived and one or two of the members operated with our 2 who donned SCBA tp clean up a small bit of extentsion up the vent. The Chief was by this time outside as the IC and we had a pump operator, plus one or two of the AMA department members who were not needed interior.

    If it was my call, I probably would have been less aggressive, but given the very limited amount of fire on arrival, the fact the the operator of the extinguisher was about 10' from an exit and he was being backed up by a handline which was in the process of being charged, I have some but not significant issues with it.



    So what happened to your demanding seatbelts be on before the vehicle goes in motion? More BS and lies? Because it certainly seems so.

    I do, but I make very few runs with my combo department as that is not my primary role. And often when I do, I am not the officer so it's not "my" rig.

    I have been very vocal about it being very wrong, but since I run in the rigs less than 100 calls a year out of 1700, there is little I can do about it the vast majority of the time.



    No, it seems like just more of your nonsense saying something out of one side of your face while the reality is so totally different as to make what you say absurd.
    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just shaking my head at you once again.
    Really?
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  17. #417
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,583

    Default

    If I shook my head at everything LAFE posted, people would think I have Parkinson's Disease...
    FyredUp, Weruj1 and Chenzo like this.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  18. #418
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I fully understand that there are dangers associatted with every level of response and fire operations.
    And you seem to think that all of them can be eliminated by policy & procedure.

    That being said our members have the right to expect that will we not put the response or the operations above thier safety. That includes traveling at reasonable speeds, slowing down at all intersections including when we have the right of way and stopping at all traffic control devices while responding even though it may extend the response times. That means that we give them adequate time to gear up and not force them to shortcut when gearing up. It means giving them time to do a complete size-up. And yes, it means if the operation reasonably calls for a backup handline and a RIT team we will not make entry until tha is in place.

    This is not about filling vests, but it is about putting our members first and making sure that all the reasonable operating positiions are filled - attack, backup lines, ventilation (where needed) and RIT - are ready to go before we commit them interior. Yes, and it may include the safety officer position.
    I guess you don't realize that waiting around until you have enough personnel to fill each and every one of these roles BEFORE initiating interior operations WILL in fact, put the personnel that will be performing the interior operations at GREATER risk while performing those operations in pretty much every situation than the they would've been exposed to if they'd attacked the fire upon arrival of the first unit?

    The fact is we are trying to do the same job with 3 people on an engine company, or fewer volunteer responders than we did 20 years ago with 4 or 5 man engines, or many more responding volunteers, with fires that are burning faster, hotter and more likely to flashover in less structurally sound structures.
    Yet, we seem to kill more firefighters in apparatus accidents and from health issues than we do conducting offensive interior fire operations. Interesting.

    Ya, we will never be completly safe. But let's be honest, how fdar are we from flat out unsafe? IMO, in many cases, not very far.
    In general, not as close to it as you think we are.
    Chenzo likes this.

  19. #419
    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
    Yet they arrived on scene with 4 guys. Who was IC? Who was Safety? Who was the pump operator? Where was your 2 in - 2 out? Where was RIT? Where was your back up line? You see this is what makes you a flaming turd of a hypocrite. You made a stink because LT Chenzo had none of those and yet neither did your 4 man crew. So what makes them right and that they did a great job while Chenzo was wrong and unsafe in your eyes? Well, other than your standard hypocrisy.

    Never said he was WRONG. It sounds like he had a little more fire and a lot more smoke then "my fire", however, I was using his fire as an example of how we have gotten into the habit of making attacks with minimum manpower and somehow considering it a "safe" operation.


    It was safe, he made an ON SCENE TACTICAL DECISION BASED ON WHAT HE SAW. Did you not see where he said he did a 360 before entering? You know, he did a thing called SIZE-UP!

    Something I hear no mention of in your little fire story.


