Like Tree379Likes

Thread: Lt. Ray hits another home run!

  1. #451
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,970

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Part of the problem is that we aren't necessarily talking the same language. Case in point, your statement quoted above:

    You are absolutely correct that less resources means that you can't do as much, or at least not as efficiently, as if you had more resources. What constitutes a "resource"? From a fire service perspective, resources would typically be apparatus, equipment and personnel. Let's look at what you typically describe when you talk about not having "adequate resources" for interior operations from that perspective. You have the apparatus, I assume it has the equipment on it and you have personnel (3-4 of what you call firefighters). So, you essentially have adequate "resources" to conduct a fire attack since 3-4 FFs engine companies successfully initiate fire attack on a daily basis across this nation. The obvious problem to most people would be that in your situation, you don't have the "right" "resources".

    No disagreement.

    Though I will debate that even 4 fully trained members - 3 when you remove the pump operator - is adequate for safe interior attack in many situations.
    Yes, there will be situations in which initiating an interior attack may not be prudent with that number of Firefighters. However, that's no reason to not initiate the attack on the many other situations in which the fire attack can be made in a reasonably safe fashion with that staffing.

    That's one of your problems on here. You seem to see everything in an all or nothing fashion and the world has a lot of grey in it.

    This is exactly the situation that you've repeatedly chosen to not acknowledge as being an "issue" when discussing the merits of using "exterior" firefighters and drivers.

    I have stated many times that we may not have enough interior members.
    Yes, but you've repeatedly taken the position that this isn't an "issue" of concern for you, yet it appears to be an actual issue for your VFD.

    The support and drivers - exterior members - have no affect on the number of interior members available, so they really have zero relevance in this discussion.
    I don't disagree that their presence has no impact on the number of interior members available, but that's not what I'm discussing. I'm not even saying that they don't have any operational value on the scene or that you shouldn't use them.


    I work in a department with an on-duty response of 5-7 FFs and backup in the 10-15 minutes time frame. The large city FD nearby typically has at least 22 FFs on the initial response, depending on the occupancy type. I think we qualify for the "less resources" category.

    They don't expect us to be able to accomplish as much as they can initially. We know we can't accomplish as much as they can initially or at least not as "safely", so we don't try to, but we don't use that as an excuse to not do our job.

    That's not an excuse. that's understanding that you simply may not be able to operate aggressivly, and yes, accept the loss of lives or the structure because the resources are inadequate.
    Did I say anything about making excuses or not operating "aggressively"? No, I stated that we understand that our staffing level comes with limitations to what we can reasonably accomplish compared to a department with 3-4 times the staffing on the initial response. We still operate "aggressively" when appropriate and take a more cautious approach when warranted.

    Accepting defeat is certainly a part of our job.
    Yes, sometimes it is necessary to "accept defeat", but that should not be our default mode as we leave the station. "Defeat" should only be accepted after we have assessed the situation at hand and determined that that is the appropriate course.

    My department had a major fire early in the morning in a 3-story, 30 unit building in a public housing complex about 5 years ago. The fire started in an apartment on the second floor at the furthest point from where we have to access it. There was a delay in reporting the fire and when our on-duty crew of 5 arrived, the fire had already extended to the third floor and roof/attic space.

    Given the time of day, this building was probably pretty close to full occupancy. The on-duty crew with a little help from some of our police and EMS personnel where able to facilitate the rescue of around 50 people from this building. Some were lead out, some dragged/carried out, some via ladders. In the end, a couple of older people went to the hospital to get checked out after taking some smoke and the most serious injury at the incident was a sprained ankle to a mutual aid firefighter who stepped in a hidden hole in the grass around the building.

    Sure, they could've "accepted defeat" given a building full of occupants, a significant amount of fire on two floors and only 5 of them, but that would've surely meant multiple fatalities that morning. Instead, they accepted the challenge presented to them, got to work and had a very, very favorable outcome for the situation.


    We prioritize the tasks with safety in mind and get to work while additional resources are on the way. We tend to be pretty successful with this approach and have very few injuries of any significance each year.

    What does all this mean since we are both responding initially with apparatus, equipment and a small number of people called firefighters, yet experience different results once on scene? As stated above, the obvious problem is that you don't have the "right" resources for the job at hand and that's why they are not "adequate".

    Which I have admitted too.
    Yes, but you also like to use the shortcomings of your resources to assert that the rest of us are acting improperly.


