antiquefirelt

Because "we" are far too liberal as a country. Most Americans, while even keeping 9/11 in their minds, still are not willing to be further inconvenienced at the airport. Remember the airline industry has been cutting back personnel and increase ticket overages to the point that many flights are overbooked and require people to be bumped or take a bump. Couple this with longer security lines, possible pat downs, body scanners and treating everyone like their guilty until proven innocent and you'l further damage the air travel industry. At this point the terrorists have won. We have substantially changed our American way of life, due to 9/11 and subsequent thwarted attacks. We are now fighting amongst ourselves over providing safety while not wanting to offend anyone or violate their rights of privacy. Face it, no one will ever take another airplane by hijacking it, as the passengers must assume the worst and will overtake the hijacker at any costs. And why not, there's nothing to lose and everything to gain? Once we get airplanes secure, what next? Malls? Times Square? Cruise Ships? Commuter Rail? We all want to be safe, but we must face the reality that we now live in a far more dangerous country than ever before and we must decide what the balance will be: Free Americans or a more secure state where we're a little less entitled to conveniences.

I definitely agree with your first statement. The issue is that most people do not use the TIC nearly enough to be truly proficient at what they are seeing. Conversely, as noted blind reliance on the TIC is a recipe for disaster. The key to success as with nearly everything in this job, is continual training and practical application. Seeing a hot outlet, putting your hand on it and finding relevance in what the TIC is telling you is as important as knowing how to turn it on and off. For this reason, our guys take the cameras off the truck on every run. They look at things all the rime, regardless of smoke condition or actual fire. This gives you a basis to judge from. We know that shiny stainless steel in most commercial kitchens reflect the image and are inaccurate. The same goes for any glass not just mirrors. If a material reflects heat, the camera will not "see" it properly. This is just one of the little issue you learn as you handle these things more and more. The camera can be successfully used to more surgically overhaul, rather than forcing you to use hands and tools. As always you must be able to correlate what you "see" in the TIC with what you actually see, smell, feel and hear. I know for certain a TIC saved my bacon one night as we nearly left an "odor of smoke" in a residence and blamed it on the cool night and nearby wood burning chimney smoke. One last look throughout the living room with the TIC found a fire in the ceiling where no one could have reached it to touch. While the house was only a few doors from the station, going back for an attic fire would have not been good for anyone involved, especially your truly!

Again, do what works for you, but understand some of the idea behind what has been said to this point. The safest way to descend the stairs is facing the stairs feet first. You can put weight on one foot at a time and if you start to go in, you can prone out on the stairs, hands on the line as a safety "rope" to the top. Using the line on the way down will cause you severe pain. Being on the stairs in a abasement fire is truly punishing. You're in the chimney, and the sooner you are on the floor (and the stairs are still intact!) the better. Going down feet first facing up will not allow you to use your hands effectively. Sure a weak step will be found, but a quick failure requires scrambling action, which cannot be accomplished on your back. Stay Safe and Merry Christmas.

Preferable? Where does the smoke, heat and steam go if you enter through the only sizable exterior entrance/exit? I'm not sure preferable would be the correct word here. Likely safer for the FFer's, but not nearly as good for the contents and the structure. Again, as ALS noted tactics are influenced by the situation. I still believe regardless of the fire being in the basement and us knowing it, the first line should enter the front door. My primary concern is cutting of the fire between the first and second floor and getting it between the fire and potential occupants. This will slow the line to the basement via in many cases, but how often are we certain the fire is contained to the basement? Again, as ALS notes, knowing your district is important. I know that 9 times out of 10 in my area the stretch to the rear and access through the rear door will take more time than entering through the front. This is due to small yards, cars parked all the way around dwellings, fences, over crowded rear porches and the like. Good stuff in this thread.

