wraftery

FYI I talked to Seth and all is good. ''Nuff said. I still want to know where firehouse fun went

Good luck, Jody. My gut feeling in this whole thing is that the higher you have to go in the Courts, the more permanent it becomes for all FF's. Hopefully, you are the guy that brings back the high standards of the Fire Service.

Politicians don't get their jobs on merit. Judges don't get their jobs on merit. Why would they expect anything different for us out here in the real world?

If your Dept upgrades to new gear, and the old stuff is still viable, remember that there are plenty of poor rural FDs out there who could make good use of your old stuff.

The lifespan of all firefighting equipment (PPV, ropes, apparatus, SCBA...everything) is ONE YEAR, calculated April to April. That's when guys see the new stuff at FDIC and just have to get it.

I recall finding a lost alzheimers patient asleep in tall (4') grass using a TIC. Done on ground TIC scanning from a high point. Kind of a no brainer...see a heat signature, go look. We were not doing a large area like a helo with FLIR but it worked. By the way, we were called to assist PD with PD as lead agency. Urban search meant stores, busses, trains, etc. With many search teams, map sheets for each team should be handed out and progress recorded at CP's master map

Barry I have seen this kind of thing before. You are showing symptoms of being in admin on straight days too long. Tell Doc to give you a company before it's too late.

Absolutely right, Lieu. All the players have to do their part before you can call it a team. We've all seen what happens when the truck doesn't get the front of the building. We have to leave room for the truck(s) at every run even those automatic fire alarms that you know are 99% falses. We have to operate on the premise that every run is that 1%...the big one. In my photo, a cockloft fire, also note that there is no water flowing. Interior crews are still operating, but fighting a losing battle. The fire, because of the Tudor parapets with no fire stops, has gotten around three trench cuts, and was inaccessable to aerials except for Side A. (It's an old picture...it was side one back then) The aerial pipes are waiting for the interior crews to back down to two floors below and the word from the IC before they open. There are a couple of good threads that can be opened for discussion here: 1. Fireground discipline...so you don't kill your brothers inside. 2. Trench cuts...How Where When Why, and the importance of triangle inspection cuts behind the trench. Just because you cut a long strip, it ain't necessarily a trench cut.

I might have been IC but it took 6 good apparatus operators to pack all that into a narrrow street.

I'll give Boston credit for their great ladder work, but us Yankee fans are right up there in the running. "Waiting to Open Up"

NFPA receives major grant from FEMA for national sprinkler awareness campaign Campaign aims to reduce fire losses by advocating need for home fire sprinkler requirements April 15, 2010 – The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) received a $746,438 grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to conduct a national home fire sprinkler awareness campaign, “Faces of Fire,” which will demonstrate the true impact residential fires have on individuals and families, and encourage people to take action to prevent fire deaths in their communities by advocating for home fire sprinklers requirements for new construction. The goal of the project is to reduce the number of home fire deaths, which account for more than 80 percent of fire deaths. By working with and providing resources to the fire service and consumers, the campaign will educate communities on the live-saving impact of home fire sprinklers and offer a set of tools that can be used at the local and state level to make the case for sprinkler requirements in communities. The grant was awarded under the 2009 Assistance to Firefighters – Fire Prevention and Safety Grant Program. “Sadly, home fires kill nearly 3,000 people a year, yet sprinklers could greatly reduce these losses,” said James M. Shannon, president and CEO of NFPA.“We have long known the life-saving benefits of sprinklers in many types of buildings. It is critical to bring this technology into homes where the vast majority of fire deaths occur.” In 2009, NFPA launched the Fire Sprinkler Initiative®: Bringing Safety Home, a nationwide effort to increase the use of home fire sprinklers through the adoption of sprinkler requirements in new one- and two-family homes. Funds from the FEMA grant will greatly expand the reach of information on the life-saving benefits of sprinklers and resources available for people interested in adopting the use of sprinklers in their community. The Fire Sprinkler Initiative Web site will be enhanced to feature a special toolkit containing media materials, fact sheets, and other content to support sprinkler advocacy at the local level. Other campaign initiatives include paid advertisements in traditional media; social media components, such as a YouTube video campaign featuring actual fire victims; and a social media outreach. NFPA will also host representatives from each state for a training meeting, which will include public safety educators, fire officials, and building officials, among others. You heard it first right here at EMT BRAVO. Let's see how this sprinkler incentive is going to work using a little math. Here's how it worked in the past. The sprinkler incentive should go the same route: Career, volunteer or otherwise, we all pay Federal taxes. The federal government funds FEMA. FEMA takes our money and gives this huge grant to NFPA NFPA uses our money to come up with a smoke detector program NFPA then charges us (quite dearly, too) to get this program to tell people they need smoke detectors To pay for this progam, we have to charge local taxpayers. Wouldn't we be better off just enacting a sprinkler requirement in our building code?

