Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 12 of 53 FirstFirst ... 2910111213141522 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 1056
  1. #221
    MembersZone Subscriber JohnVBFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, Va
    Posts
    1,471

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    And where did I claim that Fred? The simple fact is I come here to debate occasionally. Is that ok with you? If I have good knowledge of your departmental structures does that make me a criminal or something? Maybe I worked with you, or more likely I worked with your dad if he served.
    Lighten up and get on with the debate!

    Couldn't stay away could you Mr Grimwood?
    Co 11
    Virginia Beach FD

    Amateurs practice until they get it right; professionals practice until they cannot get it wrong. Which one are you?

    'The fire went out and nobody got hurt' is a poor excuse for a fireground critique.


  2. #222
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    434

    Default

    deleted by author
    Last edited by devildog4; 08-28-2007 at 11:02 PM.

  3. #223
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devildog4 View Post
    deleted by author
    Knight Dude, what is it going to take before you ďget itĒ?

    As far as Hackensack, it is not what I myself would have done under the same circumstances, it is what that Chief did then. Under no circumstance should any FF (irregardless of rank) climb a ladder placed on the roof of a burning building wearing his station work uniform. Period.

    If you feel it is OK, under ANY circumstance, then maybe you should take those toilet plungers off your collar (didnít you say you were a Capt?) and go back to rookie school to learn about wearing proper PPE.

    I would have to go back and look at the posts to see who exactly posted what comment. If I am wrong about what you posted I apologize here and now. Those comments were made and have no place here.

    I think I heard St. Andrews laying a line. Werenít they about the 6th or 7th truck in? I heard the CFD Truck operator say he only had a single 2 ĹĒ supply line. Maybe you missed that part?

    And if St. Andrews laid a line, why the recommendation to ďchange water supply standard operating proceduresĒ? Maybe, just maybe, you will find that the first 3 or 4 incoming units did not establish their own water supply? Maybe not using LDH was an issue?

    Can YOU state with 100% certainty that a hydrant WAS caught before 5 or 6engines/trucks arrived? Which unit laid the first supply line and what was their order of arrival? Nope, didn't think so. I canít. I wasnít there. I donít know. Of course, we will have to wait until the final report. I can only go by the recommendations and what I heard on the tape.

    I started the thread to comment on the preliminary investigation, because I thought the results (after what, 4 days?) spoke for themselves.

    ------------------ this is what was posted, before deletion.


    Can YOU state with 100% certainty that a hydrant WAS caught before 5 or 6engines/trucks arrived? Which unit laid the first supply line and what was their order of arrival? Nope, didn't think so. I canít. I wasnít there. I donít know.
    and yet you are more than happy to claim this was a problem there.

    I started the thread to comment on the preliminary investigation, because I thought the results (after what, 4 days?) spoke for themselves.
    and that's the problem. In only 4 days, what could they have actually learned of policies/procedures/SOP's and actual operations. And they come up with "seat belt usage", "PIO", "no 10 codes".
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  4. #224
    Forum Member KnightnPBIArmor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Beautiful downtown Hortense, GA
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devildog4 View Post
    deleted by author
    What's the matter? You finally figure out you were starting to talk out of both sides of your mouth so you had to delete the evidence? To answer your quesions as best I can remeber them before you deleted them:

    1. I'm still not your "dude"...I guess all that weed plays heck on the short term memory, huh?

    2. Under normal circumstances no I would never advocate a firefighter of any rank climbing a ladder on a burning building, but then again I have never experienced the shock of being at a fire where multiple numbers of my men were lost and what I'm sure that does to affect rational thinking...have you? As far as my attitude towards PPE, I authored our SOPs on eye protection and care, maintenance, and inspection of turnout gear...so what do you think? Oh, and by the way, they're speaking trumpets not toilet plungers, and they're the traditional symbol of a fire service officer. I wear two at the career job and three at the vollie gig, thanks for asking. I guess you'd have to be a real firefighter to know what they were.

