antiquefirelt

I agree with the sentiment, but one could also ask: If the FD leaves the premise is there no fire? I'm sure a realistic expectation is that there is no problem when they leave. If the police leave an accident, were all the crimes addressed? I'm sure the realistic expectation is that all citations have been issued, criminals summonsed and a proper report will be filed. So the question might be: If EMS leaves the scene, is it a realistic expectation that everyone has been evaluated or refused?

And YOU sound Like You own the Rights to residential Sprinkler systems or Maybe Your related This this engineer is he your KID? Wrong on both counts. I merely am saying that realistically we'll never eliminate this type of construction, so we must use what we have available to protect it from fire. No doubt a disable sprinkler system is useless, but the same can be said of any defensive system from smoke detectors to firearms. Regardless of the number of ways sprinklers can be rendered useless, they work in a majority of cases, I've yet to see any "system" that can't or doesn't fail at somepoint. But, maybe you see an angle I don't? I just don't see the construction industry losing these products in my lifetime.

Sadly, everyone going home shouldn't even be considered success, it's merely the absolute minimum. It's easier to ensure everyone can go home if we don't even respond! That being said, I've seen plenty of fires that I'm surprised everyone went home from safely and of course in those places it just proves their MO is adequate. As we say,"They don't even suspect nothing".

The reality is that most citizens and local politicians don't care what it says on the side of the fire apparatus at the fire scene as long as the fire is put out. Given the choice between properly funding the local FD to ensure they're capable of handling a first or second alarm fire on their own, or utilizing "free" mutual aid, they'll always choose the cheaper option. Unless a bunch of communities in a region are seeing growing expenses due to providing the mutual aid, chances of any one wanting to be more self-sufficient is unlikely. The problem is the public doesn't know a good job from, mediocre or worse. If you arrive in any reasonable amount of time (longer for VFD's), don't look like the proverbial Monkey/Football, the fire goes out without getting worse after arrival, they'll be happy. In fact often they'll hail the FD for being hometown heroes, while having no clue they just got mediocrity. So trying to tell the public too spend more for a problem they fail to see or understand is a real uphill battle. The fact is we're our own worst enemy far too often. We (as a whole) take what they give us (less and less), accept increasing risks to our personnel, and still get the job done to a level that is satisfactory to the masses. Until we start pointing out slower response times, equipment failures, lack of training or skill development and relate these to the loss of funds and personnel, the public will continue to push for lower taxes, as at the end of the day, unless they've experienced a fire, they have no real skin in the game. To the public we're one very expensive insurance policy, that appears to work when needed. Only when they use us themselves do they truly judge how well the money they've paid over the years was spent.

Must be a regional terminology difference, I'd never heard of using "no patient" before coming to this forum. Every time I see that I imagine a report stating "we arrived found a vehicle off the road in the snow, no patient." Which would say to me, no one is around. Whereas your description alludes to a more detailed description of who may have been involved, but for the reasons you documented, they were not considered "patients". In our area reports of this nature typically use the term "upon arrival" or "upon investigation, EMS not needed".

I think it being realistic to say that that engineered wood products will not ever leave the market, so if we cannot eliminate these hazards, we must protect them from fire as best we can. One, two or twenty fires doesn't prove or disprove the efficacy of sprinklers or any other product. In he case of residential in the ordinance I noted above, to be sprinklered means they'll almost always have the added protection of the sheetrock or other interior finish as Pex tubing sprinkler pipe rarely left exposed. Sprinklers useless? Really? Huh, I guess this one fire erased the previous decades stats that prove otherwise quite conclusively. BTW-anyone die at the Edgewater Fire? You do understand that residential sprinkler systems are designed for Life Safety not property protection, right?

I wonder if you'll feel the same way when a Republican is abusing this power (if they ever gain the Presidency again)? Yeah sure they've done it, but wait until the next one! This will become part of the routine for all presidents to come. And the President has plenty of sway with his party, so he's got some gridlock blood on his hands as well. In fact, the more he (or any Executive) abuses this power, the more we're likely to see partisan gridlock. It's kind of like blaming the whole game on the person who blew the final play, it takes a lot of mistakes to get to where we are today.

I get it, but I just don't see the logic. Your everyday citizen can't get an SBR (w/o the NFA hoops), but if the buttstock is replaced with a steadying device for "one-handed" shooting, it's a legal pistol? What's the purpose of regulating SBRs if the same firearms can be a legal pistol? It appears the only substantive difference is the steadier aim of the buttstock?