A NFPA 13D (1 & 2 Family Dwellings) has a different design than the Commercial systems we are used to. They are faster acting and lower flow so as to catch the fire when it is just past the incipient stage. Homes with low-flow wells require a tank for water supply. We are starting to explain 13D already right here in this thread and it's not costing us tax money twice! Sorry antiquefirelt I should have read yours before I came back to finish mine.

One solution is the all-electric home

M Ave, if you say this is based on your limited experience, I commend you. You are a fast learner. You already figured this whole leadership thing out. Some guys don't figure it out over a lifetime. I can't give you all the credit, though, because you obviously learned a lot from your senior men and officers. Study and take the test. You'll make a good Lt. You also reminded me of another point for officers: If you walk into the kitchen and things suddenly become quiet, they're talking about YOU. Turn around and go back to your office. Don't get mad, either. They might be saying something good.

On duty, Officers should always be addressed by their title (title nickname such as Lieu, Cap is also acceptable). In the gin mill, it might be Joey, but on duty it's Lieutenant. It reminds all hands what the pecking order is..all day, every day. By the same token, a good officer respects his subordinates. They are not stupid people. They are heros. If you are on the brimk of death, you expect those guys to risk their lives to save you. That is not to say your men should not be disciplined. A conniption on the part of an officer (only for serious matters)goes a long way. But if you throw a conniption fit more than twice a year, something is really wrong with your organization. I have often heard officers make the statement "I am the Chief" or words to that effect. I can never recall myself doing that. If you are really a Chief they'll know, you should never have to announce it. I have always tried to use "We" when talking about goals, safety, teamwork, critiquing fires, etc. I strived not to use "You" or "I." We are a team,and we are responsible for the members of that team. As the two well respected posters before me said, sometimes you gotta be a pr..k. Sometimes you gotta get the whole 1st alarm assignment to a shopping center parking lot at 3am to chew them out over the fiasco that occurred an that last inncident. Don't expect breakfast in bed the next morning, but expect that fiasco won't happen ever again.

A couple of points on foam that weren't mentioned: 1. For class B fires, do not begin a foam application until you have enough foam concentrate on scene to complete the operation. Otherwise you are wasting your time and foam. 2. Foam Is Not Foam! Not all foams are compatible. Make sure (espaecially in mutual aid situations) that only compatiblle foams are applied. Try talking to your mutual aid comrades before and, and buy compatible foams. 3. What was I thinking...Forget the second and third sentences in Point #2. FD's don't use logic like that. If Dept A buys foam, Dept B has to buy Better Foam, compatible or not. 4. If you want to dissolve the foam blanket AFTER the emergency is over, Try educting fabric softener and applying it to the foam blanket. Most foams are detergents and fabric softener breaks down detergent. Try it on your foam.

