Printable View
I wrote -George writes -Quote:
There is an arson crew - that sets and monitors the fire's progress, an attack crew - that does the obvious and a backup crew that is in place if an additional line is needed.
Quote:
Eddie, it might be a good idea to refer to them as the "ignition team" in your operational plan and not "arson crew".
I think that is a good idea George, I will let the boss know.
Thanks
:D
Holy smokes sfdlt5, that's like getting a drivers license with out ever having to drive... With recruits like that, stay low and watch your back Brother!:eek:Quote:
I also know that currently in Oneida county we are not even allowed to burn anything in the training towers either. Thanks to the recent accidents.
I learned a lot from doing live fire training in an acquired structure...my Recruit class at the Massachusetts Firefighting Academy was the last one to actually to live fire training in an acquired structure. There are some things you just can't experience in a concrete burn building.
When it comes to live fire training in an acquired structure, common sense should prevail....
NFPA 1403 should be followed..it's not expensive, only $24 for members, $26.75 for non members...funerals and lawsuits cost a hell of a lot more!
NO LIVE "VICTIMS"!!! (a training dummy can be made with some old hose and a pair of coveralls!)
All hazmats should be removed from the structure prior to training.
NO LIVE "VICTIMS"!!!
No flammable liquids or furniture!
NO LIVE "VICTIMS"!!!
Experienced fire officers who have a clue to what they are doing should be placed in charge of safety.
NO LIVE "VICTIMS"!!!
No fires are to be lit without charged lines in place.
NO LIVE "VICTIMS"!!!
To paraphrase a MasterCard commercial...
A copy of NFPA 1403....$27
An old pair of coveralls.... $25
some junk hose.... $50
Knowing that you are training your personnel safely....Pricele$$
Capt Gonzo... priceless and perfect :)
sfdlt5,
That is really SCAREY!!! How do they expect that new recruits are going to have a clue, and NOT panic when they have to go into an actual fire situation, if you can't even burn in the tower? Do the decision makers in your neck of the woods have some power over fires that none of the rest of us know about? I think the next time you have to go to a fire, you should ask your dispatch to call them and tell them to come down, since they seem to think it isn't something that you need REAL training for maybe they'd like to give it a shot!!!
Hopefully you work with experienced people. Stay safe.
Perceptually, I agree with you. If stupidity, ignorance and incompetence were crimes, we'd have to wall off entire states as prisons.Quote:
I have a good working knowledge of the basis for a charge of arson. If there needs to be other factors in order to charge a person for setting a fire for the purpose of training that results in the death of the firefighter, how about "impersonating a training officer" or even "impersonating a fire officer". I think that that is a crime!
I couldn't possibly agree with you more. Interestingly, I started a thread on this very subject awhile back and the popular opinion was that this type of knowledge was not necessary when compaered to "experience". How wrong they are.Quote:
All too often, you have people involved with acquired structure burns who don't have a basic knowledge of fire behavior setting fires for practice. Add to that a certain desire on the parts of some to give the newbies the impression that they have set huge fires a million times and you get firefighters dying in practice burns. There seems to be the end goal of misleading the newbies into believing that they will only be fighting the more glamorous, large structural fires, so setting the big fires is necessary. Smoke machines or small fires in half-barrels using proper fuels will not yield the desired results, which is to daze and amaze the newbies. It is that mentality that is killing firefighters and along with it, the practice of live burn training.
Amen.Quote:
IT CAN BE DONE SAFELY!
Here's where I stir up some crap. I believe part of the reason is we are giving ourselves toomuch credit. Part of the reason is we, as a profession refuse to change. Part of the reason is that there is too damn much romanticism of the dangers of this job and too little emphasis on doing the job right and safely. Even if it means writing off the building and letting it burn.Quote:
Why is it that the only thing we learn from a firefighters' death is how to throw a better funeral? We are constantly reminding ourselves, that with each new firefighter death, we are smarter than that. And yet, the body count continues to rise.
Hey Temptaker:)
Well Iam somewhat lucky to have about 6 other guys with experience with real fire. WE also have an excellent nieghboring dept. with some great guys also. We are lucky that we all can work together with out any problems. I am very scared that without being able to put probies into real fire, moer tragedies may accur. I hope that they find a way to change the rules back. We should not all be punished cause of others ignorance.
The people who made the no burn rule are the county coordinators. They do come to most fires. Usually they sit on the back of a truck and drink coffe and talk with old buddies. What kind of help is that.