You mean when our government as it was designed, and the parties elected, don't do what you want, this is what you do? Slippery slope when the Executive Office can force their bidding upon us, remember what works for this president will surely be used by the next. As I recall our Forefathers designed our model to eliminate the possibility of "one man's rules". Pretty sure theirs been some rolling going on in many graves, for many years. Sad part is, this just emboldens elected officials at every level. Our governor who is the political polar opposite of our President is abusing his executive power on a daily basis to ensure his agenda.

That's what I was thinking. Not a big deal to me personally. As a matter of fact I've been somewhat interested following the whole rifle/handgun transformation. If appears that the newest rules/allowance don't care about the concealablity of a rifle as long as you don't have a buttstock to assist in aiming? You can have an AR with a 16" or greater barrel with a buttstock or one with any shorter barrel with a strap on steadying device, but not a stock?

Is this a total ban on 5.56 and/or .223 or just the "Green Tip" ban? Funny to ban such a weak cartridge while allowing far more deadly ones. Hell I'm sure you can get AR's in over a dozen cartrdges.

This is a good question that certainly ought to have an answer consistent with agency policy. We struggle with this every few years and just now are looking for an actual documented policy. The issue we seem to face is the MVA where some passerby calls 911, while no one in the MVA requests EMS or needs it. Along come our EMS crews who do full "refusals" on everyone at the scene. I've contended for many years that one of the "patients" could simply refuse to be evaluated, talk to EMS and flat out not sign a thing. Of course that would get documented. Really the full signed refusal is a CYA for the service and personnel. The problem comes when you're fairly busy and being tied up for 'no reason" causes further problems with responding to other calls. This just came up two shifts ago when the crews responded to a "property damage" MVA when 20 minutes later the driver reported to the LEO that he had a headache from striking his forehead on the steering wheel. Along comes Fire & EMS and finds 5 persons involved, three are minors with no parents available. No one needed EMS, all wanted to refuse all evals and any transport. Now we have a crew tied up trying to get sign offs for minors who were involved in a PD only MVA. In the end, they could have treated this as a single victim EMS responses due to how it was reported/requested. There are many services that require refusals on everyone involved in an MVA they respond to, we do this 95% of the time, as our City Attorney feels it's much easier to defend things that are documented, vs. responding and not documenting any contact. His question has been: What's to stop someone from claiming they were injured and EMS never evaluated them to determine if they were at the time? I can see WAS 967's point of getting Name and DOB, which at least shows that you had some contact and backs up your claim that the denied wanting/needing EMS evaluation. Basically, the more that is documented the better? As far as taking that to the next level of conducting a full refusal? On our system each patient refusal takes about 1/2 hr (soup to nuts)...

Interesting topic as an 'outsider" to the local politics and policies. It appears there are many rules/policies that dictate the use of equipment and personnel during MCI's and "disasters", I'm surprised someone doesn't have the ability to suspend some rules in these cases? At some point we are withholding resources just in case they're needed for their primary mission. No doubt there's more political issues where there are more people and money, but up in my neck of the woods, we can suspend most EMS rules (with sound reasoning and judgement) in the cases of an MCI where the suspension of said rule(s) will benefit the mission.

For about 6 years our ordinances have required residential sprinklers in all new one and two family dwellings (in line with the IRC, IBC and NFPA 101). About four years ago the City Council sought to have some exceptions making it easier to build in the area covered by the municipal water system. Since then, we added an exception that requires some caveats. One of these is that no lightweight building material are used as primary structural components. The one we've gotten some push back on, directly from the industry, was not allowing engineered beams like Glu-lams, Micro-lams, etc. They seem to understand the dangers of wooden I Beams, but still argue the glue in the full dimensional engineer beams is "safe". We ask for proof, they never have any, so it currently stands as is, but the reps from one of the large manufacturers keeps calling us every few months to argue this point. Nonetheless, until we seem proof their glue and particle board stands up to heat while under a load, I'm convinced these should be protected by sprinklers. We do allow them as small window and door headers where the floor load is not depending on them.

It seems every time there's talk about consolidation or regionalization it comes down to loss of control. Everyone wants more personnel to respond, few are willing to give up their control over their resources. If you're the Chief, why would you want to go back to having a boss and not having the final say? Only if you admit that's the best thing for your department and community and are willing to put those things first! Sadly, that's rare.