    3. Still waiting for you to show me where I mentioned the IAFF, Chief Brunacini.

    4. What does a recommendation from the panel regarding seatbelts use have to do with the Sofa Super Store fire?

    5. Nope, I don't know when St. Andrews laid a line or what size it was, and NEITHER DO YOU, which was my point: you are basing your opinions based on tapes that are not authenticated as being complete, nor do you know what was or wasn't done that wasn't broadcast over the radio.

    6. Still waiting to hear what you have to say about departments that do the things that are listed in the recommendations and still have suffered LODDs. Want to apply that "incompetent" and "chaos" tag to any other departments that have suffered losses?

    7. Kind of got caught by that "Great State of California" comment, didn't you?

  5. #225
    Forum Member KnightnPBIArmor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Beautiful downtown Hortense, GA
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    ------------------ this is what was posted, before deletion.

    Thanks, Bones. I apparently was typing as you posted this; had I known I would have waited so I wouldn't have had to try and reply from memory, LOL

  6. #226
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    2,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    I have tried to be polite and reasonable with you.

    OK answer some questions yourself about this fire ... or are you just a fifteen year old kid with a new laptop, pretending to be a big city firefighter like his dad?!

    Which authority submitted the gasoline samples?
    Give me the names of the first five officers in command?
    Who was the Plans Chief at this incident and what is his assignment now?
    Yet you have answered no questions.

    Heres a news flash for you - If you think I'm going to get into some duel with you and your search engine, you are sadly mistaken. Whats next? Who was on the pipe on 42 that day? I can tell you if you want. Why don't you just post a link to witt and mikva and be done with it? You are a goof if you think I am going to engage some anonymous jagoff spouting unfounded opinions about people and events he read about on the web. You have just firmly ensconced yourself in the ranks of hottrotter and devildog4. You are a waste of time and effort.

    What department do you work for? Jagoff......
    I am a complacent liability to the fire service

  7. #227
    EuroFirefighter Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicagoFF View Post
    If you think I'm going to get into some duel with you and your search engine, you are sadly mistaken. Whats next? Who was on the pipe on 42 that day? You have just firmly ensconced yourself in the ranks of hottrotter and devildog4. You are a waste of time and effort.

    What department do you work for? Jagoff......
    Thanks for the continual compliments brother.

    I never intended to become embroiled in a debate with you over the Chicago incident. I was discussing with FFFred how effective ICS (yes thats what they call it in Chicago) plays such a critical role on the fireground and was using FDNY high-rise procedures and your high-rise procedures (and fire) as a clear example. The failings in Incident Command Systems has contributed to several LODD and the loss of life of building occupants in many many fires before. Who knows? Perhaps Charleston is another situation! The immediate recommendations there clearly show there are concerns in how Charleston implement incident command functions.

    You engaged me on my authority to quote the Chicago fire as a viable example. Well I have PM'd you on that matter.

    Stay safe ....

  8. #228
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devildog4 View Post
    deleted by author
    You start this mess then leave with your tail between your legs. I name thee devilmutt4. If you start making comments at least have the guts to stand behind your posts. Don't stir the pot if you can't take the heat. Maybe next time you'll engage your brain before you start typing.

  9. #229
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    2,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    Thanks for the continual compliments brother.

    I never intended to become embroiled in a debate with you over the Chicago incident. I was discussing with FFFred how effective ICS (yes thats what they call it in Chicago) plays such a critical role on the fireground and was using FDNY high-rise procedures and your high-rise procedures (and fire) as a clear example. The failings in Incident Command Systems has contributed to several LODD and the loss of life of building occupants in many many fires before. Who knows? Perhaps Charleston is another situation! The immediate recommendations there clearly show there are concerns in how Charleston implement incident command functions.

    You engaged me on my authority to quote the Chicago fire as a viable example. Well I have PM'd you on that matter.

    Stay safe ....
    We may disagree on this matter, but that is no excuse for my "less than cordial" responses earlier. The name calling was inappropriate. My apologies. While you seem to know quite a bit about 69 W. Washington, I still disagree with your assessment that the problem was a failure of the high rise order or the command structure itself.
    I am a complacent liability to the fire service

  10. #230
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    It's interesting to me that several experts went to CFD and made recommendations for change that would make the department better. Yet some in far off places question those recommendations. They even question if those things would have made a difference in the outcome. I suspect the outcome would have been totally different had these changes been in place prior to the fire. Otherwise, why recommend the change?