OK, where to begin? First, NFPA 211 the Standard on Chimneys, Fireplaces and solid fuel burning appliances (something like that)requires that all chimneys be enclosed where they pass through "living spaces". Furthermore they may not pass through a closet/storage area. Proper code compliant enclosures require a chimney to literally be free standing from it's bases through the roof with a 2" airspace between the chimney and any combustibles. This creates a multi-story vertical enclosure that must be fire stopped at every level by a minimum of 22 ga. steel. Most of the time this comes in the form a metal flashing secured to the floor and fitted tight to the chimney. Some exceptions are when the chimney liner is a listed "zero clearance" system such as the pured "Supa Flu" or the newer stainless steel tube liners. In cases where approved "zero-clearance" systems are used, the chimney may be exposed to the living space or the enclosure may be fitted tight to the chimney itself. Using a standard metal pipe enclosed in a wood enclosure does not meet code. The requisite clearance for standard single wall or unlisted metal pipe is 36". Most newer home use "Metalbestos" or some similar system that allows for the minimum clearance to combustibles. In my former life as a carpenter, we installed these chimney systems and I can tell you that dropping a single section will do damage to the liner and could cause future issues. Still we see many people selling these in local "swap/sell it guides" and there's little guarantee they're safe for use. I've seen numerous older chimneys that went floor to floor, with the bricks stopping at the ceiling joists and restarting on the next floor above! Thats right a wooden section at each floor. Guess what, each time it was in a 100 plus year old house! No reason they should have lasted but somehow, they did. For the most part, chimney fires start where the home insulation stops. If the roof is insulated the chimney fire "throat" will be close to the roof line whereas when the top floor ceiling represent the last insulated plane, the throat will be near this point. The point where the smoke reaches the cool chimney flue is where creosote builds up. Some other issues are the older chimneys that are corbeled (not straight). Most older houses had the chimney come straight out through the peak, though the fireplace or flue entrance was not aligned with the peak. These requires building in a slanted section which especially when not lined, is a perfect creosote catcher. These are tougher to clean and clear when burning. Up my way masons do not have to be licensed so we get tons of poor installations to inspect. Sadly most citizens don't know their right to require the mason to complete a form stating the chimney will be built in compliance with NFPA 211, and end up with little recourse other than court. In Maine it is a class E crime for a mason to fail to provide a homeowner this form, but most don't know that the standard or form even exists. Anyone and everyone with a trowel and strong back is a mason!

Some times it's better to keep quiet and let everyone think you're an idiot than to post and erase all doubt. Sorry but your attitude of "me above all others", with absolutely no risk to yourself is disturbing. You represent everything many of us resent about EMS and the direction a portion of the fire service is heading.

Well said. I'll admit that as the Union President I argued with the City over stipends for degrees. We of course were trying to get money for them and used the point that while a degree in the related field was likely most beneficial, the core coursework required of all degree programs tends to be where you see the most benefit. Those with degrees tend to be better at writing letters, memos, after action reports and position papers. While few of these are requisite of line firefighters, as they move up in the ranks, some of this becomes more obvious. This is where we see benefits of Fire Science and paramedicine degrees, not in the field. And I would not trade this benefit for field experience as that's primarily what we are paid to do. A nice well written after actin report detailing the events leading to a failed rescue is not as good a as a poorly written success story. In the end our people get stipends for any AS, BS or MS regardless of field of study. They also are reimbursed for up to 6 credit hours per semester if they pass with a 3.0 or better grade. But in hiring, it's nearly a non-issue, most people rarely fit into the "all other things being equal" that would make a degree a factor. There is nothing bad about education, but it's not the only factor. While we're trying to elevate the FS to another level, it's still primarily a blue collar hands on job, that will not require any post secondary education.

Comments like this make me think a lot of FD's are right to not sell or allow their uniforms to non-department personnel. This is why the fire service is becoming what it is. As a trained person who can render aid, how do you stand back and do nothing? Even if they were mistaken for EMS, if they have any uniform of an emergency provider they should be obligated to render whatever aid they can. If this is just updating 911 via telephone so be it, maybe it's taking control of the chaotic scene, which can be done in most cases short of weapons play, It sounds to me like the chaos was caused by these two refusing to act. Cowardice and a disgusting display of the type of people who should not be employed by any emergency service.We may not have the whole story, but given any part of this is true, it's pathetic.

