Tuesday, December 2, 2014
Never Forget - Worcester 6
On December 3, 1999, six members of the Worcester Fire Dept. lost their lives battling a fire in a huge cold storage warehouse. Honor their passing by sharing their story with your new members or old members that never took the time to learn from their tragedy.
The Wrong Side of History
The Wrong Side of History
Lt. Brad French
In an industry so deeply engrained in tradition, a shift in the way we conduct our business is inherently bound to be wrought with resistance, emotional reaction, and hesitation. The American fire service has a tremendous history of saving lives, protecting property, and acting as a safety net for the community when virtually any emergency arises. That role will never cease, and the fire service will always attract the best and the brightest that are willing and able to selflessly serve our communities. However, like any organization or group with a history dating back hundreds of years, firefighters often find themselves pushing back when what they know and what they have come to believe is questioned. The studies and research experiments conducted by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have in a sense done just that. They have made us all pause for a moment and think about what we do and what we have been doing. We compare the research results with the many incidents that bounce around in our heads that we have responded to, and we study Line-of-Duty-Death reports for any clues and links to the scientific data. As a fire service, we owe it to ourselves to do exactly that: question and learn. Over the past several years, there has been a staggering amount of nearly constant conflict and sparring in trade magazines, at conferences, and particularly on the internet and social media about the implications of the UL/NIST research on our tactical operations on the fire ground. Some of the dialogue is productive, although most is emotional, sometimes even hurtful, and often completely uninformed and ridiculous. But in a period of dramatic change, that is to be expected; maybe even welcomed.
What young firefighters need to realize as they enter the fire service during this transitional (no pun intended!) and tumultuous time period in our business is that they are coming into a fire service steeped in worthy and important traditions, but one that is also undergoing somewhat of a paradigm shift in tactical operations. As a fire service, we’re simply becoming more educated and more analytical. We’re questioning whether or not the methods we’ve always used to control fire and protect citizens are still the best way to do them today. And how can we not? Few in the fire service today would argue against the widely accepted principle that the residential fuel packages of today are significantly different than they were a couple of decades ago. Few in the fire service would argue that houses constructed with lightweight wood trusses and connected together with gusset plates or even glue are inherently more susceptible to collapse than houses built a couple of decades ago. Few in the fire service would argue about staffing and available resources being widespread issues across the country, and that fire department efficiency is almost entirely manpower-dependent. Yet as firefighters, we immediately circle the wagons and pull out our sharpest weapons as soon as someone questions the way operate on the fire ground.
Rest assured, the purpose of this writing is not to push any specific tactical guide like SLICE-RS. The purpose is not to tell you to consider a quick shot of water to “re-set” a heavy fire condition prior to entry. The purpose is not to encourage you to study ventilation so you don’t break every window you come to and single-handedly burn down an entire house all by yourself. The scope is a little large than that. Instead, the idea is to simply consider if you currently find yourself on the wrong side of history.
When motorized fire apparatus were introduced in the early 1900s, resistance to the transition away from horses was widespread, intense and emotional. Horses were very reliable, and the new motorized vehicles were sometimes difficult to start and often broke down. Many fire companies across the United States argued that their horse-drawn crews could beat the motorized apparatus to scenes, and some even held contests that became community events. In the end, of course, they had little choice but to progress with the changing world around them and eventually (albeit begrudgingly) move the fire service forward. Today, a fire engine being pulled by a horse would seem quite odd to say the least. The horsemen of a hundred years ago were devoted, skilled and passionate about their craft. They simply found themselves on the wrong side of history. Later, when SCBA were introduced to the fire service, many found the devices to be cumbersome and not necessary. In those times, the measure of a firefighter was often related to their ability to “eat smoke”, and the thought of younger, newer firefighters beginning to use these units as a matter of standard operation certainly led to many questions of manhood, toughness, and dedication to our craft (thank goodness there was no Facebook in the mid-1900s). And yet again, in today’s fire service the thought of interior firefighting without an SCBA would be considered completely absurd. Those fighting against the evolution of the fire service toward more adequate respiratory protection as it was researched and developed were simply sitting on the wrong side of history.