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
sfdlt5
Typical.. the people who make the rules don't have a clue. I'm impressed that they actually show up at fires. Try handing them a hose next time and asking them if they want to help, if they say I'm not trained for this, smile and say neither are any of my probies thanks to your rule. :)
At least you have experienced guys to work with. Can't even imagine the 'pucker factor' if you didn't.
Maybe someone else knows how to get these guys to wake up... Chief Reason... Capt Gonzo... JTL... George
Temp
sfdlt5:
Exactly, what is a county coordinator? Why do they go to the fires?
Are they elected or appointed? Do they have any fire service experience? I might be able to offer some suggestions if I know the functions of county coordinators.
As you may know, I am a strong supporter of acquired structure burns for practice, but they must be done safely.
Where I come from, they actually serve two purposes; 1) The property owner saves a bundle on demolition and 2) Invaluable live burn training for newbies and vets alike. Our department has been involved in over 100 live burns and NO SERIOUS INJURIES! Band aid cases, yes; no maydays; no close calls and the reason is simple; if the building starts to get away from us, we set up defensive tactics school. We will not risk it for a practice burn, period.
Experienced people from our department, state instructors and friends from career departments help out and it pays in spades.
What I would suggest is that someone from your fire college comes and speaks with your county coordinators. They may convince them that live burns can be done safely and are a very important segment of the learning experience for firefighters.
Countless numbers of live burns are being done all over the country. Most are being done without incident, but unfortunately, the few that go wrong are the ones that make the headlines. It's important to know about the ones that go wrong, but it is wrong to ban them because a department didn't follow acceptable practices to insure safety. And they can be done safely. The record of my department speaks for itself. We didn't get there by relying on Lady Luck. We got there by following safe practice.
Get back to me on my questions. They almost sound like trustees. I have some experience with them.
Stay safe.
sfdlt5, I feel for you brother. Our county coordinators are pretty proactive, and know their place...to assist the IC with mutual aid and resources. What you coordinators did was overy drastic. The only way I could slightly agree with them is if they realized they had no SOG's for any type of live burn. However, if they stopped them it wouldn't take anymore then 3 days to write a county policy, have it checked by legal and distributed. And I'm being conservative in my opinion on time, it doesn't take much to write a policy that says you will follow NFPA 1403 at all times. Hope it all works out for you guys soon. No live fire training is absolutely ridiculous. Kinda like taking a driving test without every driving a car, or swim lessons without ever going into the water.
FirefighterMO made good points of other "dangerous" training operations that help support my opinion of anti-acquired structure live fire training. Yes, the military trains men and women for war, in very controlled situations, just like police officers on a range, controlled. The military and PD's don't have their guys shooting at each other, yes fatalities happen, and usually do to a stupid act or accident, and the military investigates them very tediously to change things or reprimand people. That is one of the reasons I believe in live fire training, but only in burn buildings. Regardless of what you do, no one should die during training.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The above is my opinion only and doesn't reflect that of any dept/agency I work for, deal with, or am a member of. :D
Just a little more info from Oneida county, or to many in the fire service the home of incompetent fireman. The Ban on buring so speak is actually more of a reaction to the pending legle action as a result of the lairdsville incident....it is not a set ban on burning as there have been departments in the county that have continued to do live burns of some sort. As it pertains to the towers, what has come done is a sog from the county levle that needs to be reviewed and singed off on by the department chief....it does allow for the burning of hay in a barrle for smoke purposes but that is about it. Having been part of a a handfull of live burn traingings myself, i belive that they are a essential part of what we do. How are u supposed to be able to perform your job if u are not trained in how to do it. As for the County co-ordinators they are appointed i belive by the County's Board of legislators or the Head of the county's emergency services. ANd yes they are quite famous for coming to a call...they only respond to multi agency fires, and sipping on there coffe while wearing only a fire coat for gear....and most people are afraid to approach them to put on more gear as they fear that they are of a higher power, when even if they are on the scene the incident commander is still in charge. The bigger problem here is still the shape of the fire system in NYS and the districts that have fire commisioners....Hopefully the state will step up to the plate and realize that they need to be more pro active and help the rest of us and not just FDNY.
Anyone read the latest regarding the Lairdsville incident? This comes straight from the article:
“It’s definitely a jury case,” Moran said. “All I’m looking for is 12 people with common sense and they’ll do the rest. He’s a volunteer and you can’t really hold him to a professional standard.
NOW you see what upsets me about this and every other volunteer/career issue. We're all "professional" until someone has to take responsibility. THEN the standard is too hard to meet.