First, it looks like a great job and another affirmation about the use of the can. This is the kind of job that shows what decent training and execution can do. But, Lad12derff is right about the line. If there are any "always" in this job, I'd say it's taking the line though the front door on dwellings. Gaining and maintaining control of the stairs must be a priority. Had you and the Lieu gotten into trouble the line may have not been in the ideal spot to control your egress. Again, strong work, but maybe more than the obvious "can" lesson to discuss.

I don't think anyone really is saying that. The issue is blind faith in either career tract. This job, not unlike the military takes more than book smarts. All of the knowledge in the world won't help without the ability to make decisions rapidly and without all the variables. It also takes know the difference between theory and what works. They can't teach sounds and smells in a classroom, yet sometimes these are our best indicators. Conversely, you can take someone with very little education and make them a great firefighter if they have motivation. Probably not climbing high on the promotional ladder, but they can do the job well. Without a doubt well rounded individuals have a better chance of excelling. Those who have gone through college likely have better study habits (but not all) and have a system for themselves how to attain knowledge in a certain area they lack it in. To rise to the top it very often takes peers and subordinates assistance. Few company officers exceed when their company thinks they stink. So people skills, the ability to pass on knowledge and their trust is a key factor in your career path. As I've said before, our FD has no requirement for any degrees, though the city admin is usually pretty hung up on them for the top slot (well at the one time in 14 years we've had a Chief leave). Those that have degrees don't standout in any way I have seen in my time, other than payday. A few have actual fire science degrees and don't seem to be any better at hydraulics, tactics, building construction or any specific topic than those who've learned these things in-house/in the field. I'm not trying to discourage higher education as those who have it are closer to being "well rounded" than someone who has to start taking classes while working (it's a B**** trust me). But your degree means little in the field, where you'll need to prove your mettle.

It's only going to get worse. Facebook, Twitter, Myspace and the like has turned things that used to be behind closed doors into public forums. I predict all the firehouse dramas will only be far worse and damaging in the future due to the explosion of technology.

Please remember that situations dictate tactics. Most FD's don't have too many TICs so saying the engine officer should have one, is great unless it means the search crew goes without. What if we know where the fire is? Members searching above the fire, or unsupported are often in far more danger than members operating on the line. Use your resources as the situation requires. Get more TICs! Make sure everyone uses them all the time! You must learn what things look like through routinely viewing stuff with the TIC, if not you'll be slow and inefficient. Ensure you know what to do when the TIC fails, because it will! Make the walk around happen! Know to the best of your abilities the fire area or floor.

It's definitely nice having two sets. We found the only way to accomplish this was for member's who receive new gear to keep their old set, short of any major damage. We also have a quartermasters locker with enough gear for 50% of the FD. If on duty members or call members need gear cleaned, they can get a full set of dry fairly well fitted gear. This is not optimal, but is heading that way. I agree this is good use of money for those who are using the gear regularly, but understand the skepticism in slower FD's. The problem is who defines active enough when choosing who gets what? If you are doing this for a "safety" reason, then you basically are disregarding the safety of those not "chosen", which could prove very costly. Please, don't toss out NFPA standards as the answer, as picking and choosing based on what you want vs. what you really need (adequate staffing)waters the whole thing down.

Looks like there will be little in the way of actual discussion on this. I think most find it easy to toss in a barb or bash some builder with whatever they can find with very little true understanding to back it up. Most people have been sold a bill of goods on the steel vs. aluminum debate by a marketing machine that then determined to keep market share they had to offer an aluminum aerial.

In all fairness to the othe manufacturers out there that do make decent trucks, most guys from Boston that I've spoken to, talk about the E-One's ability to set up on their very narrow congested streets. The jack spread is nearly 5 feet less than their Peirces and I think until this last batch the E-Ones were all single rear axles vs, the Peirces and new E-One tandem axles. For the most part, most really just care about the functionality of the equipment regardless of whose name is on the front.

