Thread: Fire truck crashes?
04-17-2014, 09:03 AM #1
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- Wilmington, Vt.
Fire truck crashes?
Okay, I've followed these forums for a long time now. I've read about the Tac 4 suspensions, Rollover protection, seatbelts, now air bags in the trucks. These all are there to help us in the event of an accident. BUT, even all of these improvements cannot override one common denominator on the apparatus. "The driver/operator's"
In the last 6 days there have been 3 (THREE) crashes involving fire apparatus hitting fire apparatus at an intersection responding to a call. They would be Daly City, Ca., Texas, and now this morning in L.A., Ca.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is up with this???? There is no way that this should be happening. We cannot protect the public if we are not able to protect ourselves.
Let's PAY ATTENTION when entering intersections! It is NOT A RACE! Who give a crap who gets there first?! Aren't we all doing the same job?
Slow "WAY" Down or Stop, "make eye contact" with anyone else that may be in or near the intersection, then proceed through with caution. It's pretty sad that we will take such a chance at killing ourselves before we even let the fire have a chance at it.
Please.....SLOW DOWN & BE CAREFUL @ INTERSECTIONS!
04-17-2014, 10:42 AM #2
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Maybe communicate on those things called radio
I know the radio is a new concept
But say hay joe I am approaching the intersection of main and grape
04-20-2014, 02:24 PM #3
They're called accidents for a reason......
Last edited by MemphisE34a; 04-20-2014 at 08:56 PM.RK
Management is making sure things are done right. Leadership is doing the right thing. The fire service needs alot more leaders and a lot less managers.
"Everyone goes home" is the mantra for the pussification of the modern, American fire service.
Comments made are my own. They do not represent the official position or opinion of the Fire Department or the City for which I am employed. In fact, they are normally exactly the opposite.
04-20-2014, 02:43 PM #4
04-20-2014, 05:03 PM #5
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
Gordon Graham "Predictable is Preventable"
04-22-2014, 09:56 PM #6
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Bryn Athyn, Pa.
"Crash" is the preferred term by the USDOT. They are the ones pushing its use. They seem to feel like most "crashes" could have been avoided whereas "accident" implies something that probably could not have been predicted or prevented.
04-23-2014, 08:02 PM #7
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- SW Oregon
What is a radio? Again, before the start of time, (or 1972) we had policy that pretty much made it impossible for a single operator to talk on the radio while driving. But he could listen just fine. A good Engineer should also know just about where the other guys should be, even if coming from more than three stations. We also had policy that required slowing way way down for a stop sign and practically stopping in the intersection if your light was red. but, like already said better, this is why they are called "accidents" "Crashes?" Seems rather harsh and perhaps politically motivated? Dunno. Stuff happens. HB of CJ (old coot)
04-24-2014, 02:55 PM #8
If these incidents happened at volunteer departments, would you still be saying that "crashes" is too harsh of a term?
In my own opinion, both drivers are in violation of the law as it reads here in PA. According to the PA motor vehicle code, an emergency vehicle may proceed through controlled intersections after they have been given the right of way by the other motorists at the intersection. It also states that emergency vehicles must be operated with "due regard" for other motorists. The notion of "I have my lights and siren on, so it is automatically the other guy's fault" is not true here and has actually been enforced where some have gotten tickets.
If two engines come to the same intersection at the same time, then the standard rules of right of way are in effect. Having the situation where one of the trucks is going through a red light makes it really bad. Didn't the operator even slow down coming to the intersection? How could they not see that another truck was coming to the intersection (and had the right of way)?
To me "crashes" seems a lot more accurate. If they were following the law (at least how it is written in PA) there would not have been an accident, therefore, it must be a crash.
04-24-2014, 04:25 PM #9
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Pa Wilds
Preliminary reports indicating two different dispatch channels. Looking at the map of crash site (Garfield Ave. & Garvey Ave. at 000 address (intersection e - w is zero) Engine appears to be going out to New Avenue at 1,000 East and then down to Graves Ave. (Fire at 800 block of Graves) while the truck Co. was going to go south on Garfield and then go East on Graves to the address. D.C. interviewed stated Policy is to slow at intersections before proceeding. Google Map shows Garfield (N-S) is a 4 lane with crowded center and no divider. Garvey is a 4 lane divided with turn lanes and grassy divider. Building on N.W. corner is tight to the sidewalk on both streets. Would have restricted view. Will be interesting to learn if the Monteray Park ladder was tied up on a different call and the Alhambra ladder was not the normal truck company assigned. I would say that the majority of times apparatus crashes occur when there is a "Non-cyclic occurance". Something is not normal for the response. Is the regular ladder assignment in the same house as the engine? Then the driver would not normally be looking for a ladder from the other community. As you say huntPA, "Slow Down, and look". Better to take 30 seconds longer, than never get there at all. Good handout example for the EVDT class in Youngsville next week-end.
Last edited by kuh shise; 04-24-2014 at 04:27 PM.
04-25-2014, 03:04 PM #10
We are going to have our engine there for the basic firemanship class. I will be running it Sunday (taking the paramedic assist class Saturday).
05-18-2014, 11:18 AM #11
Maybe if we would learn to SLOW Down at intersections and stop at red lights and stop signs alot of these issues could be resolved. Me department's policy is you must slow down and be capable of seeing all directions of an intersection before proceeding through. It is also our policy that all apparatus responding code or non-code will stop at all stop lights and stop signs before proceeding through.
We need to get to the call to be of assistance to anyone. If we cause/get into an accident/crash we create a new problem.
06-13-2014, 09:52 PM #12
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
Relying on the radio is a BAD idea. You never know if the PD, EMS, or another FD has a run and will cross your path. I'm not of the opinion that a vehicle running lights and sirens has to absolutely stop at all red lights and stop signs. Sometimes you may have a clear view for several blocks and may have no traffic to contend with. Other times you may not be able to see 50' around the corner. It ALL DEPENDS on the specific intersection that you are dealing with. And you may have many different variables on a single run. But you SHOULD be able to stop at any intersection when you cannot CLEARLY see all the potential hazards. And you should drive accordingly.
01-18-2015, 09:07 AM #13
DFR_Truck 24 'crashes into a mixer"
A little late, but.................
From Fox 3 News: Published on Jan 6, 2015
A collision between a Dallas Fire-Rescue ladder truck 24 and a concrete mixer truck sent six people to the hospital on Tuesday.
Last edited by 1OLDTIMER; 01-18-2015 at 09:19 AM.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By NobodyAnymore in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 2Last Post: 10-20-2010, 05:14 PM
By mtndew21 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & FundingReplies: 1Last Post: 05-08-2010, 12:48 PM
By RspctFrmCalgary in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 4Last Post: 08-20-2005, 09:47 AM
By captstanm1 in forum Firefighters ForumReplies: 0Last Post: 04-10-2003, 06:16 PM
By 640SATFD in forum Apparatus InnovationReplies: 0Last Post: 04-11-2000, 01:26 PM