    So, it isn't so much that we need to realize that less resources means less ability and less risk taking as it is the need for you to realize (or at least acknowledge) that the quality of the firefighters on hand has far more of a impact on the overall safety, ability to do "the job" and the outcome of an incident than the quantity of "firefighters" that are on hand.


    ... And how many times have I stated that part of the issue is training and experience.
    Yes, but that's only part of the issue.


    Right, because expecting an organization calling itself a Fire Department to be able to perform a victim search/rescue supported by interior fire attack is an oh so "high and mighty" standard.

    It depends on how you wish to define the expectations of a fire department.
    As I've said repeatedly, it's not my definition or expectations. It's the core function of a Fire Department and what the public expects if their loved one is trapped in a burning building.

  2. #452
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And you continue to be an idiot.
    Ha ha ha. That means so much to me coming from you.

    Mere words are not adequate to describe it.

    Given you are a pitiful excuse for anyone claiming to be a firefighter, I take your comment as a compliment. You are everything I strove to avoid becoming.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #453
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireMedic049 View Post
    Yes, there will be situations in which initiating an interior attack may not be prudent with that number of Firefighters. However, that's no reason to not initiate the attack on the many other situations in which the fire attack can be made in a reasonably safe fashion with that staffing.

    And those situations depend on the experience and training of the members as well as the abilities of the IC.

    By and large, our interior members are inexperienced, which greatly limits those situations.

    And I have no issues admitting it.


    That's one of your problems on here. You seem to see everything in an all or nothing fashion and the world has a lot of grey in it.

    You see more grey than I do.

    I much prefer a very black and white "shall" and "shall not" world.


    Yes, but you've repeatedly taken the position that this isn't an "issue" of concern for you, yet it appears to be an actual issue for your VFD.

    Yes, it's an issue, but it's a long-term issue.

    The fact is our manpower issue is not going to be solved tomorrow, so for at least the next year, these are the conditions we will be operating under, and like it or not, my tactics for the short-term at least will be driven by the resources at hand.


    I don't disagree that their presence has no impact on the number of interior members available, but that's not what I'm discussing. I'm not even saying that they don't have any operational value on the scene or that you shouldn't use them.

    It isn't even an issue.



    Did I say anything about making excuses or not operating "aggressively"? No, I stated that we understand that our staffing level comes with limitations to what we can reasonably accomplish compared to a department with 3-4 times the staffing on the initial response. We still operate "aggressively" when appropriate and take a more cautious approach when warranted.

    [COLOR="#FF0000"]And so do we...... Except those situations are very, very few and very, very far between for us.

    As I have stated if I ever encounter a (statistically unlikely) rescue situation as IC, I will take far greater risks.However, even in that situation the risks will still have to be supported by reasonable levels of training and experience.


    early in the morning in a 3-story, 30 unit building in a public housing complex about 5 years ago. The fire started in an apartment on the second floor at the furthest point from where we have to access it. There was a delay in reporting the fire and when our on-duty crew of 5 arrived, the fire had already extended to the third floor and roof/attic space.

    Given the time of day, this building was probably pretty close to full occupancy. The on-duty crew with a little help from some of our police and EMS personnel where able to facilitate the rescue of around 50 people from this building. Some were lead out, some dragged/carried out, some via ladders. In the end, a couple of older people went to the hospital to get checked out after taking some smoke and the most serious injury at the incident was a sprained ankle to a mutual aid firefighter who stepped in a hidden hole in the grass around the building.

    Sure, they could've "accepted defeat" given a building full of occupants, a significant amount of fire on two floors and only 5 of them, but that would've surely meant multiple fatalities that morning. Instead, they accepted the challenge presented to them, got to work and had a very, very favorable outcome for the situation.

    And in a similar situation we would do what resources, training and experience allow.

    Yes, but you also like to use the shortcomings of your resources to assert that the rest of us are acting improperly.

    Yes, I feel the fire service as a whole needs to reassess risk v. benefit.


    As I've said repeatedly, it's not my definition or expectations. It's the core function of a Fire Department and what the public expects if their loved one is trapped in a burning building.
    It's the core function as defined by you.

    Core functions are defined at the department level by the department.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  4. #454
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    It's the core function as defined by you.

    Core functions are defined at the department level by the department.
    Ha ha ha. That is why a six year old boy and an Australian dog would be better for your citizens than you.

