Like Tree435Likes

Thread: Hey LA! This one's for you!

  1. #176
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    "You could wail upon the siren, house just struck by lightnin'
    Stopping for the rain.
    And your head, would be itchin'
    while the fire consumes the kitchen,
    If you only had a brain."

    "When the fire is a-blazin, I find it quite amazin',
    That LA's standing in the yard .
    Just because I'm presumin' that you're somewhat sub-human,
    If you only had heart."

    "I'm afraid there's no denyin' you're just a dandelion,
    Out standing in the yard.
    I'd could brave a structure fire....
    The public would admire...
    If you only had the nerve"
    Now that, is FUNNY.

    Untrue, but damn funny.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  2. #177
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Let me ask you a question. You say you have these career guys that volly on your VFD, why can't they enter these structure fires with your less experienced guys and help them get experience?
    If NOTHING else in your post get's answered by LA, I want this point addressed.

    LA, you claim to have these career members. You claim to have volunteers with limited experience... Other than your personal reasons of having to feel superior to everyone else on the fire ground, WHY aren't these career guys taking the inexperienced volunteers in? Why? Isn't, ya know, actually fighting fire, with more experienced guys offering guidance, in fact the best way to gain that experience you claim your members don't have?
    RyanK63 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. #178
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    So once again, you find value in FF1 Certification, as long as someone else pays for it. But not enough value to make it an inhouse option at your volly FD.

    Really? Did you happen to read that two of our members are in the process of taking the LSU on-line FFI. That costs about $150 person. The one that just tested and passed also took the on-line class, at $150.

    We would also send them to class if they wanted.

    We simply don''t have enough members to make it efficient from a time standpoint to teach it in-house. I would be more than happy to do it if there were 4 or 5 that were willing to take it on nights other than scheduled training, which we need for operational, not certification-targeted
    training.

    So thanks to someone else paying for it your volly FD gets the benefit of it. Nice...real nice. Keep on keeping those vollies down because the last thing you want is them educated. It would make you seem less the expert you like to play that you are.

    Again, more than happy to pay for it if they want it to take it on-line. more than happy to pay for them to take a class if it's not on a training night. Even more than happy to teach it on non-training nights if I could get 3 -5 to make a commitment to it. Bottom line is there simply isn't enough value in FFI for rookies to teach it on a training night where we need to focus on operational, not certification, training.


    Yepper...get them certified to investigate the fires you don't want them to fight. makes sense to you I suppose.

    Ya, that's right. I have stated so many times that I don't want them fighting fires.

    Psssstt .. Even operating defensive from the get go is still fighting fires.



    WOW! I am impressed...if you only saw value in it maybe more would be interested in becoming FF1.

    Funny thing I tell them it has value which is dependent on how much a department would use it. That's why we pay for the classes as we see it has value AFTER they have completed a department specific rookie class.


    Let me ask you a question. You say you have these career guys that volly on your VFD, why can't they enter these structure fires with your less experienced guys and help them get experience? Because frankly, your way of keeping the rookies out NEVER gets them any experience. You see in order to get experience you actually have to do something besides stand out in the front yard.

    All of our career members are our officers ... which is why I stated that "unless there is an officer available to make entry with the less experienced members".

    I refuse to view a structure fire as a training experience unless the structure is still stable and fire is manageable enough to fulfill a training role, and there is enough experienced members on-scene to provide enough supervision to have a fairly safe environment. When both of those are present, yes, the newer members can make entry to get experience.


    No it's crying. Because one minute out of one side of yur mouth you don't have enough experienced interior firefighters and in the next minute out of the other side you are yapping about an advanced skills Fire Investigation Task Force with all of these FF1 trained firefighters. So if you have all of these FF1's let them do what they trained to do and fight fire. Stop crying about manpower shortages and start doing the job.

    Only takes one member from each department to develop an Arson Investigation task Force. In the case of my VFD, we'll provide 2 as my Captain is already an FI. A parish our size, excluding the small city, we could easily have an effective team with 6-8 Investigators (4 on each end of the parish).

    I'm not crying about my interior manpower. What we have is par for the course in the rural areas of LA. In fact, it's actually better than some. We provide what protection we can, which means inconsistent and marginal interior capabilities, but that is the hand that we have been dealt. While responding I plan defensive, and if it happens to be a call where we get enough interior qualified folks, or MA arrives quickly, and fire conditions that allow entry, I MAY switch gears to offensive or transitional on arrival.