  11. #231
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    It's interesting to me that several experts went to CFD and made recommendations for change that would make the department better. Yet some in far off places question those recommendations. They even question if those things would have made a difference in the outcome. I suspect the outcome would have been totally different had these changes been in place prior to the fire. Otherwise, why recommend the change?
    It's interesting to me that your mother didn't smother you when you were an infant thus saving all humanity from your stupidity. Did she drink lots of hard alcohol or smoke when you were in the womb?

    There is no offical report yet and not one of you swinging d*cks has bothered to cite one paragraph of any policy the CFD had or didn't have on the day in question. Unless some context is provided...all of this is for naught.

    FTM-PTB

  12. #232
    EuroFirefighter Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChicagoFF View Post
    We may disagree on this matter, but that is no excuse for my "less than cordial" responses earlier. The name calling was inappropriate. My apologies. While you seem to know quite a bit about 69 W. Washington, I still disagree with your assessment that the problem was a failure of the high rise order or the command structure itself.
    Chicago thank you! I respect your approach and listen, I do acknowledge the reasons why you were so defensive so I am sorry also for arousing your suspicions.

    It is your right to disagree and I will only say that these conclusions, that there were ICS and communication failings at that fire, are not mine but made by those who investigated the fire. Both internal and external investigations came to those same conclusions and hence, the SOP was reviewed and updated.

    Quite often there are a number of contributory factors that lead to LODD. The ICS may be inadequate; or the ICS plan is competent but the implementation fails; or the communication channels fail etc. These views I hold are supported by a wealth of reporting from NIOSH and other organizations who have investigated LODD in the past (and I know how highly Fred respects them)!

  13. #233
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Letís see what the final investigation reveals, and hope we all can learn from that

    Quote Originally Posted by devildog
    I started this post to ask people what they thought of the recommendations. You, FFFRED and ChicagoFF turned that into bashing the IAFF, calling Chief Brunacini a plagiarizer and attacking the members of the panel and forum.
    No you started this thread to tell us how perfect the land of fruits and nuts was and how if they had not been using 10-codes, using LDH, assigned stagging, used task specific radio call signs..etc. those 9 men would be alive today.

    This is all without seeing a full offical report, ever looking at one page of their operational manual, understanding that

    I on the other hand pointed out after some members insinuated that our procedures were based on these ICS principles, that in fact our procedures and evolutions pre-dated this ICS concept (which ironicly enough was partially developed to control poorly disiplined and inexpereinced fire departments in the Golden State, your state of perfection mind you) The fact is that I was making a point that we don't follow ICS as you know it and you didn't care to answer whether we are acting recklessly by not blindly following your "hand holding" rules developed by suburban chiefs in the desert southwest.

    The plagarism comments stem from the fact that the pro-ICS crowd claims our policy fits into their system when in fact their system mirriors ours to some degree and then adds in superfoulous layers of beauracracy that they made up without any substantial prior expereince as the basis for these measures. Which came first the chicken or the egg?

    You claim that you've never heard of pre-assigned duties and it doesn't fit within your ICS world...fact is your concept is about 100 years out of date and you are more than welcome to join us in the present if you choose to.

    Why ďChanges in water supply standard operating proceduresĒ? As I indicated earlier, a single 2 1/2" supply line is not sufficient for a truck operation. In fact I donít think I heard anyone say anything about catching a hydrant or that they laid out their own supply line until maybe 5 or 6 engines/trucks were on scene.
    You won't hear such transmissions on our dept radio either...In fact if you can find one transmission of a company during the 7th alarm at the Deuche Bank notifying the Chief on their own that they have a hydrant and are performing inline pumping I'll turn my pension over to you.

    MY point being until an offical report is issued which factually states what lines were laid where and by whom and for what purpose your entire position is without merit.

    You and a few others have stated that according to you a few of the first alarm Engine companies failed to secure a positive water supply. And this fact is justification for the need for LDH.