    They do the job. Unlike you who finds ways to avoid it.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  5. #455
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    It's the core function as defined by you.

    Core functions are defined at the department level by the department.
    This is the most meaningless, idiotic, without any support statement you have ever made here, and believe me you have made so many it is impossible to count them all.

    If you ask ANYONE, firefighter, citizen, board member, ANYONE, they will tell you the job of the fire department is to put out fires and save lives. Just because you find yourself in a pathetic situation it doesn't allow you to create a paradigm shift to suit your needs.
    FireMedic049 likes 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

  6. #456
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    971

    Default

    A lot of talk here about what the citizens deserve, and what they expect, and what the fire service owes them should their house be on fire. That's all well and good, but what's their role in this? If they are not willing to pay for a career department, and they're not involved enough to elect public officials who will give them what they need, and if they're unwilling to volunteer themselves, then what kind of fire protection can they really expect to get? Not very good, that's what. And isn't that what they then deserve?
    Some say that the public needs to be told that their fire protection is insufficient. Can't they figure that out when every structure that has a fire burns to the ground? A huge part of the problem is that most people think they will never have a house fire. That's something that happens to other people. They don't really believe that they'll ever be standing outside watching their house burn, possibly while family members are still inside.
    If a department routinely arrives after a house is fully involved, then they need more apparatus in more locations. They will need better staffing so those apparatus can respond. Those who staff them will need to be trained. This all requires funding and people to volunteer as firefighters, or even more funding to pay for career firefighters.
    If a guy like LAFE shows up at the scene of a well involved house fire with some real burn time and finds one geriatric driver with an O2 bottle, one 19 year old with a hard-on for hydrant hook-up and one or two interior trained firefighters, what can he really expect to accomplish? I'm not giving a free pass here but the reality is that they will be unable to perform a real agressive interior push. They would have to try a transitional attack and then try a cautious move toward the seat of the fire. Only after knocking down the main body of fire could a search begin. I suppose they could try a one firefighter line advance, but how effective/efficient will that be? This would have to be done not only without a proper RIT in place, but with no capable backup whatsoever. God forbid something goes wrong and they can't self-extricate. They are basically dead at this point. Mutual aid would only show up to recover their bodies. Not to mention the possible structural deficiencies of a building with advanced burn time. You can forget about proper ventilation and VES entirely.
    I don't agree with some of the ultra conservative, super safety conscious posts that I've seen from LAFE, but that doesn't make him ENTIRELY wrong concerning his department's operations. The truth is that there are many departments with similar staffing challenges who make agressive decisions on the fireground. Just because it worked out for them last time doesn't mean it will work out the next time. Luck is not a legitimate factor in size-up and SHOULD NOT be relied upon. Things like burn time, victim survivability profiles and available resources ARE legitimate parts of size-up and MUST be relied upon.
    Last edited by captnjak; 07-07-2013 at 01:06 PM.

  7. #457
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,085

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    This is the most meaningless, idiotic, without any support statement you have ever made here, and believe me you have made so many it is impossible to count them all.

    If you ask ANYONE, firefighter, citizen, board member, ANYONE, they will tell you the job of the fire department is to put out fires and save lives. Just because you find yourself in a pathetic situation it doesn't allow you to create a paradigm shift to suit your needs.
    Reminds me of my 2-1/2 year old grand son when we play shoot em up games. When he is not getting the best of it, he changes the rules. Fine for kids games, not so good for public safety.
    ?

  8. #458
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    A lot of talk here about what the citizens deserve, and what they expect, and what the fire service owes them should their house be on fire. That's all well and good, but what's their role in this? If they are not willing to pay for a career department, and they're not involved enough to elect public officials who will give them what they need, and if they're unwilling to volunteer themselves, then what kind of fire protection can they really expect to get? Not very good, that's what. And isn't that what they then deserve?
    Awesome. One of the many reasons I live in a place that has professionals.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #459
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Awesome. One of the many reasons I live in a place that has professionals.
    I live in a place that has professionals too. They just don't get paid.

    We have minimum standards of training and we will boot your worthless azz off the FD if you don't meet them. If you don't ever show up for calls we will get rid of you. We don't care what your skill set is, if you aren't available what good are you?