And now here we are. Again. The study of today’s interior fire environment involving the tremendous amounts of heat energy release, the dramatically changing building construction practices now becoming standard, and the importance of fully and completely understanding ventilation are not simply a flash in the pan. This moment of scientific research and tactical application in the fire service isn’t something that will simply pass if given enough time. We can’t bully and harass our way past this information on social media in the name of temporary manliness and imaginary expertise. Like it or not, we are now at another one of those major crossroads in the history of the American fire service. There is little doubt about which direction we’re heading. And there’s also little doubt that there will be resistance along the way. Water puts out fire; apply it quickly. Period. Air makes fire worse; apply it in a limited fashion. Period. Rescue victims as quickly as we possibly can, remembering that often our best tactical move for rescue is to make the fire go away. Period. Why those concepts spark such tremendous emotion and debate is often confusing and frustrating. It’s not about new acronyms or catchy phrases about from where to hit the fire. Getting emotionally and emphatically stuck on that stuff is just getting too far down in the weeds. It’s about keeping our heads on a constant swivel in the fire service, remaining in a never-ending mode of learning and questioning, and not being too hard-headed to evaluate and adapt important information when it comes along. Stay aggressive, keep training, and strive for excellence in this business that we all love so dearly. Just don’t find yourself on the wrong side of history on this one.
In an industry so deeply engrained in tradition, a shift in the way we conduct our business is inherently bound to be wrought with resistance, emotional reaction, and hesitation. The American fire service has a tremendous history of saving lives, protecting property, and acting as a safety net for the community when virtually any emergency arises. That role will never cease, and the fire service will always attract the best and the brightest that are willing and able to selflessly serve our communities. However, like any organization or group with a history dating back hundreds of years, firefighters often find themselves pushing back when what they know and what they have come to believe is questioned. The studies and research experiments conducted by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have in a sense done just that. They have made us all pause for a moment and think about what we do and what we have been doing. We compare the research results with the many incidents that bounce around in our heads that we have responded to, and we study Line-of-Duty-Death reports for any clues and links to the scientific data. As a fire service, we owe it to ourselves to do exactly that: question and learn. Over the past several years, there has been a staggering amount of nearly constant conflict and sparring in trade magazines, at conferences, and particularly on the internet and social media about the implications of the UL/NIST research on our tactical operations on the fire ground. Some of the dialogue is productive, although most is emotional, sometimes even hurtful, and often completely uninformed and ridiculous. But in a period of dramatic change, that is to be expected; maybe even welcomed.
What young firefighters need to realize as they enter the fire service during this transitional (no pun intended!) and tumultuous time period in our business is that they are coming into a fire service steeped in worthy and important traditions, but one that is also undergoing somewhat of a paradigm shift in tactical operations. As a fire service, we’re simply becoming more educated and more analytical. We’re questioning whether or not the methods we’ve always used to control fire and protect citizens are still the best way to do them today. And how can we not? Few in the fire service today would argue against the widely accepted principle that the residential fuel packages of today are significantly different than they were a couple of decades ago. Few in the fire service would argue that houses constructed with lightweight wood trusses and connected together with gusset plates or even glue are inherently more susceptible to collapse than houses built a couple of decades ago. Few in the fire service would argue about staffing and available resources being widespread issues across the country, and that fire department efficiency is almost entirely manpower-dependent. Yet as firefighters, we immediately circle the wagons and pull out our sharpest weapons as soon as someone questions the way operate on the fire ground.
Rest assured, the purpose of this writing is not to push any specific tactical guide like SLICE-RS. The purpose is not to tell you to consider a quick shot of water to “re-set” a heavy fire condition prior to entry. The purpose is not to encourage you to study ventilation so you don’t break every window you come to and single-handedly burn down an entire house all by yourself. The scope is a little large than that. Instead, the idea is to simply consider if you currently find yourself on the wrong side of history.
When motorized fire apparatus were introduced in the early 1900s, resistance to the transition away from horses was widespread, intense and emotional. Horses were very reliable, and the new motorized vehicles were sometimes difficult to start and often broke down. Many fire companies across the United States argued that their horse-drawn crews could beat the motorized apparatus to scenes, and some even held contests that became community events. In the end, of course, they had little choice but to progress with the changing world around them and eventually (albeit begrudgingly) move the fire service forward. Today, a fire engine being pulled by a horse would seem quite odd to say the least. The horsemen of a hundred years ago were devoted, skilled and passionate about their craft. They simply found themselves on the wrong side of history. Later, when SCBA were introduced to the fire service, many found the devices to be cumbersome and not necessary. In those times, the measure of a firefighter was often related to their ability to “eat smoke”, and the thought of younger, newer firefighters beginning to use these units as a matter of standard operation certainly led to many questions of manhood, toughness, and dedication to our craft (thank goodness there was no Facebook in the mid-1900s). And yet again, in today’s fire service the thought of interior firefighting without an SCBA would be considered completely absurd. Those fighting against the evolution of the fire service toward more adequate respiratory protection as it was researched and developed were simply sitting on the wrong side of history.