The implication of a company like McDonald's being self insured means that they consider their properties disposable cuold not be further from the truth. A company of that size with that much money simply does some math and comes up with a decision. The logic goes like this for a hypothetical company. 1. Out of 1000 properties, yearly on average, 1 will be a total loss, 7 will suffer severe fire damage, 32 will have minor fires with damage under $5000, If the company can pay for this average plus an extra percentage for a high loss year they go to step 2. 2. Can they afford a huge lawsuit which occurs every 50 years? If yes, and the annual cost is cheaper than an insurance company charges then self insurance is a viable choice. I presented a simplified version with only two criteria, but your insurance goes through a similar process to determine yor insurance rate. It's called insurance underwriting. Neither the insurance company nor the self insured company considers their properties disposable. They are both just playing the odds.

Thanks, Barry. The same logic can be applied to a company like Mickey Dee's. The fact that a building is self insured is probably not even a minimal factor in the decision to go to defensive mode. Things like Building construction, fire involvement, resources, etc. and not the owner's insurance policy govern your decision to go defensive. On the other hand. look at what happened after Katrina with a so-called reputable insurance carrier like State Farm. State Farm played a game of semantics. Was it wind damage (covered) or flood damage (not covered)? State Farm said mostly flood damage and a lot of "insured" people got stiffed and lost everything. No owner or franchisee wants to go out of business. And it's not only the building loss that affects the community. If there are no burgers sold, there is no paycheck for the burger flipper or the fry guy. Try this while you are out doing company inspections (you do do company inspections,right?): Ask the owner of a chain fast food joint how much the gross take is per hour for that store. I think it will amaze you.

Not sure exactly how the liability part works. You say "I have enough to pay for my lost property," But I am sure that state laws would require you to have a minimum amount of liability insurance (or escrow or reserved funds).

. We had a Town Judge in the 1980's and '90's. He was a rather liberal fellow for most cases, except when it came to violations of fire codes. He would impose hefty fines on defendants for even minor violations that were not corrected in the fire inspction process. Obstructed or locked fire exits were always sure to bring down his wrath on the violator. I never understood why this was until one day, I heard his grandmother had some personal involvement in the Triangle Shirtwaist fire, possibly as one of the survivors. No other comments. Just something I thought you would like to know.

Good post, Lieu. Not much to add to that. I did note the 2 1/2 as the first lin in. Too often that1 3/4 is pulled because "we always start with it" When should you pull that 2 1/2? You'll konw when, so don't fight your common sense and go for the smaller line.

An accountability as a system, whoever's system you are using is not perfect. However, accountability as an ATTITUDE should be as close to perfect as humanly possible. What I mean by an attitude is this: you call yourselves brothers. You came to the incident with that brother. It's your duty as his brother to watch out for him and know where he is all the time. and he is suppposed to do the same. No tags, IC boards, signup sheets, or federal labor law will ever be as close to perfect as that bond between brothers. That's accountability.

Yes. I always thought that the lower the number, the more optimal it is, but I am just a follower. You probably also think that 1 is better than 3, 5, or 7. It's not so. Try getting your wife to do what you want!

One tip for doing a PAR via radio: Give your people a pre-announcement such as "All units operating at 123 Main St, standby for a PAR." Wait a little bit for them to do their piece of the PAR before calling for the entire PAR. I've done this in training and actual incidents and it goes alot smoother. Picture a multi family dwelling with fire on more that one floor. The PAR should something like this (After the pre-announcement) "Command to all unit operating at 123 Main St on a PAR...Division 6 Division 6, I have E1, E4, L2, PAR is 10 on Floor number 6 all accounted for, E2 Driver is at the pump. Received Division 6...Division 7 PAR" And so on As this is going on, the person at the IC Board (and NOT the IC in this case) should be checking his board against the PAR> Not the IC because this job has exceeded the max span of control of 7. Somebody questioned my number of 7 before. It's 7 max, and 5 optimum.

A PAR can be called for, even when there is no emergency like a collapse or m'aidez. In fact an IC should call fo a PAR if the incident starts getting complicated, or if you have been on scene for a long period of time. Sometimes an IC wants to make sure people are where he thinks they are, and doing what he told them to do. A PAR message is not a get out message.