    Well I would say that should that be the case (which we don't know until a report comes out) it would seem to me that emphasizing the policy of who is to hook to a hydrant...when and using what hose would be a much more sensible and well thought out policy than some knee jerk reaction by bying bigger hose that presumably under the same circumstances wouldn't get laid in either.

    But as I and others said before until a full offical report is issued...your entire position is based on conjecture and nothing more.

    FTM-PTB
    Last edited by FFFRED; 08-29-2007 at 01:08 PM.

  14. #234
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    These views I hold are supported by a wealth of reporting from NIOSH and other organizations who have investigated LODD in the past (and I know how highly Fred respects them)!
    You got that right!

    Lets hope someone other than the clueless and inexpereinced bookworms over at NIOSH offer a report on this fire. Outside of the factual diagrams and estabilishment the time line...the rest is good kindling for a camp fire.

    FTM-PTB

  15. #235
    EuroFirefighter Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post

    You and a few others have stated that according to you a few of the first alarm Engine companies failed to secure a positive water supply. And this fact is justification for the need for LDH.

    Well I would say that should that be the case (which we don't know until a report comes out) it would seem to me that emphasizing the policy of who is to hook to a hydrant...when and using what hose would be a much more sensible and well thought out policy than some knee jerk reaction by bying bigger hose that presumably under the same circumstances wouldn't get laid in either.

    But as I and others said before until a full offical report is issued...your entire position is based on conjecture and nothing more.

    FTM-PTB
    Simple facts though FFFred are this ...
    • They were flowing more water on the attack line/s than they were receiving
    • CFD pumpers are only configured to lay a single line of 2.5 inch
    • The water supply for such a large fire was always going to be hydraulically challenged
    • The aerials suffered the same lack of water until St Andrews supported them with LDH

  16. #236
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    Simple facts though FFFred are this ...
    • They were flowing more water on the attack line/s than they were receiving
    • CFD pumpers are only configured to lay a single line of 2.5 inch
    • The water supply for such a large fire was always going to be hydraulically challenged
    • The aerials suffered the same lack of water until St Andrews supported them with LDH
    Are you one of the "experts" hired by the mayor to tell him what the CFD needs?

    Fact is....none of these facts have been listed here by anyone credible or listed in a publicly available report on the fire. (as far as I know none has been issued) We've neither seen policy or a description of their Engines hosebeds. And as I've said in the past...I find anyone who claims to be a fire service expert, immediately suspect when the only recomendation is for LDH, for a reported problem that is more procedural than equipment based. The cost to purchase and refit the hose beds would be much quite a bit more than just suggesting that they do what a number of other departments do on a regular basis and that is perform the reverse stretch.

    Who knows perhaps the CFD is more accustomed to reverse stretches in the older downtown part and LDH would greatly change their existing operations for the fires they most often face.

    Perhaps MPO re-education would be in order and focusing on hydraulics and hose lays would be a better solution. You can give them 3000gpm pumps and 8inch hose and none of it will matter if they don't understand hydraulics.

    None of this known because we haven't seen any concrete report or citations of established and published CFD procedures.

    When coupled with recomendations like PIO and seatbelts (I understand they are to look at all facets of the CFD) it would seem that perhaps these guys came in with the solutions already in mind before even examining all facts and potential solutions. Considering the swiftness of these recomendations only after a week on the job...I would say these guys aren't really doing the job they were hired for...merely dictating what they beleive to be the best course of action based on what their departments have done...not what will work best for the CFD. I know it would take me much more than a week to come up with comprehensive reform for any department large or small.

    Remember at least one of these "experts" quailifications must be questioned when his own dept citing safety concerns demands the use of fog tips off standpipes in highrises. What other obvious mistakes will this man potentially impose on the citizens and firemen of Charleston?

    Sounds like you Batt18 might have some insight but these are the most specifc claims we've seen to date. How is it you know for fact that this is how their Engines are set up? Do you work for the CFD?

    As you can see from above...without knowing all the facts, I can make endless presumtions and assumptions that might or might not be on the money...but until we see a final report and accounting of what actions did or didn't take place...everything here is conjecture.