And now here we are. Again. The study of today’s interior fire environment involving the tremendous amounts of heat energy release, the dramatically changing building construction practices now becoming standard, and the importance of fully and completely understanding ventilation are not simply a flash in the pan. This moment of scientific research and tactical application in the fire service isn’t something that will simply pass if given enough time. We can’t bully and harass our way past this information on social media in the name of temporary manliness and imaginary expertise. Like it or not, we are now at another one of those major crossroads in the history of the American fire service. There is little doubt about which direction we’re heading. And there’s also little doubt that there will be resistance along the way. Water puts out fire; apply it quickly. Period. Air makes fire worse; apply it in a limited fashion. Period. Rescue victims as quickly as we possibly can, remembering that often our best tactical move for rescue is to make the fire go away. Period. Why those concepts spark such tremendous emotion and debate is often confusing and frustrating. It’s not about new acronyms or catchy phrases about from where to hit the fire. Getting emotionally and emphatically stuck on that stuff is just getting too far down in the weeds. It’s about keeping our heads on a constant swivel in the fire service, remaining in a never-ending mode of learning and questioning, and not being too hard-headed to evaluate and adapt important information when it comes along. Stay aggressive, keep training, and strive for excellence in this business that we all love so dearly. Just don’t find yourself on the wrong side of history on this one.
Belton Middle School - "Burn to Learn"
On November 25th, Belton firefighters were on hand for the annual career day event held at Belton Middle School. This year was a little different as firefighters demonstrated the importance of fire safety by conducting a "Burn to Learn" demonstration. Having working smoke alarms in every home was emphasized as an essential life-saving tool.
Municipal Fire Officers Meeting
Just a reminder that the next Municipal Fire Officer's Meeting will be December 30th at 7pm. The meeting will be hosted by Anderson Fire Department. The location will be announced soon.
Fire Engineering - Webcast
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Friday, October 24, 2014
Hump Day SOS Which Came 1st
Follow the link below to the latest article by David Rhodes regarding RIT and the inital hoseline deployment.
http://community.fireengineering.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1219672%3ABlogPost%3A604937
http://community.fireengineering.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1219672%3ABlogPost%3A604937
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Measure
By Mark vonAppen
There is a difference you can find in those who stand apart from the crowd, those people of character who just get it. The intangible quality that sets them apart is something completely tangible. It's called a work ethic, and it is the oft forgotten element on the journey to building, or rebuilding a culture. You can feel it when you touch a book, when you pick up a tool, or when you wipe your brow when it is slick from sweat.
The importance of holding one another accountable cannot be understated. Accountability is a discipline. We do it for the person next to us. We do it for each other. We do it on our own together.
I want to do what I'm meant to do. I want to do it with passion. I want to do what makes people feel. When my career is over I want to be remembered for the things that cannot be measured.
I want to look back and say, "I did my job."
When everything else has faded away nobody will remember the metrics, they'll remember the person inside the uniform. If you're not living up to who you said you'd always be, you will just be at a costume party for 30 years and you'll be quickly forgotten. If that's what you choose, you can walk away from your career with only your certificate of attendance.
I'm not going out like that.
There is a difference you can find in those who stand apart from the crowd, those people of character who just get it. The intangible quality that sets them apart is something completely tangible. It's called a work ethic, and it is the oft forgotten element on the journey to building, or rebuilding a culture. You can feel it when you touch a book, when you pick up a tool, or when you wipe your brow when it is slick from sweat.
Too many times we give accolades for simply showing up, keeping a seat warm, or holding down a spot. Commendations are handed out like participation ribbons. We talk change, talk about improved performance, but we go no further. Changes are made by those who take action. Activity should never be confused with achievement, and just because you exist doesn't mean you deserve.
The privilege of wearing the uniform and the gift of service is something that is earned, it's not a right. Ask yourself, "Who's in there?" Do you remember what it took to get to where you are today? Do you remember the promises that you made? Do you remember who you said you'd always be? Find that person again. Remember how you used to measure yourself.