    AS far as my incident the extinguishers were used to knock down the small fire on the stove by the chief from basically the laundry room which was less than 10' from the door. The fire was a good 20' from where he was and there was so little smoke that an SCBA wasn't even needed. The handline was, as I understand it was in the process of being pulled by one of our captains and being charged while that was occurring (the backup line to the extinguishers). At that point the AMA department arrived and one or two of the members operated with our 2 who donned SCBA tp clean up a small bit of extentsion up the vent. The Chief was by this time outside as the IC and we had a pump operator, plus one or two of the AMA department members who were not needed interior.

    LT Chenzo and the FF that went in with him, after the LT did a 360 size-up, were wearing full PPE, including SCBA. Apparently your guys weren't even wearing SCBA while entering a structure with a reported fire. Yet YOU challenge the safety of LT Chenzo's tactics? Are you so F***ing deranged that you can't see the complete hypocrisy of YOUR line of thinking?

    Further, a firefighter on the exterior of a building on a ladder without full PPE taking an infant from an interior rescuer was chstized by you for unsafe practices, yet you justify the actions by your Chief who was interior with no SCBA, no back up, no 2 in 2 out, no established external command, no RIT, using an extinguisher to fight a fire. Did he do a size-up? Did he do a 360? Frankly, why in God's Green Earth did he go interior to a KNOWN fire with no SCBA? With all this you justify you justify your Chief's actions, while criticizing LT Chenzo's actions. Lt Chenzo stretched the line to the door and while the rest of the line was being pulled by the firefighter and MPO he did a 360, both crew members that went in were in full PPE, including SCBA, he was working command, safety was at the pump and a second line was pulled for exposures or any exterior work that needed to be done. A second engine was coming from our FD and 2 mutual aid engines were en route.

    It seems pretty clear to me who was set up to do the job safely from the beginning and it certainly was not your FD.


    If it was my call, I probably would have been less aggressive, but given the very limited amount of fire on arrival, the fact the the operator of the extinguisher was about 10' from an exit and he was being backed up by a handline which was in the process of being charged, I have some but not significant issues with it.


    So once again when your chief entered he had no back up, no scba, no RIT, no exterior command,you think it is okay because it is your FD. I have no idea how you can look at yourself in the mirror with the absolutely unexplainable hypocrisy and BS that pours unabated from you.
    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post


    So what happened to your demanding seatbelts be on before the vehicle goes in motion? More BS and lies? Because it certainly seems so.

    I do, but I make very few runs with my combo department as that is not my primary role. And often when I do, I am not the officer so it's not "my" rig.

    So, if you are not the officer, safety isn't your business? So you wouldn't speak up about what is a safety violation on your FD if you aren't the officer? Seriously, how many degrees of stupidity is that? If it is against SOP or Policy you don't have to be an officer to point out a violation. This is just another example of why you will never be taken seriously by most people on this forum. If I am driving, and the FD SOP says seatbelts are required the officer can say whatever he wants, I am not turning a wheel until everyone is belted. END OF STORY. You see that is called having courage of your convictions. What you have is no sense of ethics, courage, responsibility, or Brotherhood.

    I have been very vocal about it being very wrong, but since I run in the rigs less than 100 calls a year out of 1700, there is little I can do about it the vast majority of the time.

    Yeah, nothing you can do. Like bring it up at training, bring it up at officer's meetings, post the SOG on seat belt use. Remind the drivers that they hold responsibility for the passengers in the vehicles they are operating. Yeah, you are right, there is nothing YOU will do, while there is plenty that COULD be done.



    No, it seems like just more of your nonsense saying something out of one side of your face while the reality is so totally different as to make what you say absurd.

    Really?


    Yeah, REALLY...
    As usual, just shaking my head at your two faced hypocrisy.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 05-02-2013 at 10:22 AM.
    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

  20. #420
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I fully understand that there are dangers associatted with every level of response and fire operations...........Ya, we will never be completly safe. But let's be honest, how fdar are we from flat out unsafe? IMO, in many cases, not very far.
    Yet firefighters put out fires every day with those exact same circumstances. Many times doing interior attack because they know how to do their job effectively and safely.

    Something that eludes you.

    And we manage to all go home.
    Last edited by scfire86; 05-02-2013 at 02:14 AM.
    FyredUp and Chenzo like this.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

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