We're either in or out of the pool here- if you consider yourself a professional (career OR volunteer), then you've got to say, "Hey, we have standards in the industry and we're going to use them." You can't pick and choose and still do the job.
Oh My God.Quote:
“It’s definitely a jury case,” Moran said. “All I’m looking for is 12 people with common sense and they’ll do the rest. He’s a volunteer and you can’t really hold him to a professional standard.
Gonz...you have been in contact with this guy. Is it worth setting the volunteer fire service back 30 years to get his client off.
I think the prohibition on live burns that is being referred to by sfdlt5 is a result of a memo from NYS OFPC (Office of Fire Prevention and Control). I just received the memo from our County Fire Coordinator (don't have it with me) and it basically states that OFPC is prohibiting any live burn, whether in an acquired structure or in a Training Tower Burn room, unless the people in charge have had the 2 OFPC Live Burn Safety training classes offered by NYS. Once these requirements have been met, NFPA 1403 is the rule of thumb at a live burn. This is a direct result of the Lairdsville incident and the other recent explosion that occurred during training.
My own company routinely conducts live burns in the County burn room, as well as any structure we or our surrounding companies may have acquired. We've never had an injury to speak of and have always erred on the side of safety. We have now suspended live burns until our officers have met the safety training requirements....CYA.
Word on the street also has it that NYS has hired over a dozen new investigators for PESH (NYS version of OSHA as NYS is not an OSHA state) that are specifically targeting Fire Dept's due to the recent deaths that have occurred in training and at actual emergency's.
I have no doubt that there will be Dept's/Companies that will have to be dragged kicking and screaming (and paying fines) into the 21st century the hard way. And thanks to statements like Mr Moran's there will probably still be some who think that rules and standards apply to everyone but them.
My experience with live burns done in accordance with NFPA 1403 is the same as others on this thread.
I have also found that two types of live burn training are different than that offered at Concrete burn structures. PPV in the attack mode and Class A foam just don't react the same way as they do in an acquired structure.
Mr. Moran if your still monitoring this forum, you're doing a disservice to the fire service in general. Although I know that this is not your job; your job is to plead the case of your client. Lord knows that that would probably require him to admit that he was not qualified to hold the position that he had or to admit that he made mistakes, both of which he is not likely to do.
Here in PA good has come of the Lairdsville incident. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality requires that all training fires receive an "Open Burning Exception" permit from them prior to any such fires. The State Fire Academy in conjuction with the State Fire Commissioner and DEP, has just required that all live burns submit this application to the local Educational Training agency as well as the DEP 45 days in advance of the training dates. This exception may be disapproved by the State Fire Academy Supervisor if he/she feels that the purposes of, and the drill objectives do not meet certian criteria, which basically is NFPA 1403. This new procedure requires that all acquired structural burns are conducted by certified state fire instructors and that the training must be a part of the State Fire Academy local level training program. It also requires the signature of the "Responsible Fire Chief". The form and information can be downloaded from www.osfc.state.pa.us See proactive change is possible when the right people recognize when and how it should be accomplished. Congrats to Commissioner Mann and those at the PA State Fire Academy for accomplishing this!
It sounds as if Mr. Moran is going to lead the fine folks in New York to believe that volunteer departments are not capable or qualified to conduct live burn training without someone being seriously injured or killed. Mr. Moran would lead us to believe that volunteer departments should be held to another standard when conducting live burns. Is there anything wrong with NOT conducting them if you cannot meet NFPA 1403? Is there anything wrong with asking your state for qualified instructors when undertaking such an exercise?
I am starting to get upset; I will see you all over at the "Lairdsville Revisited" thread. Got some things to get off my chest.
Bradley Golden deserves better.
Actually, Mr. Moran is the lawyer. I pulled the quote from an article www.withthecommand.com got off of a news wire. Let me get the link for you all.
Here it is, fresh from the Utica Observer-Dispatch, the current events:
http://www.uticaod.com/news/daily/local1.htm
George...
Bob Moran (or should it be MORON) has not contacted me...after seeing his opening argument in his defense of Alan Baird, if he did contact me, I would unleash a torrent of hatred upon his sorry butt.
He has the unmitigated audacity to feign ignorance of the standards, then state that that because his client is a volunteer, that he should not have to meet the standards. In one statement, he has set the entire fire service back 30 years, not just the volunteer sector!
In a way, I'm glad this is not on Court TV... it would have cost me some serious dinero! I would have thrown something through my set in the family room...then gone upstairs to watch on the set in the bedroom and throw something through that one, then into my son's room and probably thrown something through that one, too!
Sorry Gonzo, I think Imixed you up with mongo.