The privilege of wearing the uniform and the gift of service is something that is earned, it's not a right. Ask yourself, "Who's in there?" Do you remember what it took to get to where you are today? Do you remember the promises that you made? Do you remember who you said you'd always be? Find that person again. Remember how you used to measure yourself.
Do your job right, because you said you would. You said you'd do it forever that way. Actions speak louder than words. Ask yourself, "Who's in there?" If you don't like the answer, take the first step toward change.
The uniform doesn't give you power or credibility, your actions do. Wearing tights and a cape doesn't mean you've earned the right to be called a super hero. You are what you repeatedly do. If you believe that excellence is your responsibility, and strive for it day in and day out, then that is where you will go. If you belly-ache and talk change, but are unable or unwilling to make the change in yourself, then you will stand still.
I want to do what I'm meant to do. When my career is over I want to be remembered for the things that cannot be measured.
The right to be proud and confident is one that is earned over a career of hard work, dedication, of attempts and failures. Excellence isn't easily achieved. In the same way, neither is confidence. Confidence is hard-won and fleeting. We are percieved to be larger than life creations that defy natural laws and are the very image of all that is right. The fact is, we're human. We are full of faults, shortcomings, and insecurities. To overcome these we must be tireless in the pursuit of our ideals.
I want to do what I'm meant to do. I want to do it with passion. I want to do what makes people feel. When my career is over I want to be remembered for the things that cannot be measured.
I want to look back and say, "I did my job."
When everything else has faded away nobody will remember the metrics, they'll remember the person inside the uniform. If you're not living up to who you said you'd always be, you will just be at a costume party for 30 years and you'll be quickly forgotten. If that's what you choose, you can walk away from your career with only your certificate of attendance.
I'm not going out like that.
Closing The Deal
Closing The Deal
By Mark vonAppen
When people lose trust in the organization everyone will slow down their efforts and do just enough to survive. They're usually smart enough to do it in a way that won't get noticed at first, or get them in trouble, but it's there, and everyone knows it. These unhappy individuals look to spread their disease until more people come on board and perhaps, their subtle mutiny will cause a system-wide failure. It's a depressing thing to see.
Firefighters are uber-sensative to issues of trust. We all worked hard to get the job, we expected to reach a place where hard work is rewarded: play by the rules, eclipse the minimum standard, and it will all be okay. Well, the world isn't fair, and fire department politics are often more complicated to navigate than the office politics governing the 9-5 crowd. Sometimes exceeding the minimum makes you a target. When you become a target, you seek cover so you don't get hit.
Trust is the key to keeping people from turning to the dark side. Informal, destructive leaders, who seek to undo all that is right, are nonetheless leaders and they have to nudged, or shoved, in the right direction. By issuing forth fair, reasonable expectations ambiguity and anxiety are alleviated. Most of all though, expectations establish trust. Trust is built slowly, one brick at a time. It can all come tumbling down quickly though, if even one brick is removed.
It is very easy to become selfish in a group setting. People shrink from responsibility and ask, "What's in it for me?" When things are at their most difficult, we have to drop our guard and say, "This is me, this is who I am. This is what I give to you, and here is what I expect in return." It is the heart of the "10 for you, 10 for me" leadership pact that I use with my crew.
Leadership is nothing more than the ability to create influence. This blog is centered on the belief that anyone can lead from anywhere in any organization. The most difficult thing to do when things get tough is to make yourself vulnerable and continue to sacrifice. Trust is hard found, and easily lost.
How do we overcome leadership voids and ensure that the wrong types of leaders don't rise to power? The answer is simple, decide on a common belief system that works for the good of all. We do it because we care about our brothers and sisters. Take the initiative and say, "If no one else is going to step up, I will. I will lead unselfishly."
The deal that we strike, through a common value system (Excellence, The BIG4), creates investment. We sign our names to the contract, wear the sticker on our helmet, and we put it out there for the world to see. The deal that we make breaks down barriers, helps us shoulder our responsibilities, and creates a starting point from which all decisions are made. Having common values eliminates resentment and gives us a clear path to follow. Ultimately, being accountable gets rid of all scapegoats. Assessing blame becomes less important when we hold ourselves accountable. Because we are invested, when things go wrong we have nowhere to point the finger but at ourselves.