    I wouldn't expect you to lose sleep over anything since you have repeated proven what a callous, cold blooded, heartless, son of a bitch you are. When you can say something as cold and calculating as I can write off victims and not lose one second of sleep over it you are beyond redemption.

    You call it writing off. I call it simply realizing what we are capable of of. We deal with the hand we have been dealt, and I fully recognize that response times, travel times and manpower tie one hand behind our back before we start. Those are things that we cannot change. People in this area generally choose where they live and many have chosen to move out of the city to our rural area to escape taxes or own more land, and with that comes a lower level of police and fire protection. I will not allow my members to get hurt operating a fire because somebody has made a choice. Yes, we want to help in thier time of need, but after the fire is over the wife and kids are counting on Dad still bringing a full paycheck home.

    I don't have time to worry about things that i have no power to change.


    That is my primary concern.

    if you want to call that writing off victims, so be it.



    Well ya see skippy, most people look at training people to put the fire out being a wee bit more important than sifting through the smoldering remains of yet another house you refused to go interior on looking for the cause. But hey, you have proven fire fighting convention and norms mean nothing to you.

    And so do we.

    What does having members who already have FFI, and in most cases FFII, and generally several years of experience and follow-up training (and sometimes other certs like Instructor and Officer) and forming a Fire Investigation team have to do with not training new members?

    Of course, you are also assuming that members who are not specifically being trained to pass FFI/FFII like trick monkeys aren't being adequately trained either.

    After all, we all know that unless they have that nice piece of paper they aren't real firefighters.



    I have no idea how training new members has any connection to taking trained experienced members for fire investigation.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  4. #179
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    So once again, you find value in FF1 Certification, as long as someone else pays for it. But not enough value to make it an inhouse option at your volly FD.

    Really? Did you happen to read that two of our members are in the process of taking the LSU on-line FFI. That costs about $150 person. The one that just tested and passed also took the on-line class, at $150.

    We would also send them to class if they wanted.

    We simply don''t have enough members to make it efficient from a time standpoint to teach it in-house. I would be more than happy to do it if there were 4 or 5 that were willing to take it on nights other than scheduled training, which we need for operational, not certification-targeted
    training.

    So thanks to someone else paying for it your volly FD gets the benefit of it. Nice...real nice. Keep on keeping those vollies down because the last thing you want is them educated. It would make you seem less the expert you like to play that you are.

    Again, more than happy to pay for it if they want it to take it on-line. more than happy to pay for them to take a class if it's not on a training night. Even more than happy to teach it on non-training nights if I could get 3 -5 to make a commitment to it. Bottom line is there simply isn't enough value in FFI for rookies to teach it on a training night where we need to focus on operational, not certification, training.


    Yepper...get them certified to investigate the fires you don't want them to fight. makes sense to you I suppose.

    Ya, that's right. I have stated so many times that I don't want them fighting fires.

    Psssstt .. Even operating defensive from the get go is still fighting fires.



    WOW! I am impressed...if you only saw value in it maybe more would be interested in becoming FF1.

    Funny thing I tell them it has value which is dependent on how much a department would use it. That's why we pay for the classes as we see it has value AFTER they have completed a department specific rookie class.


    Let me ask you a question. You say you have these career guys that volly on your VFD, why can't they enter these structure fires with your less experienced guys and help them get experience? Because frankly, your way of keeping the rookies out NEVER gets them any experience. You see in order to get experience you actually have to do something besides stand out in the front yard.

    All of our career members are our officers ... which is why I stated that "unless there is an officer available to make entry with the less experienced members".

    I refuse to view a structure fire as a training experience unless the structure is still stable and fire is manageable enough to fulfill a training role, and there is enough experienced members on-scene to provide enough supervision to have a fairly safe environment. When both of those are present, yes, the newer members can make entry to get experience.


    No it's crying. Because one minute out of one side of yur mouth you don't have enough experienced interior firefighters and in the next minute out of the other side you are yapping about an advanced skills Fire Investigation Task Force with all of these FF1 trained firefighters. So if you have all of these FF1's let them do what they trained to do and fight fire. Stop crying about manpower shortages and start doing the job.

