1. #326
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    A valid point. Personally, I prefer to have the pumping engine closer to the fire. A reverse lay is always an option in the toolbox but it's not my preferred option if it means dropping a skid load or somesuch in the street. If I'm going to need to station an engine at the hydrant, I'd rather have it pumping in-line to another engine at the fire -- not feeding overly long handlines or a "phantom pumper" somewhere down the road. LDH reduces the need to place an engine at the hydrant dramatically over using smaller limited volume supply lines.

    Why would you prefer to have your engine close to the fire? (this is assuming you work in an urban/suburban area with regularly spaced hydrants)
    • You loose one man early in the operation (hydrant man)
    • You loose efficency in your pump.
    • Creates issues for later arriving companies that need placement adjacent to the building (Ladder, Rescue, Service..etc.)
    • One less apparatus that is in a potential collapse zone.
    • Why would you characterize the handlines as "overly-long". Aren't they the correct length? Wouldn't this be more professional and orderly than just pulling the pre-connect which may be more than, the right amount or may not be enough hose for the job as some on here advocate?

    Do you only have 1 or 2 responding Engines to a fire? This is I know is good reasoning for forward lays when the Engine also brings most of the tools and ladders with it as well. Applies to Quints (eckkkkk, must wash my mouth out now!)

    FTM-PTB

  2. #327
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    Yet many just jumped on board here and proclaimed that they need LDH in Charleston. Maybe they do maybe they don't...we won't have a better idea until the full report is out and see what the reasoning is....I hope is it something more substantial than "this is what everyone else we know is using..."
    Oh hey, we agree that waiting for the final report AND waiting for CFD's response is what needs to happen before proclaiming an opinion either way makes any sense. Let me re-phrase that, of course we all have opinions on these recommendations based on our experiences. However, to point to any one of these recommendations as a contributing factor is just guess work or amateur detective work. Remember these were just quick recommendations about CFD's policies overall.

    I'm speaking about my general beliefs and my experiences with LDH.

    The other point is that I still think there is room for 3" supply hose. Deuce and a half in my town has been a handline for the last 15-20 years. We pull it for commercial or heavy fire conditions.

    Maybe a split bed or combination of LDH and smaller hose would be smarter for those urban areas with hydrants on every street corner... Dunno.

    Thanks for your comments.
    Last edited by ChiefKN; 09-06-2007 at 09:51 AM.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  3. #328
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    Reference bold print - neither did I. I happen to have agreed with you, why you all bent out of shape. But let's try this. If I have a 1000' lay, then I will need 2000' of 2 1/2" to get a double lay and only 1000' of 5" hose. And the 5" hose is capable of providing 3 times as much water. with less hose. In fact, given the situation mentioned here, the 5" hose would also be cheaper. Also, the storz fittings are much easier to work with than screw fittings. They are faster as well. Not that the difference between screw fittings and storz fittings is all that significant.
    1000 ft lays aren't common in urban/suburban cities. If one needs that much they can relay with two(or more) Engines. That is a rural issue. You are confusing what the discussion is about as usual.

    Stortz is nice in some respects but the comment that they are easier and faster is debatable...I've cross threaded stortz before and the time it takes to loosen threaded fittings is minimal and is a non-issue to me on the fireground. I've used both.

    FTM-PTB

  4. #329
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainGonzo View Post
    Why can't you just answer one simple question....

    What Fire Department do you work for?

    Come on now, it isn't rocket science or brain surgery!

    As for my thoughts.. I'l wait for the full report to come out.
    Just a question here. But if there are noted deficiencies, shouldn't they be fixed ASAP. Should we really be waiting for the full report? Without playing the blame game, there were things that have been reported as being contributing factors. If those things appear to be a problem, and one can logically see that, then why not implement change now, why wait.

    As a for instance. There was no formal change of command. That to me is a real big issue. Chief Garvin was the first IC and he had a tactical plan as to what had to be done. He knew what resources he wanted and where. Cheif Thomas shows up and takes over without ever touching base. Chief Thomas' approach could very well be totally different requiring different resources and placements. I read an article on this that also said a nearby fire department self dispatched itself to the scene with 5 fire fighters. They didn't even check in with the IC or go through a staging area. They went directly to the back of the store and began fighting fire. And cars were running over the supply lines. Why wasn't the road closed off?

  5. #330
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    I would like to thank chiefKN for a good post on the LDH.