At the heart of all of this is peer pressure. We monitor each other, look out for each other, and we do it for each other. We know that talking about change does little to influence the future, actions do. We create a safe work environment where people are heard and doors are truly open. In doing so, we create our own success. The team belongs to those who get the job done and no one else. The leader's job, no matter their rank, is to amplify the talents of those around them.
It's time to lead up, push past hidden agendas, follow a path that is clear, unselfish, and in the best interest of everyone. When we do, the chaos will drop away.
Either you're in or you're out. If you are not invested, you have no right to complain because you are not an active participant in shaping the future. Stop wishing and start doing. Nobody is going to tap you on the shoulder and ask, "Hey, do you want to be great at this?" It is a conscious decision. Excellence is not someone else's responsibility, it is yours and mine. Nobody, no matter how hard they try, can take that commitment away from us. When we believe in the deal that we make with each other there is no telling how far we can go.
When a leadership vacuum exists, bad things happen. Good people can disappear into silos of self-pity and self-defense and sometimes, the wrong type of leader can gain influence. People start to think more about themselves, less about the group, and in the process, they destroy the team.
When people feel unappreciated, they will begin to turn on each other, undermining one another's success, and their efforts are stepped up only in an attempt to make someone else look bad. It's a vicious and destructive cycle.When people lose trust in the organization everyone will slow down their efforts and do just enough to survive. They're usually smart enough to do it in a way that won't get noticed at first, or get them in trouble, but it's there, and everyone knows it. These unhappy individuals look to spread their disease until more people come on board and perhaps, their subtle mutiny will cause a system-wide failure. It's a depressing thing to see.
Firefighters are uber-sensative to issues of trust. We all worked hard to get the job, we expected to reach a place where hard work is rewarded: play by the rules, eclipse the minimum standard, and it will all be okay. Well, the world isn't fair, and fire department politics are often more complicated to navigate than the office politics governing the 9-5 crowd. Sometimes exceeding the minimum makes you a target. When you become a target, you seek cover so you don't get hit.
Trust is the key to keeping people from turning to the dark side. Informal, destructive leaders, who seek to undo all that is right, are nonetheless leaders and they have to nudged, or shoved, in the right direction. By issuing forth fair, reasonable expectations ambiguity and anxiety are alleviated. Most of all though, expectations establish trust. Trust is built slowly, one brick at a time. It can all come tumbling down quickly though, if even one brick is removed.
It is very easy to become selfish in a group setting. People shrink from responsibility and ask, "What's in it for me?" When things are at their most difficult, we have to drop our guard and say, "This is me, this is who I am. This is what I give to you, and here is what I expect in return." It is the heart of the "10 for you, 10 for me" leadership pact that I use with my crew.
The team belongs to those who get the job done and no one else. Trust is hard found, and easily lost.
Leadership is nothing more than the ability to create influence. This blog is centered on the belief that anyone can lead from anywhere in any organization. The most difficult thing to do when things get tough is to make yourself vulnerable and continue to sacrifice. Trust is hard found, and easily lost.
How do we overcome leadership voids and ensure that the wrong types of leaders don't rise to power? The answer is simple, decide on a common belief system that works for the good of all. We do it because we care about our brothers and sisters. Take the initiative and say, "If no one else is going to step up, I will. I will lead unselfishly."
The deal that we strike, through a common value system (Excellence, The BIG4), creates investment. We sign our names to the contract, wear the sticker on our helmet, and we put it out there for the world to see. The deal that we make breaks down barriers, helps us shoulder our responsibilities, and creates a starting point from which all decisions are made. Having common values eliminates resentment and gives us a clear path to follow. Ultimately, being accountable gets rid of all scapegoats. Assessing blame becomes less important when we hold ourselves accountable. Because we are invested, when things go wrong we have nowhere to point the finger but at ourselves.
It's time to lead up, push past hidden agendas, follow a path that is clear, unselfish, and in the best interest of everyone. When we do, the chaos will drop away.
Either you're in or you're out. If you are not invested, you have no right to complain because you are not an active participant in shaping the future. Stop wishing and start doing. Nobody is going to tap you on the shoulder and ask, "Hey, do you want to be great at this?" It is a conscious decision. Excellence is not someone else's responsibility, it is yours and mine. Nobody, no matter how hard they try, can take that commitment away from us. When we believe in the deal that we make with each other there is no telling how far we can go.