    Only takes one member from each department to develop an Arson Investigation task Force. In the case of my VFD, we'll provide 2 as my Captain is already an FI. A parish our size, excluding the small city, we could easily have an effective team with 6-8 Investigators (4 on each end of the parish).

    I'm not crying about my interior manpower. What we have is par for the course in the rural areas of LA. In fact, it's actually better than some. We provide what protection we can, which means inconsistent and marginal interior capabilities, but that is the hand that we have been dealt. While responding I plan defensive, and if it happens to be a call where we get enough interior qualified folks, or MA arrives quickly, and fire conditions that allow entry, I MAY switch gears to offensive or transitional on arrival.



    I wouldn't expect you to lose sleep over anything since you have repeated proven what a callous, cold blooded, heartless, son of a bitch you are. When you can say something as cold and calculating as I can write off victims and not lose one second of sleep over it you are beyond redemption.

    You call it writing off. I call it simply realizing what we are capable of of. We deal with the hand we have been dealt, and I fully recognize that response times, travel times and manpower tie one hand behind our back before we start. Those are things that we cannot change. People in this area generally choose where they live and many have chosen to move out of the city to our rural area to escape taxes or own more land, and with that comes a lower level of police and fire protection. I will not allow my members to get hurt operating a fire because somebody has made a choice. Yes, we want to help in thier time of need, but after the fire is over the wife and kids are counting on Dad still bringing a full paycheck home.

    I don't have time to worry about things that i have no power to change.


    That is my primary concern.

    if you want to call that writing off victims, so be it.



    Well ya see skippy, most people look at training people to put the fire out being a wee bit more important than sifting through the smoldering remains of yet another house you refused to go interior on looking for the cause. But hey, you have proven fire fighting convention and norms mean nothing to you.

    And so do we.

    What does having members who already have FFI, and in most cases FFII, and generally several years of experience and follow-up training (and sometimes other certs like Instructor and Officer) and forming a Fire Investigation team have to do with not training new members?

    Of course, you are also assuming that members who are not specifically being trained to pass FFI/FFII like trick monkeys aren't being adequately trained either.

    After all, we all know that unless they have that nice piece of paper they aren't real firefighters.



    I have no idea how training new members has any connection to taking trained experienced members for fire investigation.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  5. #180
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    If NOTHING else in your post get's answered by LA, I want this point addressed.

    LA, you claim to have these career members. You claim to have volunteers with limited experience... Other than your personal reasons of having to feel superior to everyone else on the fire ground, WHY aren't these career guys taking the inexperienced volunteers in? Why? Isn't, ya know, actually fighting fire, with more experienced guys offering guidance, in fact the best way to gain that experience you claim your members don't have?
    First of all, we do very few structural runs.

    Typical year for us we will do 1-2 structure fires in the district. There is a good chance that both of those, if we get 2, will be fully involved with no entry possible simply due to the travel times due to the size of our district (100 square miles).

    We may do 2-3 more mutual aid fires and most, if not all of them will be exterior only as well.

    So we go to very few fires where entry is even an option.

    Secondly, all of our career guys are our 4 officers. Typical fire will get one officer responding. At night, we may get two depending on what Shift is working (Chief is shift at Shreveport Fire Communications and Asst. Chief and Captain are on the same shift at neighboring city. I am basically unavailable weekdays except for large events and work Saturdays out of town.).

    If only one officer responds, he is obviously command and remains exterior per policy.

    If there is a second officer, or on very rare occasions, a third, the officer not functioning as IC can go in with newer members, unless we need them to oversee and exterior sector or need to place them in role of safety or operations due to the size of the incident.

    In a perfect world, we could have our experienced members fulfill those roles, but the problem is they are officers and may need to remain exterior to fulfill critical ICS/NIMS functions, especially given that typical response is 1-2.

    On my combo department we have 7-8 career members who volunteer, so along with the career firefighters, they do fulfill that function.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 05-11-2013 at 08:28 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  6. #181
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Come on Bobby...show some stones and post your reply to me.. I need a good laugh.
    Just decided that it wasn't worth it.

    Frankly I don't care who you would and would not be willing to work an incident with.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  7. #182
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    If only one officer responds, he is obviously command and remains exterior per policy.
    I would be adamantly opposed, and advocating for change, of this policy.