    Moving along (good thing I have thick skin) I need to ask a question.

    fffred said-
    Most people seem partial to forward lays to the point that many are unfamiliar with or unconfortable with the reverse (backstretch) despite it being a standard and basic Engine Evolution since the begining of the modern fire service (and even before in many of the larger older cities which became the origin for many smaller depts operational styles.)
    I'm not sure I know what the difference is between the two lays. Could someone explain this to me? I only know what we use and I don't know what it is called. I'm sure I was taught what it was 15 years ago during essentials, and then it probably got a broad brush because everyone uses the same thing around here.

  6. #331
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    1000 ft lays aren't common in urban/suburban cities. If one needs that much they can relay with two(or more) Engines. That is a rural issue. You are confusing what the discussion is about as usual.

    Stortz is nice in some respects but the comment that they are easier and faster is debatable...I've cross threaded stortz before and the time it takes to loosen threaded fittings is minimal and is a non-issue to me on the fireground. I've used both.

    FTM-PTB
    My use of 1000' was just an arbitrary number, use 100' if you so desire. The point being made that they lay 2 - 2 1/2" lines instead of 1 - 5" line. In that case the cost of the actual hose will be more for the 2 1/2" option. You can also lay in both at the same speed, however you will have to do twice the work to pick it up in the end.

    How the heck did you cross thread a storz fitting?

  7. #332
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    Just a question here. But if there are noted deficiencies, shouldn't they be fixed ASAP. Should we really be waiting for the full report? Without playing the blame game, there were things that have been reported as being contributing factors. If those things appear to be a problem, and one can logically see that, then why not implement change now, why wait.
    Once again for you slow people...are the problems what they appear to be.

    Is the water supply issue a operational, training, or equipment problem?

    Do their operations call for the wrong type of supply hose at this type of fire?(operational) Do they have procedures in the books that weren't followed or misunderstood at this fire?(training) or is the hose they are using inadequate for the application it is utilized for?

    As a for instance. There was no formal change of command. That to me is a real big issue. Chief Garvin was the first IC and he had a tactical plan as to what had to be done. He knew what resources he wanted and where. Cheif Thomas shows up and takes over without ever touching base. Chief Thomas' approach could very well be totally different requiring different resources and placements.
    Did he have a tactical plan or does the Department operations specify what is to be done by whom and when? The suggestion of the IC creating a plan on scene from scratch is nothing more than amaturish...or put another way just like a game of pick-up football. Neither you nor anyone else has cited CFD operational procedures. How is it an approach to fighting a fire could be completely different based solely on what chief officer shows up first and happens to be in command at that moment?

    Isn't there an overall plan of attack that at least generally defines roles, responsiblies and objectives...that applies to all buildings of a generally similar design. (ie. High-rise, taxpayers, PDs, MDs...etc.) Were these chiefs following the same general appoach?

    It is only prudent to completely evaluate all issues and find the root problems not the superfical ones that might only be a symptom of a larger underlying problem. Not as you suggest to jump at the first conclusion that pops into ones head.

    I read an article on this that also said a nearby fire department self dispatched itself to the scene with 5 fire fighters. They didn't even check in with the IC or go through a staging area. They went directly to the back of the store and began fighting fire. And cars were running over the supply lines. Why wasn't the road closed off?
    Isn't that the problem of that other department and the CPD? I hope this will all be addressed by people who thoroughly examine all the issues and not just create solutions without knowing what really caused these men's deaths. Change for change's sake would be a waste and a disservice to these men, their lives, families and their memories.

    FTM-PTB

  8. #333
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post

    How the heck did you cross thread a storz fitting?

    Perhaps jam is a more appropriate term.

  9. #334
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    And again Trotter,we've had LDH since the second load came off the boat from across the pond.Like Fred,given the tools available I'll deliver you a working fire stream REGARDLESS of who has what on their trucks.If they are all 2.5 we'll do the calcs and adjust incoming to meet the projected need.If they have 4/5/6 as long as the adapters are available we'll make that play too.You don't work in Charleston and I'm quite certain that while you think you know what went on,in reality you'd probably get lost there.While there are undoubtably issues that exist,it is my belief that NO ONE can be there for a week and come up with a comprehensive fix it plan. I'll wait for the report to come out and see what critical information can be gleaned from that.Thanks Fred,you keep me from pounding my head on the wall.Some people just can't figure it out. T.C.

  10. #335
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    I'm not sure I know what the difference is between the two lays. Could someone explain this to me? I only know what we use and I don't know what it is called. I'm sure I was taught what it was 15 years ago during essentials, and then it probably got a broad brush because everyone uses the same thing around here.
    I'm going to assume you really don't know this. A forward lay is one whereas the engine lays the line from the hydrant to the fire. Some departments will put a hydrant valve on the plug so that another engine can come in and boost the pressure/flow. However, I'd imagine most just run off of hydrant pressure.