The Game Has Changed
By Mark vonAppen
The other night I was reminded that we are not always in charge of the way that things turn out. I saw what it looks like when statistics take precedence of human lives. The other night I was reminded that the game has changed. There are very specific parameters under which the game is played, and over the past year the rules have been irrevocably altered. We are not as capable as we once were, and the house called our bluff. We say it a lot, that someone will pay when the budget forces us to press our luck by making us play short handed, but rarely can we reach out and touch the consequences. The other night we could touch them and they made us all feel cold and helpless.
With the change in house rules there are real consequences for not playing along. I saw it play out in blood, sweat, broken bones, and lives lost. In a nutshell, too many patients, too much twisted metal, and not enough tools to go around.
My mind swirled, "He's really, really bad, and she's really bad too. You have to pick one because you don't have enough tools to go around. Take your pick. Heads you lose, tails you lose."
We have to remember that success in our craft doesn't come from holding a good hand, you are judged on what you do when you're dealt a bad hand.
I was dealt a bad hand and I had to make the better of two no-win decisions. When the house makes the rules, it wins eventually and I was reminded of just how difficult it is to play against a stacked deck. I realized again that no matter how good I think I am, I'm not that good. I watched helplessly as good people tried valiantly to take apart a car with their bare hands as two lives slipped slowly further and further away.
I watched it happen and it was awful.
As the guy who writes and tries to buoy others, I reached out to my network of friends and shared my frustration. Here is what came back:
You can only do what you can do. We are not superheroes; we are people, just people with a trade to help people. It's not always going to be "ok". Everyone isn't always going to go home. This is a war that will never end for our profession. We do the best we can with what we've got. People get dealt a bad hand and we are there to help, just help. Sometimes we save the day, sometimes we do not. It's how you now handle yourself after defeat that will continue to define you as a firefighter and a human being. Try not to get caught up too much in the what if game. Some of that is always ok as you can learn from shortfalls and better yourself.
Remember, this is a contact sport. You didn't fail with your leadership. Getting back on that rig will help prove that to yourself.
I wasn't alone at this event. A lot of brothers were there who are hurting afterwards just like me. What hurts most is that we all know that we used to be able to do a lot more. The people who make financial decisions (cuts) that limit our ability to respond to emergencies don't have to deal with the fallout, we do. We are left with the scars. Because we know the difference, it stings that much more.
Sometimes we all need a lift. I definitely did and still do. I needed another wake up call. I needed to be reminded that sometimes we all face no-win situations. I needed to be reminded that we all face the same problems from coast to coast, even around the world, and we are all there for each other.
We have to remember that success in our craft doesn't come from holding a good hand, you are judged on what you do when you're dealt a bad hand.
More on the Mission Statement or Mis-Statement
More on the Mission Statement or Mis-Statement
Earlier on the Hump Day SOS we looked into the mission mis-statements and how far away we have drifted from our original mission “To Save Lives & Property”. Many of you responded with your own stories of mission creep, incomprehensible jibber jab of corporate speak. Some of you still resist thinking that the fire service is off track and this new mission statement trend is right in line with what troops need.
I have been a little too serious with the HD SOS lately so let’s have some fun. The staff here at the Hump Day SOS went undercover in 100 American fire departments and took hidden double secret video of staff meetings and combined them here in a video so that you, the ordinary men and women of the fire service, could see what is being talked about inside your headquarters……. Enjoy!
http://www.vevo.com/watch/weird-al-yankovic/Mission-Statement/USRV81400344
Terrorism - Are You Ready?
Posted by Mark Munroe
ISIS, Hamas, Lone Wolf's, Mexican Drug Lords, Etc all have one thing in common, their dislike of the United States, it's government but more importantly, you and your families. A few years ago, while watching my son play with other kids on the playground, I struck up a conversation with an older gentleman watching his grandson interact with mine. We discussed how cute the kids were and how well they got along. Within a few moments, his facial expression changed and I could see he was disturbed about something. I asked him what was wrong and he told me he was from Israel and said to me "Isn't it amazing that some people in this world would stop at nothing to kill those two children playing together, just so they would not grow up to be good and patriotic American's. This my friends is what you, myself, our families and our communities face today, right now.