    Please, don't paint all volunteer/POC FDs with the same brush that you paint LA's. Believe me there are several VFDs I have taught in that are every bit as professional as some paid FDs I have been in.
    conrad427 likes 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. #460
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    971

    Default

    Just to clarify: My post had nothing to do with career vs vollie.

    I've worked with so-called professionals who were worse than useless.

  11. #461
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    A lot of talk here about what the citizens deserve, and what they expect, and what the fire service owes them should their house be on fire. That's all well and good, but what's their role in this? If they are not willing to pay for a career department, and they're not involved enough to elect public officials who will give them what they need, and if they're unwilling to volunteer themselves, then what kind of fire protection can they really expect to get? Not very good, that's what. And isn't that what they then deserve?

    Some say that the public needs to be told that their fire protection is insufficient. Can't they figure that out when every structure that has a fire burns to the ground? A huge part of the problem is that most people think they will never have a house fire. That's something that happens to other people. They don't really believe that they'll ever be standing outside watching their house burn, possibly while family members are still inside.

    I still firmly believe that in the situation LA's vfd is in the chief needs to hold a public meeting, invite the board and citizens to attend, and publicly announce that due to inadequate staffing they can no longer guarantee any interior firefighting or rescue attempts will be made. He can also make a plea at that point for more citizens members or paid personnel and let the board and citizens decide what they want. They have 5 choices: 1) Continue in as is, 2) Hire some paid personnel, 3) Contract out fire protection to the AMA FD, it would seem $160K and the use of current vfd apparatus would be quite an incentive, 4) More community members could step up and volunteer, 5) Have no fire protection at all. But with the public hearing at least they are informed and they decide.

    If a department routinely arrives after a house is fully involved, then they need more apparatus in more locations. They will need better staffing so those apparatus can respond. Those who staff them will need to be trained. This all requires funding and people to volunteer as firefighters, or even more funding to pay for career firefighters.

    Couldn't the same be said for many city FDs that seem to consistently burn down large buildings...

    If a guy like LAFE shows up at the scene of a well involved house fire with some real burn time and finds one geriatric driver with an O2 bottle, one 19 year old with a hard-on for hydrant hook-up and one or two interior trained firefighters, what can he really expect to accomplish? I'm not giving a free pass here but the reality is that they will be unable to perform a real agressive interior push. They would have to try a transitional attack and then try a cautious move toward the seat of the fire. Only after knocking down the main body of fire could a search begin. I suppose they could try a one firefighter line advance, but how effective/efficient will that be? This would have to be done not only without a proper RIT in place, but with no capable backup whatsoever. God forbid something goes wrong and they can't self-extricate. They are basically dead at this point. Mutual aid would only show up to recover their bodies. Not to mention the possible structural deficiencies of a building with advanced burn time. You can forget about proper ventilation and VES entirely.

    AGAIN, inform the citizens and the board and if they make no changes then become a fight fire through the windows department with the citizens apparent blessing.

    I don't agree with some of the ultra conservative, super safety conscious posts that I've seen from LAFE, but that doesn't make him ENTIRELY wrong concerning his department's operations. The truth is that there are many departments with similar staffing challenges who make agressive decisions on the fireground. Just because it worked out for them last time doesn't mean it will work out the next time. Luck is not a legitimate factor in size-up and SHOULD NOT be relied upon. Things like burn time, victim survivability profiles and available resources ARE legitimate parts of size-up and MUST be relied upon.

    No one has said be suicidal in their desire to get inside to fight fire. In Chenzo's case he did a 360, looked at the situation and decided he could make a push and save the house, safely, with the crew on hand. If he had looked at it and said NO, I need to wait for more resources I would agree with that decision. But that is NOT at all the same as always starting defensive or transitional and waiting for the AMA FD to do your interior firefighting. AND it is most certainly not the same as immediately writing off a building before even arriving on scene due to construction type. Not size or location of the fire, construction type. Seriously, a trash can fire in the bathroom would result in total loss of the structure in that scenario.
    Excuses for inaction, no realistic plan to change the situation, and saying it will likely never change, are all recipes for disaster.
    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

  12. #462
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    971

    Default

    A lot of good points.

    A few clarifications:
    City departments are most likely arriving quicker and experiencing less total losses than rural counterparts.
    Chezno's case was not what I described (well involved fire with good burn time). It was an exterior siding fire with extension to attic. Not belittling him or his fire but it's not the same thing.
    I don't endorse ALWAYS starting defensive or transitional either. Again, I was referring to a well involved fire with good burn time, which is apparently what LAFE finds on arrival at EVERY incident he responds to.