BTW, with any aerial, I think you'd want to consider the lower critical temperature, that which shows a physical change in the material. So, I'll assume AL is far lower than steel, but steel shows effects (elongation) at as little as 1400 F. In the end, I think is all "much ado about nothing" M'Ave is right, if these temps are affecting your aerial, it's time to bop the operator on the helmet!

Same here. We ran a Sutphen rental for one year. It was interesting to say the least. Our personnel got a fair shot at transitioning from a RM stick to the MM tower while using an older chassis with a terrible turning radius and very unforgiving placement parameters. The bucket is really the biggest issue I have with them. Completely designed for water tower use almost completely ignoring any other aerial use. Even then the guns on the sides are not as easy to work as a tiller barred manual gun, but alas, many major and small FD's use them successfully every day. More power to them I guess.

Pretty strong opinion about the sticks being garbage. Funny Boston Fire seems to have made them work for long stretch, regardless of their maintenance program. I'm not trying to sway you, but it seems E-One, Sutphen and Aeriascope have all been fairly successful at putting out usable aluminum aerials. E-One certainly has a fair market share of sticks. My limited understanding of physics, tells me that the mass of the aluminum aerial will not stay heated enough to actually melt unless left in directly flame for longer than any aerials wires, hydraulic seals , etc. will last. I think we'd have seen more melted sticks by now if this was anything more than a Peirce salesman's gimmick. Sorry, old Peirce salesman, as they now offer an aluminum aerial after years of bashing them saying they were dangerous and would melt.

I was surprised myself a few years back when I was involved in a discuss about aluminum and the salesman corrected me. Check the specs out from the Seagrave/Aerialscope brochure: http://www.seagrave.com/MySeagrave/ContentManager/DocLibrary/AERIALSCOPE_SS.pdf middle of the second page under "boom construction". I'm fairly sure the Scope is 1000 lbs unlimited but he E-One midmount has some restrictions below zero degrees? I know they won't put a manual gun on their buckets due to concerns of rapid changes in reaction force directions. But, they know their product best and with no E-One aerial hitting the ground, it seems their engineers are dialed in. Best price the met the spec regardless of aerial material. We bid out a MM tower in 2006 and it came down to E-One, KME and ALF. Sadly for all the other things E-One does right they seem to have missed the boat on their midmount product, with far more restrictions and numerous unhappy customers in the northeast.The KME was also more restricted in operation parameters so we bought the ALF. One week after signing the contract they were bought up and right after delivery went bankrupt. But alas, still no issues taking it out of service. Peirce and Scope also bid and were $100K plus above the other three.

Yeh, Aerialscope. 75% of the aerial box booms and bucket are aluminum, are they not? I think you'll find only the bases section is steel and the rest AL.

Hence his screenname "Grumpy FF".

Greenwood (North) had a new Maxim rescue pumper on the Spartan Furion chassis at their open house last summer. In all it looked fairly decent, not high end quality, but functional. I'm not sure shooting to build "a pumper" for between 350-450k is much of a goal. That's a pretty big ballpark for a custom chassis pumper from a relative unknown. It's not your Daddy's maxim of years passed.

My question on this went unanswered. I'm sure the buffs will be sad to note that the almighty Aerialscope uses aluminum for the moving boom sections. And again, while I have no specific frame of reference on E-One equipment, it's hard to argue with their rate of aluminum aerial failures (zero). How many other builders regardless of materials used can make that assertion? Me thinks some people are far to worried about nameplates, badges and looks. Give us trucks that work, ugly or not, and we'll do our job, the less they cost the better. (more $$ for raises!)

I doubt we'll ever know the real reasons but accepting a free fire truck would be highly questionable in municipal government. It certainly would look like a bribe to continue buying from the same dealer/vendor/builder. I know we cannot accept gifts over a certain dollar value with City Council approval, and we talking about double digits not 6 figures. Even the council might question the long term effects of accepting such a gift givent he other dealers looking for excuses to sue. This may have also been around the time Boson starting looking at others besides E-One?

I won't argue the limited merits of E-One themselves, but aluminum aerial devices or parts? Why do you equate that with garbage?