    FTM-PTB

  17. #237
    EuroFirefighter Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post

    Fact is....none of these facts have been listed here by anyone credible or listed in a publicly available report on the fire.

    None of this known because we haven't seen any concrete report or citations of established and published CFD procedures.

    As you can see from above...without knowing all the facts, I can make endless presumtions and assumptions that might or might not be on the money...but until we see a final report and accounting of what actions did or didn't take place...everything here is conjecture.

    FTM-PTB
    I agree FFFred that we must not jump to conclusions. Things are not always as they seem, even in videos and on audio tapes, there is always another side. No I don't work for CFD but I talk with people who do or did.

    Much of the information is already made public and there are some conclusions that we might reliably draw ourselves. Going over these things in our own minds is a good exercise because it makes us take a closer look at our own operations, to see if such system failures might occur and if so, how we might deal with them. Just as a pilot repeatedly goes through the simulator and is given catastrophic system failures to deal with.

    It is known within Charleston that their pumper configurations cannot be set up to effectively pump to capacity. In this fire, for whatever reason to be determined, one system failure that apparently had a major influence on the fire developing as it did was, the water supply wasn't able to meet demands of an interior fire attack.

    There are clear calls on the tape, from various IC's, for additional apparatus to urgently respond. There were clear calls to bring in a 1 1/2" hand-line followed shortly by a 2 1/2" hand-line. There was clear information from Engine 11 who was supplying water to the interior crews that he was very quickly running out of water ... 19.22 hrs half way empty; 19.24 hrs 1/4 tank left; E11 appears to be flowing between 60-90gpm on the fire at that rate. There were repeated calls for water (supply) from both Engines supplying attack lines. Then there were repeated requests by the Chief to start increasing pressure on the supply lines. There was a request from the engineer on E11 to his captain 'do you want the 2 1/2" charged' ... the answer 'not until you got that supply line in' .... seconds later there are several transmissions apparently coming from the interior that sound like they are saying 'we need to back out' ...
    • How should we be set up to prevent this happening in our own situation?
    • What can an IC immediately do, as he arrives on-scene, to counter a rapidly developing situation such as this?

    Those are two relevant tactical approaches that we might 'simulate' in our own minds .... or in the training environment ....

  18. #238
    Truckie SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,513

    Default

    * How should we be set up to prevent this happening in our own situation?
    * What can an IC immediately do, as he arrives on-scene, to counter a rapidly developing situation such as this?
    12 pages and 237 posts, something finally distiled in a manor in can be looked at objectively in our setting.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  19. #239
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Upstate, SC
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    You won't hear such transmissions on our dept radio either...
    Nor on ours. I'd also like to point out that mutual aid departments around here often use their own channel to communicate. So it's possible that another arriving fd laid a line and you might never heard it on CFD's tapes.

  20. #240
    EuroFirefighter Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nuthead View Post
    Nor on ours. I'd also like to point out that mutual aid departments around here often use their own channel to communicate. So it's possible that another arriving fd laid a line and you might never heard it on CFD's tapes.
    That did happen but much later. The fact is that the two engines supplying interior attack lines were forced to conserve their water and flow less than thirty percent of the amounts being requested by those inside crewing the hand-lines. The first arriving mutual aid engine only brought tank water to the scene but did rescue the trapped occupant and then made a very brave effort to rescue firefighters trapped within.

    No criticisms being directed at the handling of this incident. There are more twists than turns still to come. However, this is a big box structure housing a major fire load and a rapidly escalating fire. You have around a dozen firefighters inside on hand-lines that are either not flowing or under-flowing. Then come the reports of a trapped occupant to the rear.

    Just play out that table-top exercise in your minds, in your firehouse.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. New Nest for the Eagles & Condors !
    By RetJaxFF in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-29-2007, 08:44 PM
  2. F-16 crashes in Charleston, SC **pics**
    By sconfire in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-22-2005, 08:47 AM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 03-07-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-08-2005, 10:07 PM
  4. RFP's
    By D Littrell in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-08-2000, 06:36 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-06-1999, 10:13 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