    A reverse lay/backstretch is where the second in engine lays from the attack engine to the hydrant. I've heard of departments hooking straight to the plug, but I believe most hook the supply line to the engine, engine hooks into the plug with a short line, which maximizes the hydrant's flow.

    Unless FFFred is thinking of something that's more regional for his area, that's what they mean here.

  11. #336
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Trotter,from the thirty year guy you think needs to read a book or go to a pump class: Straight lay,hydrant(source)to fire. REVERSE(or back lay)FIRE to water(hydrant or source).This, AGAIN, is one of the first things taught to a rookie around here,perhaps YOUR training program isn't as advanced? To further our original discussion,by your call,CFD doesn't(at least presently)use LDH,So it's lack of use is a moot point.We were discussing ways of increasing supply using EXISTING equipment(IE 2.5),So LDH and Stortz are off the plate. Now the only way I know of to increase supply with a 2.5 is more of it or pump it at the source.And most folks that use 2.5 for supply have an ample supply of it so for the slow to catch on here: It costs the city $0,nix,nada.,zilch to change the bed and tactics to use a multiple 2.5 feed line.This can be done IMMEDIATELY,no bids,no purchasing necessary.It can be done with equipment at hand,they already own it.Now NONE of this can be done immediately with LDH unless you're prepared to make a sizable donation to the CFD.Is any of the haze starting to clear? T.C.
    Last edited by Rescue101; 09-06-2007 at 10:48 AM.

  12. #337
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,689

    Default

    Reverse lay does not always mean a 2nd engine laying a line away from an attack engine. Sometimes, and quite often in 1 city I know of, the first engine (attack) pulls up, estimates the attack line they need, pulls it off, and then the engine lays down to a hydrant. This is all done with 1 engine, not 2.


    Do any of these "experts" have any experience with such hose lays/operations since they are recommending 1 specific operation?
    "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?

  13. #338
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    I'm going to assume you really don't know this. A forward lay is one whereas the engine lays the line from the hydrant to the fire. Some departments will put a hydrant valve on the plug so that another engine can come in and boost the pressure/flow. However, I'd imagine most just run off of hydrant pressure.

    A reverse lay/backstretch is where the second in engine lays from the attack engine to the hydrant. I've heard of departments hooking straight to the plug, but I believe most hook the supply line to the engine, engine hooks into the plug with a short line, which maximizes the hydrant's flow.

    Unless FFFred is thinking of something that's more regional for his area, that's what they mean here.
    No as far as I know it isn't regional...long before I got hired in my present dept. I worked for a Dept that had little to no written policies on fire operations(today they might be different). They used nothing more than the IFSTA manuals for training materials (and I think 1 copy of Dunn's Collapse although it was over most of their heads)

    At the time we practiced the forward lay but also the MPOs and members were profficent in use of their modifcation of a reverse lay and we still had one spare Engine that when placed out of service men were still riding the backstep...it had skid loads (male butt off first).

    As I recal there were three major hose lay senarios presented. (I recall some brothers from the Plano FD were in some of the revised editions)

    One was the forward lay as described above.

    Two was the reverse, where the male butt with nozzle came off first...the appropriate amount of hose came off the rig and the Chauffeur proceded to the hydrant. Hooked up and broke the line at the next butt. Then hooked it up and supplied it with the appropriate pressure.

    Three was what Catch22 was refering two and I think the DC area guys would recognize as the Wagon-Pumper concept. Where a pumper pumps to a hose wagon or something like that.

    FTM-PTB

  14. #339
    MembersZone Subscriber
    JohnVBFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, Va
    Posts
    1,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jasper45 View Post
    Bat18 sounds an awful lot like an Englishman though, not many of us uneducated types use the word 'whilst', nor do we "attend" fires in the States.
    There is no doubt that it is Paul Grimwood.


    http://forums.firehouse.com/showpost...1&postcount=18

    Which leads me to ask about that whole multiple screen name thing. But whatever floats his boat.
    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.

  15. #340
    Forum Member
    KnightnPBIArmor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Beautiful downtown Hortense, GA
    Posts
    745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HotTrotter View Post
    There was no formal change of command. That to me is a real big issue. Chief Garvin was the first IC and he had a tactical plan as to what had to be done. He knew what resources he wanted and where. Cheif Thomas shows up and takes over without ever touching base.
    How on God's green earth can you know this for 100% certainty if you weren't there, genius? Ever thought they may have done a face-to-face transfer?