    With already limited manpower, how in the hell can your department justify committing, what you've said yourself is, a trained and experienced member to standing outside?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    In a perfect world, we could have our experienced members fulfill those roles, but the problem is they are officers and may need to remain exterior to fulfill critical ICS/NIMS functions, especially given that typical response is 1-2.
    So again, filling your vests is more important than putting out the fire.... Those are your words this time, not mine.
    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

  8. #183
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Just decided that it wasn't worth it.

    Frankly I don't care who you would and would not be willing to work an incident with.
    Here's a hint, it's not you.
    RyanK63 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

  9. #184
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    So LA,Let me get this straight.

    You don't have the money to train in live fire at a training facility and you don't get to do many, if any, acquired structure training burns, AND you don't want your less experienced guys to go interior at a structure fire...SO, where are they supposed to gain any experience at live fire firefighting skills?
    Chenzo and conrad427 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

  10. #185
    Forum Member
    RyanK63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fleetville, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Psssstt .. Even operating defensive from the get go is still fighting fires.
    I think this says it all right here.

    Name:  430414_398506630163452_100000123548928_1679873_137962965_n.jpg
Views: 92
Size:  22.6 KB
    FyredUp likes this.
    "If it was easy, someone else would of done it already." - Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    - Firefighter 1 / HAZMAT Ops / EMT-B

  11. #186
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    SO, where are they supposed to gain any experience at live fire firefighting skills?
    I'm beginning to think that they aren't supposed to, and that's all part of LA's agenda to murder the fire service as we know it.

    "Fill the vest, f**k the rest. The fire will go out eventually."
    "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

  12. #187
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RyanK63 View Post
    I think this says it all right here.

    Attachment 22873
    Where did you find that classified picture of LA's department in action?

    I'll bet you there's more visible fire outside than actually inside the building....
    RyanK63 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

  13. #188
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    So LA,Let me get this straight.

    You don't have the money to train in live fire at a training facility and you don't get to do many, if any, acquired structure training burns, AND you don't want your less experienced guys to go interior at a structure fire...SO, where are they supposed to gain any experience at live fire firefighting skills?
    That is the problem.

    Once every couple of years we will get a building and be ale to do burns, assuming that it is structurally sound enough.

    We are now are able to do burns at the LSU facility just down the road 3 times per year. Previously, you were not able to utilize your training nights doing burns at their facility, but that policy has just changed.

    Problem is for the other 99.5% of the rural departments who are no where near the LSU facility or nowhere near a burn building of any type that they can use, they don't have this option.

    We are also doing a burn at my combo departments facility this Thursday night. They have agreed to let us come twice a year at no charge. Much of that is because of my dual membership.

    Again, most rural VFDs are not within 50 or more miles of a burn facility.

    We also have had our training budget doubled for this upcoming year so we will be able to travel to training significantly more.

    I have no issues with my less experienced guys going interior at fires as long as there is an experienced member with them. The problem is that given many of our calls get a single officer responding, that often is not possible.

    We now are lucky enough to have some options that most rural VFDs will never have.

    It should increase our abilities, but training fire is still not even close to structural fire.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  14. #189
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    I would be adamantly opposed, and advocating for change, of this policy.

    With already limited manpower, how in the hell can your department justify committing, what you've said yourself is, a trained and experienced member to standing outside?

    My volunteer Chief is a strong believer that command needs to be outside of the structure. You will have to debate him to change that.

    I agree with him. Command cannot function inside the structure.

    That being said, he will allow command to function interior if absolutely needed in a viable rescue situation.




    So again, filling your vests is more important than putting out the fire.... Those are your words this time, not mine.
    I guess if you calling filling the role of Incident Command as a vest.

    I used to believe that command could function interior. I now believe that it is not the case.

    Command must have a view of the entire scene and structure. Command can not be in control if they are on a handline inside the structure.

    And yes, there are times, especially at commercial buildings where there needs to be a sector officer exterior on the rear during the initial operation. That is not "a vest". And there are situations where there absolutely needs to be a safety officer from the get-go. Again, that is not "a vest".

    That may mean waiting for another company or mutual aid to arrive before tarting interior operations. And that may mean the loss of the structure. But again, it is all about us coming home, and if a strong ICS needs to be set up initially using your first in officers, it's worth it.