We know full well, from our experiences of 9/11/01, Oklahoma City, the Fort Hood shootings, the Newtown shootings, the cinema shootings in Colorado and many, many more, that the United States is no longer immune to terrorism. No longer can we sit back and watch events unfold in other countries and shake our heads in shock and horror. It is now at our front door step. ISIS, as of this writing, is making one to three million dollars a day, selling oil on the black market, imagine that, one to three million dollars a day! It took Osama Bin Laden, millions of his own money and years of preparation for 9/11 and he brought down the two biggest buildings in New York City and with them, thousands of people and first responders, who to this day, are still dying of 9/11 related cancers, 343 and counting. Our boarders are not secure, allowing for an untold amount of people to cross into the country unchecked and undocumented. Who is coming across? What kind of threat do they pose? Has your department or personnel been advised of any possible threats? What to look for? How to react? And more importantly, how to protect yourself from these threats? Is your department ready? Are you?
Recently, I had a situation I was involved with here in New Hampshire with a potential Active Shooter incident in the town I serve as Assistant Chief. South Hampton is only a few miles from Brentwood, NH, the town where police officer Steven Arkell was gunned down in cold blood while answering a domestic dispute call. The house was set on fire by the suspect and we all watched on t.v. as the house exploded. South Hampton, only two weeks later, experienced an incident where a well known subject (well known to the local PD) after being questioned at his home, stole a police cruiser and tried running down two police officers, then ran into the woods. For the first hour, no one from my department was even aware of the situation. It was only when the deputy chief of the town next to us was contacted by their PD of the situation that we were informed. The scene become very confusing, many PD's self deployed, no one could tell myself or the other Assistant Chief who was in charge. Some FD's started self deploying even though they were not called. Command Posts started showing up, personnel from everywhere were walking right into the area. The other chief and myself later found out that our command post was within sight of where PD believed the shooter to be.
As the department training officer, I started looking around, scouring the country asking questions about Terrorism and Active Shooter training, the basic equipment a fire department might need in these kinds of situations. No one could answer the most simple question, where do I find the needed training. I was continuously told to check with FEMA, which I did. FEMA had some basic courses on terrorism. I checked with other agencies on Active Shooter, I was told there were classes for PD but nothing for Fire/EMS. I continued to ask around the country, who is preparing first responders for the eventual terrorist attack or the active shooter situation? Are our first responders in the smaller communities ready for such events and if not, what is the outcome for these communities and its citizens? After checking around the New England area, the answer I continuously received was "no we are not ready at all" Thirteen years after 9/11 and our firefighters and EMS are still not ready for a terrorist attack. We certainly see drills once in a while in the larger cities but what about the smaller communities who are going to possibly face the same situation or end up responding mutual aid to the larger cities when all goes to hell? Are your people ready for the next attack that we have been told over and over again is coming? And if not, where are you and your department going to get this needed training?
It boggles the mind, with everything that is going on in this world today, the training needed to prepare first responders to face a some kind of terrorist attack is still not available on a large scale. I call on Washington, state authorities and local communities to take action, a strong lead and a sound voice on preparing our first responders for what will eventually come. Fire & EMS Instructors & Training Officers around the country should be demanding this kind of training to prepare their people, their departments and their communities for what could and will turn out to be disastrous turn of events. Does your department, as it stands now, have the training or the trained personnel it needs for not only a terrorist attack but an Active Shooter situation say involving your high school? Are your people prepared for what they will face when they arrive on scene? Are they ready for after the incident, when they go home and face their families and loved ones? Does your community have the resources its going to need for this type of situation and I am not talking about the four wheel Gators you got from a grant. Do you have enough body bags, medical equipment, and the personnel you can count on and know are going to show up? Are your people ready and trained for a car bombing, Anthrax incident, an MCI shooting or a CBRNE attack? If not, where and how are you going to get them trained? Great question!
Please let me know your thoughts, do you agree or disagree, I would be very interested in hearing from you all who have an opinion one way or another. Remember, there is no wrong answers, just a lack of knowledge the we all must overcome and soon.
We know full well, from our experiences of 9/11/01, Oklahoma City, the Fort Hood shootings, the Newtown shootings, the cinema shootings in Colorado and many, many more, that the United States is no longer immune to terrorism. No longer can we sit back and watch events unfold in other countries and shake our heads in shock and horror. It is now at our front door step. ISIS, as of this writing, is making one to three million dollars a day, selling oil on the black market, imagine that, one to three million dollars a day! It took Osama Bin Laden, millions of his own money and years of preparation for 9/11 and he brought down the two biggest buildings in New York City and with them, thousands of people and first responders, who to this day, are still dying of 9/11 related cancers, 343 and counting. Our boarders are not secure, allowing for an untold amount of people to cross into the country unchecked and undocumented. Who is coming across? What kind of threat do they pose? Has your department or personnel been advised of any possible threats? What to look for? How to react? And more importantly, how to protect yourself from these threats? Is your department ready? Are you?