  13. #463
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    This is the most meaningless, idiotic, without any support statement you have ever made here, and believe me you have made so many it is impossible to count them all.

    If you ask ANYONE, firefighter, citizen, board member, ANYONE, they will tell you the job of the fire department is to put out fires and save lives. Just because you find yourself in a pathetic situation it doesn't allow you to create a paradigm shift to suit your needs.
    No disagreement that a core function of the fire department is to put out fires, and all fire departments do that.

    It just varies as to what stage in the fire that occurs.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  14. #464
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Excuses for inaction, no realistic plan to change the situation, and saying it will likely never change, are all recipes for disaster.

    You call safe operating procedures designed to have a minimum staffing level before interior operations are started excuses.

    I call it procedures for ensuring safe operations for the members and placing them clearly as the priority.

    As far as plans to change the situation ....

    Formalized procedures and training, and dedicated rapid deployment handlines for
    exterior/transitional operations.

    Increased recruitment through the use of newspaper articles and mailers. To this date,
    those efforts have brought in 4 new members. Unfortunately one was recently
    deployed overseas and one had issues within the department. But we still have 2
    exterior members functioning within the department.

    AMA on all structural incidents.

    Increased training budget.

    Increased live burn training and increased outside training.

    Development of a training area beginning with live car burn props, roof/ventilation prop
    and live burn pits.

    I never stated that it would never change, but there is certainly that possibility. The reality is though that even if we do see a change in terms of recruitment, it will be a while before they are up and functioning.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  15. #465
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    No disagreement that a core function of the fire department is to put out fires, and all fire departments do that.

    It just varies as to what stage in the fire that occurs.
    Yes, puttingout fires is a core function of a FIRE DEPARTMENT. As well as saving lives, the part I see you conveneintly ignored.

    The point is really LA, if you believe that the majority of the time you will have no positive impact then why exist? You have already stated repeatedly that most houses burn down and if people don't save themselves they will die. So what is the community getting for heir $160K besides a sham of a fire department with nice equipment there is no one trained to use or available to use?

    You so desperately need others to buy into your nonsense so you can feel validated, sorry it won't happen here and if you told the truth it wouldn't happen there either.
    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. #466
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Excuses for inaction, no realistic plan to change the situation, and saying it will likely never change, are all recipes for disaster.

    You call safe operating procedures designed to have a minimum staffing level before interior operations are started excuses.

    Your minimum staffing requirements, which you admit you can't meet, eliminate any interior actions until the 4 person AMA FD engine arrives. So yes, you have rationalized an excuse for inaction when the rest of the country begins actions, when appropriate, after size-up.

    I call it procedures for ensuring safe operations for the members and placing them clearly as the priority.

    Blah Blah Blah...Your continued parroting of this would be admirable if it wasn't an excuse for doing nothing meaningful until the PAID CAREER PROFESSIONAL TRAINED AMA FD EGINE ARRIVED and did what you won't do.

    As far as plans to change the situation ....

    Formalized procedures and training, and dedicated rapid deployment handlines for
    exterior/transitional operations.

    So nothing has changed. Still outside with your exterior members while gramma burns alive inside.

    Increased recruitment through the use of newspaper articles and mailers. To this date,
    those efforts have brought in 4 new members. Unfortunately one was recently
    deployed overseas and one had issues within the department. But we still have 2
    exterior members functioning within the department.

    One had issues? You mean the guy that was previously trained and probably told you what a farse you were? Two more exterior guys? So still nothing has changed.

    AMA on all structural incidents.

    Because someone has to do what your FD can't and won't. Actually go inside and put the fire out.

    Increased training budget.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    Increased live burn training and increased outside training.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    Development of a training area beginning with live car burn props, roof/ventilation prop
    and live burn pits.

    Will that finally allow people to go inside? If not, why spend the money?

    I never stated that it would never change, but there is certainly that possibility. The reality is though that even if we do see a change in terms of recruitment, it will be a while before they are up and functioning.

    Yes, YOU did. You have said repeatedly due to the culture in that area your situation likely will never change.
    Just more of the same La, more of the same.
    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

  17. #467
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Yes, puttingout fires is a core function of a FIRE DEPARTMENT. As well as saving lives, the part I see you conveneintly ignored.