    This is especially true with a very inexperienced department.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 05-11-2013 at 11:04 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  15. #190
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RyanK63 View Post
    I think this says it all right here.

    Attachment 22873
    And you have a problem with departments that may choose or are forced to operate primarily exterior?

    You don't think they are fireman?

    Ignorant.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  16. #191
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    I'm beginning to think that they aren't supposed to, and that's all part of LA's agenda to murder the fire service as we know it.

    "Fill the vest, f**k the rest. The fire will go out eventually."

    Damn, you figured me out.

    That's right ... You now know my evil plan.

    If you want your IC interior, fine, but it simply isn't, and never will be safe.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  17. #192
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Damn, you figured me out.

    That's right ... You now know my evil plan.

    If you want your IC interior, fine, but it simply isn't, and never will be safe.
    And you have never actually taken an Incident Command class or were just too damn stupid to understand the concept of "Working Command." Working command is a viable option for the FIRST ARRIVING OFFICER if they believe that tactically they can have a greater effect on the outcome of the incident by being actively involved in fireground work. Note that that says FIRST ARRIVING OFFICER. Generally the next arriving officer, or senior firefighter if there is no officer, takes command.

    Sorry that that doesn't fit into your surround and drown belief in command.
    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

  18. #193
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I guess if you calling filling the role of Incident Command as a vest.
    When you believe command can serve no function but to stand outside, observe, and give out orders, then yeah, it is filling a vest.

    I used to beleive that command could function interior. I now believe that it is not the case.
    So... you weren't always a dumb***** then?

    Command must have a view of the entire scene and structure. Command can not be in control if they are on a handline inside the structure.
    Disagree. It's been proven over and over again, day after day, that command can effectively function interior and still fullfill the role of command.

    And yes, there are times, especially at commercial buildings where there needs to be a sector officer exterior on the rear during the initial operation. That is not "a vest". And there are situations where there absolutely needs to be a safety officer from the get-go. Again, that is not "a vest".
    Little bit different when we're talking about commercial buildings. Pretty sure for the sake of this discussion, we're talking about residential fires. But nice diversionary tactic in an attempt to justify your position.
    This is especially true with a very inexperienced department.
    Blah blah blah, make some more excuses not to do your job.
    "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

  19. #194
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    And you have never actually taken an Incident Command class or were just too damn stupid to understand the concept of "Working Command." Working command is a viable option for the FIRST ARRIVING OFFICER if they believe that tactically they can have a greater effect on the outcome of the incident by being actively involved in fireground work. Note that that says FIRST ARRIVING OFFICER. Generally the next arriving officer, or senior firefighter if there is no officer, takes command.

    Sorry that that doesn't fit into your surround and drown belief in command.
    I have taken a whole range of IC/NIMS classes, and not only am I very familiar with the concept of "working command", but I have used it many times.

    That being said, the Chief is my boss, and the Chief does not want his IC inside the structure, so we do not use "working command" unless the IC must make entry to effect a rescue.

    Again, I have used it. And again, I until recently, had no issues, but given the changes in both fire behavior and building construction, I now believe that somebody operating interior cannot safely operate as the IC.

    We are the priority.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #195
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And you have a problem with departments that may choose or are forced to operate primarily exterior?

    You don't think they are fireman?

    Ignorant.
    When it appears as simple as going inside, poking some holes in the ceiling, and putting the fire out, yeah, I have a bit of a problem with departments that choose to operate exterior because they're quasi-wanna-be Pubed officer has convinced them that going interior is too scary and dangerous.

    I see three guys in that picture, and I'm gonna guess there's at least one (running the pump) if not two (IC based on the way you do things) more guys on scene with them. There's no fire coming out the windows, not even the highest window near the fire, there's no smoke angrily coming from any of the soffet or anything, not even the soffet that has some fire showing through it.

    Go inside, pull some ceiling, squirt some water, and go home. There's no need to conduct exterior operations on this house, even with only 4 or 5 guys.
    RyanK63 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

  21. #196
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Damn, you figured me out.
    Doesn't take much to see that you're a spineless coward.

    That's right ... You now know my evil plan.