  16. #341
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    No as far as I know it isn't regional...long before I got hired in my present dept. I worked for a Dept that had little to no written policies on fire operations(today they might be different). They used nothing more than the IFSTA manuals for training materials (and I think 1 copy of Dunn's Collapse although it was over most of their heads)

    At the time we practiced the forward lay but also the MPOs and members were profficent in use of their modifcation of a reverse lay and we still had one spare Engine that when placed out of service men were still riding the backstep...it had skid loads (male butt off first).

    As I recal there were three major hose lay senarios presented. (I recall some brothers from the Plano FD were in some of the revised editions)

    One was the forward lay as described above.

    Two was the reverse, where the male butt with nozzle came off first...the appropriate amount of hose came off the rig and the Chauffeur proceded to the hydrant. Hooked up and broke the line at the next butt. Then hooked it up and supplied it with the appropriate pressure.

    Three was what Catch22 was refering two and I think the DC area guys would recognize as the Wagon-Pumper concept. Where a pumper pumps to a hose wagon or something like that.

    FTM-PTB
    I figured I was at least pretty close. You know how some of that regional stuff goes, though. What we call one thing in the Midwest, you New Yawkers might call something else. Kind of like a Brennan (?) nozzle and a cellar nozzle (our training chief is from NY, gets interesting talking to him when the phrases start coming out).

    We've reverse layed a few times even with LDH on longer lays using the "Wagon-Pumper" concept. It seems to be more efficient at getting the max. flow from the hydrant. Typically we'll use the forward lay, since we've rarely got a hydrant more than a block or two away.

  17. #342
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    I figured I was at least pretty close. You know how some of that regional stuff goes, though. What we call one thing in the Midwest, you New Yawkers might call something else. Kind of like a Brennan (?) nozzle and a cellar nozzle (our training chief is from NY, gets interesting talking to him when the phrases start coming out).

    We've reverse layed a few times even with LDH on longer lays using the "Wagon-Pumper" concept. It seems to be more efficient at getting the max. flow from the hydrant. Typically we'll use the forward lay, since we've rarely got a hydrant more than a block or two away.

    You mean the Bresnan distributor or Bresnan Nozzle?

    There are many tools that carry our former members names or tools that have been renamed by other departments. That former dept I had mentioned earlier, had a Kelly tool. Not one of them knew that it was developed by Capt. Kelly of I think Ladder Co. 163.

    Even here some things have had their names shortened. The McCarthy Disc, developed by Chief McCarthy to identify OOS hydrants, is now just known as a Hydrant disc...etc.

    Sorry for the detour...back to the orginally schedualed thread.

    FTM-PTB

  18. #343
    Forum Member
    FDAIC485's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southeast aka Dixie
    Posts
    653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KnightnPBIArmor View Post
    How on God's green earth can you know this for 100% certainty if you weren't there, genius? Ever thought they may have done a face-to-face transfer?
    He might not be 100% but he's pretty close believe it or not. Again, before anyone sounds off on their knowledge of the Fire Service in Charleston, I suggest that you visit http://www.firefighterhourly.com to get the truth.
    I believe them bones are me. Some say we are born into the grave. I feel so alone, gonna end up a big ol' pile a them bones

    -J. Cantrell

  19. #344
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDAIC485 View Post
    He might not be 100% but he's pretty close believe it or not. Again, before anyone sounds off on their knowledge of the Fire Service in Charleston, I suggest that you visit http://www.firefighterhourly.com to get the truth.

    Believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear. I looked at that site and I can't find any word for word citations of what their department procedures are. Some of us are still waiting for the full and hopefully comprehensive report. I'm already skeptical that these "experts" have already after a whole week came up with some widesweeping suggestions for change in their equipment and operations.

    Every recomendation might be on the money however some already seem a bit troublesome...take for example from a recent news paper article:

    Incident command has become a thorny subject for the Charleston Fire Department in the aftermath of the sofa store fire. Fire safety experts have questioned why Assistant Fire Chief Larry Garvin entered the burning store multiple times while serving as the initial incident commander before Thomas assumed control. Federal standards call for incident commanders to remain outside burning buildings to better coordinate firefighting.
    Can anyone explain to me who made up these "Federal Standards" and how much fire have these people seen?

    And why is it this Chief can't take a peak inside a structure?

    FTM-PTB

  20. #345
    MembersZone Subscriber
    JohnVBFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Norfolk, Va
    Posts
    1,477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDAIC485 View Post
    He might not be 100% but he's pretty close believe it or not. Again, before anyone sounds off on their knowledge of the Fire Service in Charleston, I suggest that you visit http://www.firefighterhourly.com to get the truth.
    Please tell me you are honest enough to admit that using an anonymous blog site as a reference is as valid as using Wikpedia?