    The point is really LA, if you believe that the majority of the time you will have no positive impact then why exist? You have already stated repeatedly that most houses burn down and if people don't save themselves they will die. So what is the community getting for heir $160K besides a sham of a fire department with nice equipment there is no one trained to use or available to use?

    You so desperately need others to buy into your nonsense so you can feel validated, sorry it won't happen here and if you told the truth it wouldn't happen there either.
    I have no need to feel validated.

    I'm proud of what my VFD does with the manpower and resources available. And quite frankly, we have a significantly better track record than most of the other VFDs in the parish. Or the neighboring parishes.

    And I have no problems in admitting part of that lies in the fact that we have the small city AMA department to our east and my combination department to our west.

    The community has no issues in supporting us as evidenced by the consistent renewal of the fire district milage.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  18. #468
    Forum Member
    ToDaRoof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    174

    Default

    It's not a "significantly better track record" if you're getting bailed out every time... Your community should just give the money to the paid guys since they're doing your work for you.

  19. #469
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Your minimum staffing requirements, which you admit you can't meet, eliminate any interior actions until the 4 person AMA FD engine arrives. So yes, you have rationalized an excuse for inaction when the rest of the country begins actions, when appropriate, after size-up.

    Had a car fire yesterday.

    Myself as the IC, 4 interior members including a former captain and a driver.

    Had it been a structure we would have had 2 interior teams.

    As far as what the rest of the country does, I really don't give a damn. You want to call 2 interior members, with no backup team and a driver exterior safe, have at it. But to me, that's a recipe for disaster should anything happen to that interior crew.

    And one day, it will.



    Blah Blah Blah...Your continued parroting of this would be admirable if it wasn't an excuse for doing nothing meaningful until the PAID CAREER PROFESSIONAL TRAINED AMA FD EGINE ARRIVED and did what you won't do.

    You are really hung up on the fact that most of time our interior ops are based on the use of the AMA engine, aren't you?



    As far as plans to change the situation ....

    Formalized procedures and training, and dedicated rapid deployment handlines for
    exterior/transitional operations.

    So nothing has changed. Still outside with your exterior members while gramma burns alive inside.

    And people die in fires. It happens. Get over it.

    Increased recruitment through the use of newspaper articles and mailers. To this date,
    those efforts have brought in 4 new members. Unfortunately one was recently
    deployed overseas and one had issues within the department. But we still have 2
    exterior members functioning within the department.

    One had issues? You mean the guy that was previously trained and probably told you what a farse you were? Two more exterior guys? So still nothing has changed.

    The guy with one month of experience as a volunteer at the neighboring combo department? He was let go by them as well a couple of weeks later for the same issue.


    AMA on all structural incidents.

    Because someone has to do what your FD can't and won't. Actually go inside and put the fire out.

    Can't because right now we don't have enough responding interior members much of the time and won't because it's not safe to operate interior at that level.

    Maybe you are just much tougher and braver than we are, or we're just smarter and understand what can happen to the members when you try to operate short staffed.

    Again. We are the priority. And as IC I will ensure that every one of my members go home. All the friggin' time.


    Increased training budget.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    You and going inside again......

    Increased live burn training and increased outside training.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    Staffing.

    Development of a training area beginning with live car burn props, roof/ventilation prop
    and live burn pits.

    Will that finally allow people to go inside? If not, why spend the money?



    Because structural fires represents 1-2% of our runs.

    Car fires, brush fires and MVAs represent the bulk of our incidents. That is what we are building the training center for ... the bulk of what we do.

    Live burn props will be the ones at the neighboring LSU and my combo departments facility. It is simply not feasible at this time to build our own.

    You just seem so fixated with structural operations.


    I never stated that it would never change, but there is certainly that possibility. The reality is though that even if we do see a change in terms of recruitment, it will be a while before they are up and functioning.

    Yes, YOU did. You have said repeatedly due to the culture in that area your situation likely will never change.


    We're hoping that we can, but there is a good possibility it will not.

    At some point there may be funding available for some career members, but even that's not likely .