    If you want your IC interior, fine, but it simply isn't, and never will be safe.
    Yeah... I disagree. Shocker, I know. There's no reason, ESPECIALLY on a fire like the picture above, that command can't be interior.
    "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

  22. #197
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I have taken a whole range of IC/NIMS classes, and not only am I very familiar with the concept of "working command", but I have used it many times.
    I don't believe you.

    That being said, the Chief is my boss, and the Chief does not want his IC inside the structure, so we do not use "working command" unless the IC must make entry to effect a rescue.
    As I said I would be working to change that. No reason that the initial officer can't conduct interior operations when property conservation is a viable option. No need to burn the whole house down

    Again, I have used it. And again, I until recently, had no issues, but given the changes in both fire behavior and building construction, I now believe that somebody operating interior cannot safely operate as the IC.
    Again, I don't believe you. And Again, more excuses.

    We are the priority.
    But that doesn't mean that we have to stand in the yard. Why do you put yourself above the public who calls us for HELP?
    "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

  23. #198
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    When you believe command can serve no function but to stand outside, observe, and give out orders, then yeah, it is filling a vest.

    You're right. There's really no need to observe changing smoke, fire and structural conditions. There's no need to be able to assign multiple apparatus operating on different frequencies, talk to dispatch and communicate with EMS on multiple radio frequencies. There's no need to be in a position to deal with water supply issues.

    You're right. Standing outside is just a vest.


    I used to beleive that command could function interior. I now believe that it is not the case.
    So... you weren't always a dumb***** then?

    I also used to believe that most fires should be attacked interior. I also used to believe that the public was the priority. I used to believe that we had to drive fast and bust through intersections to get there quickly. I have evolved.


    Disagree. It's been proven over and over again, day after day, that command can effectively function interior and still fullfill the role of command.

    And there have also been plenty of LODD and injury reports where command not functioning outside the structure but instead going interior has been identified either as a major factor or as a contributing factor in the LODD.

    Again, if you want to believe that if things go bad you can manage the problem from a handline inside the structure, have at it. I would suspect that many folks would not agree with you.


    And yes, there are times, especially at commercial buildings where there needs to be a sector officer exterior on the rear during the initial operation. That is not "a vest". And there are situations where there absolutely needs to be a safety officer from the get-go. Again, that is not "a vest".
    Little bit different when we're talking about commercial buildings. Pretty sure for the sake of this discussion, we're talking about residential fires. But nice diversionary tactic in an attempt to justify your position.

    So you don't agree that there are times that you need 2 command officers outside of a residential structure from the get-go? I disagree. They may be infrequent, but they happen.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  24. #199
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    When it appears as simple as going inside, poking some holes in the ceiling, and putting the fire out, yeah, I have a bit of a problem with departments that choose to operate exterior because they're quasi-wanna-be Pubed officer has convinced them that going interior is too scary and dangerous.

    I see three guys in that picture, and I'm gonna guess there's at least one (running the pump) if not two (IC based on the way you do things) more guys on scene with them. There's no fire coming out the windows, not even the highest window near the fire, there's no smoke angrily coming from any of the soffet or anything, not even the soffet that has some fire showing through it.

    Go inside, pull some ceiling, squirt some water, and go home. There's no need to conduct exterior operations on this house, even with only 4 or 5 guys.

    And that is your opinion.

    There are many FDs out there, that for whatever reasons, have decided that they do want to conduct interior operations the majority of the time. That is their decision. And as much as you don't want to hear it... That is their right to decide how they will conduct operations.

    And that decision is just as valid as your department's decision to function as a primarily interior operation.

    I'm sorry that seems to bother you that much, but get over it. It's their call.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  25. #200
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    If you want your IC interior, fine, but it simply isn't, and never will be safe.
    We had interior commands all the time. Everyone went home.
    Chenzo likes 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. e-one's essay contest
    By fireflymedic in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2009, 02:50 PM
  2. E-One's new chassis!
    By micke7 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 05-01-2007, 10:07 AM
  3. This one's for you, Bou!!!
    By Adze39 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-08-2004, 06:35 AM
  4. Really Big Brass One's!!!!
    By Jim917 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-17-2003, 04:52 PM
  5. y no one's been to my site?
    By TFD-JC06 in forum Meet and Greet
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-27-2002, 11:34 AM

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register