    Nobody here is questioning that there are some changes that need to be made. No one here is questioning that something went tragically wrong.

    What many are saying is that it is impossible to conduct an accurate review of an entire fire department and make recommendations for improvement in 4 days.

    Many are saying lets us see Charleston's SOP's/SOG's, protocols in documented cited fashion.

    Most important of all, many are advocating not making changes, JUST to make changes because something happened.
    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.

  21. #346
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Here is another odd posting from your supposedly factual web site.

    September 06, 2007
    Charleston Fire: Larger Hose Baffles Some
    It's shocking to say the least. Just in the last two days, a senior member of the Charleston Fire Department, responsible for apparatus, realized that in order to use 4 inch hose the apparatus might have to be re-plumbed.

    Apparently the city is wavering over what size hose to use for supply lines. Their intakes are 2.5 inches in diameter. In addition they are concerned over where to put the larger hose because there are no cross-lays for attack lines.

    If you want confusion try explaining the differences in pressure and gallonage to senior officers. The "changes" to the hose may take much longer than anticipated. The cost may be cited as a reason not to move forward.

    Here's the deal: If it were taken care of when the apparatus were purchased, many within the last 10 years, this wouldn't be an issue.
    Are we understanding this correctly...E-One and either Hale or Waterous made them Engines that have pumps with 2.5" intakes...it is confusing because it mentions "re-plumbed" but then discusses hose? Does anyone know which it is?

    Also it makes an interesting mention...their Engines don't have "crosslays" or I would assume a synonym for Preconnected attack lines.

    Should this be the case...I can easily see what would be a easy and dependable method for them to adopt. Backstretching on most fires...otherwise known as Reverse lays.

    My Engine doesn't have "crosslays" either and we put out fires all the time(or should I say my dept does as I'm not that boastful)

    I can completely understand their concern about a wholesale adoption of LDH when a less-expensive, more dependable method that would quite possibly be an excellent fit for a city structured as they are is right under their noses. How is it these "experts" overlooked this option? Could it be they aren't the experts they think they are and are only experts with what they are immediately familiar with? Was their a rush to judgement? Did these guys actually do any research before putting out these recomendations?

    Once again...can anyone cite their Engine Co. Operations procedures for fires and how they typically stretch to a fire building?

    FTM-PTB
    Last edited by FFFRED; 09-06-2007 at 01:53 PM.

  22. #347
    EuroFirefighter
    Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    Once again...can anyone cite their Engine Co. Operations procedures for fires and how they typically stretch to a fire building?
    The fact is .... whatever their procedures are they had 12-16 guys committed to the interior of a developing big box fire and they couldn't supply them with enough water to charge or adequately flow the attack hose-lines in use.

  23. #348
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    You mean the Bresnan distributor or Bresnan Nozzle?

    There are many tools that carry our former members names or tools that have been renamed by other departments. That former dept I had mentioned earlier, had a Kelly tool. Not one of them knew that it was developed by Capt. Kelly of I think Ladder Co. 163.

    Even here some things have had their names shortened. The McCarthy Disc, developed by Chief McCarthy to identify OOS hydrants, is now just known as a Hydrant disc...etc.

    Sorry for the detour...back to the orginally schedualed thread.

    FTM-PTB
    That's the one! I can never get the name right, but I knew about the origin. We (myself and training chief) had this discussion one time that the new guys need to understand the history of the service a lot better.

    Believe half of what you see and nothing of what you hear. I looked at that site and I can't find any word for word citations of what their department procedures are. Some of us are still waiting for the full and hopefully comprehensive report. I'm already skeptical that these "experts" have already after a whole week came up with some widesweeping suggestions for change in their equipment and operations.
    I looked over the site myself. All I see is a blog by a reputable journalist/former firefighter-fire marshal and a bunch of anonymous comments to his postings. Even the author pretty much keeps from forming opinions from what I've seen.

  24. #349
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Batt18 View Post
    The fact is .... whatever their procedures are they had 12-16 guys committed to the interior of a developing big box fire and they couldn't supply them with enough water to charge or adequately flow the attack hose-lines in use.
    Where exactly is this information coming from? I keep reading it but I have yet to see anyone cite a source for it.

  25. #350
    EuroFirefighter
    Batt18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22 View Post
    Where exactly is this information coming from? I keep reading it but I have yet to see anyone cite a source for it.
    It's in the tapes .... 'we are running out of water' .... 'do you want that 2 1/2" charged'? ... 'Not until you get that supply line in' .... Maydays!

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register