    QUOTE=FyredUp;1375973]Just more of the same La, more of the same.[/QUOTE]
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #470
    Let's talk fire trucks!
    BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    And people die in fires. It happens. Get over it.
    Its time to give up your position in fire prevention and seek other gainful employment. Why waste the your time, or the audiences, if you're so matter-of-factly ready to accept that people die in fires - and you're perfectly okay with that. Their time sitting through one of your "pubed" classes could be better spent with their friends and families - cherishing precious moments they'll never have again in case they're caught in a house fire and the IC is more worried about his member's safety than the trapped occupants.
    FyredUp, Chenzo and conrad427 like this.
    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  21. #471
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Its time to give up your position in fire prevention and seek other gainful employment. Why waste the your time, or the audiences, if you're so matter-of-factly ready to accept that people die in fires - and you're perfectly okay with that. Their time sitting through one of your "pubed" classes could be better spent with their friends and families - cherishing precious moments they'll never have again in case they're caught in a house fire and the IC is more worried about his member's safety than the trapped occupants.
    Do I like it? No.

    But he reality is that in rural areas with extended response times unless the occupants are able to self-extricate it simply is not reasonable to expect them to be viable when we arrive.

    Best case for my VFD is a response time of about 8-10 minutes, and that is in the extreme southern part of the district, where the majority of the members live.

    Typical case is probably 12-14 minutes in the southern 30% of the district.

    And in the mid and northern parts of the district, where there is very little population and 1-2 members, we're looking at 12-15 plus, and that even is with calling the department to the north in right away, as they are equally distant.

    Our district is narrow and long and there is very limited population, and limited membership in the northern 70%. The good news is we have a working structural fire in that 70% of the district once very 3-4 years.

    That's not being negative. That is simply the reality as driven by today's hydrocarbon based world.

    And there are very limited ways to deliver the pubed message to those folks as there is no real community in our fire district. So it's very frustrating.

    The fact is any structural fire in the northern half of our district has a very high probability of being very heavily or fully involved on arrival simply due to time. And that is based on historical data from fires in that area of the district.

    And as an IC, my members do come first. All the time.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  22. #472
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Its time to give up your position in fire prevention and seek other gainful employment. Why waste the your time, or the audiences, if you're so matter-of-factly ready to accept that people die in fires - and you're perfectly okay with that. Their time sitting through one of your "pubed" classes could be better spent with their friends and families - cherishing precious moments they'll never have again in case they're caught in a house fire and the IC is more worried about his member's safety than the trapped occupants.
    The likelihood of survival in a house fire in my combo district, which is where I am employed, is much better.

    Limited full-time staffing. 6x the volunteers, more evenly spread throughout the district. Live-in volunteers at 4 of our 5 volunteer stations. Better trained and experienced volunteers including 10-12 that work as career elsewhere.

    And a much better community infrastructure to spread the word about firesafety.

    Yes, much better situation there.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  23. #473
    Forum Member
    ToDaRoof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Old Dominion
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Lala, if you don't give a damn about how the rest of the country does the job, why do you even bother to frequent the board and add your two cents to everything?
    BoxAlarm187 and Chenzo like this.

  24. #474
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Your minimum staffing requirements, which you admit you can't meet, eliminate any interior actions until the 4 person AMA FD engine arrives. So yes, you have rationalized an excuse for inaction when the rest of the country begins actions, when appropriate, after size-up.

    Had a car fire yesterday.

    Myself as the IC, 4 interior members including a former captain and a driver.

    Had it been a structure we would have had 2 interior teams.

    As far as what the rest of the country does, I really don't give a damn. You want to call 2 interior members, with no backup team and a driver exterior safe, have at it. But to me, that's a recipe for disaster should anything happen to that interior crew.

    And one day, it will.


    WOW!! YOU HANDLED A CAR FIRE WITHOUT HAVING TO CALL MUTUAL AID!! Or was the AMA FD engine coming to this too? How that in any way relates to talking abut structures fires is beyond me.

    If you and your guys can stand outside and listen to victims scream as they burn to death Hell has a special place for you. It isn't the fact that we are always successful, it is the fact that when conditions in the building allow, WE AT LEAST TRY.


    Blah Blah Blah...Your continued parroting of this would be admirable if it wasn't an excuse for doing nothing meaningful until the PAID CAREER PROFESSIONAL TRAINED AMA FD EGINE ARRIVED and did what you won't do.

    You are really hung up on the fact that most of time our interior ops are based on the use of the AMA engine, aren't you?