Had a conversation with our State's Fire Marshal's Office's head sprinkler guy yesterday. He noted that the reports were the units here were protected by an NFPA 13R system and there was likely some improper separation issues at the attic level. Clearly, the 13R is made for Life Safety and seeing no one was killed, the system worked, but... Is a 13R really appropriate for this many contiguous units? Once the fire gets some headway it can outpace the sprinkler system's design fairly easily. A true 13 may have given firefighters more time to cut off the spread of fire?

We "proofed" our flowmeters on one engine then used that to evaluate 1.75" hose for purchase, finding the true FL at typical flows. We found the formulas and rules of thumb we used for our most common lines (1.75") were off a bit. Of course we purchased hose with a larger inside diameter, but nonetheless, we flow what we deploy in the most efficient manner this way. Depending on your pumps piping it's a good idea to flow test the actual preconnects to determine each one's EP as the piping can be a factor.

Our first due runs with the following: (2) 200 ft. preconnected 1.75" lines in donut roll trays on the front bumper, (1) 15/16"SB and (1) Vindicator VHA (1) 200 ft. preconnected 1.75" line in donut roll tray in the left rear compartment, tipped out with a SM30 fog nozzle Rear bed: 1300 ft. 5" LDH supply (1) 400 ft 3" preconnected RAM monitor with SB tips (1) 400 ft. 2.5" preconnect with SB stacked tips on top of 200ft. additional 2.5" hose The front bumper loads can be conencted together to deploy a rapid 400ft. 1.75" line for rear porches, buildings in the rear, alleys etc. We utilize the Vindicator tip for this which allows us to flow 180 gpm at 210 psi EP. This isn't a regularly utilized line, but an option that's been drilled on. Given the small crew size, this may be the fastest way to get water on the fire and as long as we don't try doing this while flowing multiple lines, the pump can produce the 180-200 gpm easily at 210 psi. This was laid out having flow tested our own Ponn Supreme hose and utilizing the VHA to get a FL of just 42 psi at 180 gpm @ 40 psi NP. And when at all possible the back-up line comes off a separate engine.

Hard to know what would work or is feasible, but I believe Portland Maine does the Odd side/Even side plowing. Travelling home from Boston it was easy to see that Portland was clearly in better shape even after adding more snow than Boston had. Though overall not nearly the size of Boston, the congested areas still were cleared in anticipation of another foot today! Here in our little 'Burg, the DPW has been given a snow removal plan by the Council that failed to address numerous issues, now coming back to bite us. Our crews shovel out all the hydrants and DPW comes back and fills them back while winging back a day later.

It's no doubt a little different in the City where there's no place to put the snow. I was in Boston Fri/Sat and saw first hand that cars were buried on both sides of the streets (at least in the North End, Southie and much of Dorchester). Residents have no place to put the 6 ft of snow that's piled between their cars. Most of the sidewalks were clear and a single lane was passable through most side streets, but you have two choices to put the snow: in the street or into the sidewalk. Saw L18 out 4 or 5 times in our travels, they seemed to get around, no doubt they're used to tight conditions.

Not sure of NJ Code, but strictly following NFPA it's likely this complex cold have had an NFPA 13R system (residential up to 4 stories), which allows for fewer heads and excludes more areas, than the full NFPA 13 systems used in older or larger (height) buildings. I know we're fighting to ensure that 13R at the minimum is used in Townhouses for this reason, as once the fire gains any headway it overcomes the lesser Life Safety systems. If the fire started in an unprotected void (likley allowed in 13R) then the fire has plenty of fuel to overcome the 4 head design flow. We know sprinklers can be defeated, but with a fully functional properly designed full 13 system, I'd think the FD would have a much greater chance of making a stop before it grew way out of hand.

Were these sprinklered with full NFPA 13 systems or the 13R, if at all?

They just had a piece on the national news or one of the Sunday morning shows about JetBlue recruiting retired first responders and interviewed an FDNY retiree. It was a decent piece and highlighted the "family work team style". Regardless of that, we fly a bit and have had more positive flights with JetBlue than any other carrier and their helping fly LEO's to NYC makes it even more likely that we'll seek JetBlue for any trip rather than the lowest fare.

Haven't heard that, but I have heard key information (it's hidden under the mat) or other security measures broadcast in an age when we have so many other options. At some point while it may not be part of HIPAA, the privacy of any individual will likely be cause for civil suit given that there are so many reliable options to minimize public broadcasting of information.

We don't have any in the municipal fire or EMS units, just the local PD's and private EMS services. That said, the local dispatch center utilizing the I Am Responding system to text calls as an adjunct tool and more sensitive info is typically directed through this or units are asked to call in. We're now looking at tablets for use in a pseudo-MDT manner.