    I would find it humiliating to call myself a firefighter on a fire department that can't do a damn thing interior without waiting for the response of an AMA Engine company. But then again you have no conscience, no understanding of dedication or committment, and certainly a flase sense of pride.

    As far as plans to change the situation ....

    Formalized procedures and training, and dedicated rapid deployment handlines for
    exterior/transitional operations.

    So nothing has changed. Still outside with your exterior members while gramma burns alive inside.

    And people die in fires. It happens. Get over it.

    And you are willing under any circumstances, even when if you had entered you could have saved them, to write them off as cavalierly as a tax deduction.

    Increased recruitment through the use of newspaper articles and mailers. To this date,
    those efforts have brought in 4 new members. Unfortunately one was recently
    deployed overseas and one had issues within the department. But we still have 2
    exterior members functioning within the department.

    One had issues? You mean the guy that was previously trained and probably told you what a farse you were? Two more exterior guys? So still nothing has changed.

    The guy with one month of experience as a volunteer at the neighboring combo department? He was let go by them as well a couple of weeks later for the same issue.


    Did you do any counseling? Did you attempt to correct his behavior? Or was it easier to get rid of someone who questioned your Bull Schitt?

    AMA on all structural incidents.

    Because someone has to do what your FD can't and won't. Actually go inside and put the fire out.

    Can't because right now we don't have enough responding interior members much of the time and won't because it's not safe to operate interior at that level.

    Maybe you are just much tougher and braver than we are, or we're just smarter and understand what can happen to the members when you try to operate short staffed.

    Again. We are the priority. And as IC I will ensure that every one of my members go home. All the friggin' time.


    Then all of you should quit and go join the checker league. If you are willing to risk nothing then you most certainly are NOT firefighters.

    Increased training budget.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    You and going inside again......

    Yeah, because it is what FIREFIGHTERS DO. Funny thing is...That alone is why you call the AMA FD.

    Increased live burn training and increased outside training.

    Yet no one can go inside.

    Staffing.

    Excuses, and still not telling the board or citizens the truth.

    Development of a training area beginning with live car burn props, roof/ventilation prop
    and live burn pits.

    Will that finally allow people to go inside? If not, why spend the money?



    Because structural fires represents 1-2% of our runs.

    Car fires, brush fires and MVAs represent the bulk of our incidents. That is what we are building the training center for ... the bulk of what we do.

    Live burn props will be the ones at the neighboring LSU and my combo departments facility. It is simply not feasible at this time to build our own.

    You just seem so fixated with structural operations.


    And you seem too fixated on not doing them when they actually occur. Dude, if I was on that career FD you have come in for AMA I would be laughing at you every time you called us. They aren't mutual aid for structure fires, they ARE your response for structure fires. You guys are ancillary to what they do.

    I never stated that it would never change, but there is certainly that possibility. The reality is though that even if we do see a change in terms of recruitment, it will be a while before they are up and functioning.

    Yes, YOU did. You have said repeatedly due to the culture in that area your situation likely will never change.


    We're hoping that we can, but there is a good possibility it will not.

    At some point there may be funding available for some career members, but even that's not likely .

    It will never even be on the table if you don't stop the charade of being a fully functional fire department.

    QUOTE=FyredUp;1375973]Just more of the same La, more of the same.
    [/QUOTE]

    Just more pathetic excuses...sad it is all you have.

    By the way, if you have any teen aged kids or grandkids maybe one of them could show you how to use the quote function.
    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

  25. #475
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,280

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoxAlarm187 View Post
    Its time to give up your position in fire prevention and seek other gainful employment. Why waste the your time, or the audiences, if you're so matter-of-factly ready to accept that people die in fires - and you're perfectly okay with that. Their time sitting through one of your "pubed" classes could be better spent with their friends and families - cherishing precious moments they'll never have again in case they're caught in a house fire and the IC is more worried about his member's safety than the trapped occupants.
    So perfect it needed to be quoted!
    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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. The Quint hits the UK
    By SteveDude in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-13-2005, 05:37 PM
  2. I know this isn't a firefighter but it still hits home
    By Itsmy6 in forum Line of Duty: In Memory Of
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-06-2005, 02:02 AM
  3. LODD Hits Home
    By scfirewife41 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-01-2005, 10:20 AM
  4. Lutan1 hits the big 30!
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-12-2002, 03:34 PM
  5. When fire hits home
    By ADSNWFLD in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-30-2001, 11:28 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