Recently, I had a situation I was involved with here in New Hampshire with a potential Active Shooter incident in the town I serve as Assistant Chief. South Hampton is only a few miles from Brentwood, NH, the town where police officer Steven Arkell was gunned down in cold blood while answering a domestic dispute call. The house was set on fire by the suspect and we all watched on t.v. as the house exploded. South Hampton, only two weeks later, experienced an incident where a well known subject (well known to the local PD) after being questioned at his home, stole a police cruiser and tried running down two police officers, then ran into the woods. For the first hour, no one from my department was even aware of the situation. It was only when the deputy chief of the town next to us was contacted by their PD of the situation that we were informed. The scene become very confusing, many PD's self deployed, no one could tell myself or the other Assistant Chief who was in charge. Some FD's started self deploying even though they were not called. Command Posts started showing up, personnel from everywhere were walking right into the area. The other chief and myself later found out that our command post was within sight of where PD believed the shooter to be.
As the department training officer, I started looking around, scouring the country asking questions about Terrorism and Active Shooter training, the basic equipment a fire department might need in these kinds of situations. No one could answer the most simple question, where do I find the needed training. I was continuously told to check with FEMA, which I did. FEMA had some basic courses on terrorism. I checked with other agencies on Active Shooter, I was told there were classes for PD but nothing for Fire/EMS. I continued to ask around the country, who is preparing first responders for the eventual terrorist attack or the active shooter situation? Are our first responders in the smaller communities ready for such events and if not, what is the outcome for these communities and its citizens? After checking around the New England area, the answer I continuously received was "no we are not ready at all" Thirteen years after 9/11 and our firefighters and EMS are still not ready for a terrorist attack. We certainly see drills once in a while in the larger cities but what about the smaller communities who are going to possibly face the same situation or end up responding mutual aid to the larger cities when all goes to hell? Are your people ready for the next attack that we have been told over and over again is coming? And if not, where are you and your department going to get this needed training?
It boggles the mind, with everything that is going on in this world today, the training needed to prepare first responders to face a some kind of terrorist attack is still not available on a large scale. I call on Washington, state authorities and local communities to take action, a strong lead and a sound voice on preparing our first responders for what will eventually come. Fire & EMS Instructors & Training Officers around the country should be demanding this kind of training to prepare their people, their departments and their communities for what could and will turn out to be disastrous turn of events. Does your department, as it stands now, have the training or the trained personnel it needs for not only a terrorist attack but an Active Shooter situation say involving your high school? Are your people prepared for what they will face when they arrive on scene? Are they ready for after the incident, when they go home and face their families and loved ones? Does your community have the resources its going to need for this type of situation and I am not talking about the four wheel Gators you got from a grant. Do you have enough body bags, medical equipment, and the personnel you can count on and know are going to show up? Are your people ready and trained for a car bombing, Anthrax incident, an MCI shooting or a CBRNE attack? If not, where and how are you going to get them trained? Great question!
Please let me know your thoughts, do you agree or disagree, I would be very interested in hearing from you all who have an opinion one way or another. Remember, there is no wrong answers, just a lack of knowledge the we all must overcome and soon.
Rescue: Remove the Victim or Remove the Fire?
Posted by Chris Langlois
It’s an age old question that is still debated by firefighters to this day, and often quite vigorously. When responding to an occupied residential structure fire, do you immediately go for the rescue to remove the victims or do you attack the fire? Many firefighters would say that you should do both at the same time, and if you have the available resources showing up quick enough to do so, that is probably the most correct answer. However, many times our reality is that we are showing up with a single engine company that must operate for several minutes alone. In those cases, the question of rescue vs. fire attack ceases to be a vigorous firehouse debate and becomes a life or death decision that must be made in seconds by a first arriving company officer.
Rescue is always our number one priority. It always has been and it always will be, it’s really why we do what we do. However, there are two very appropriate ways of addressing rescue: remove the victim from the fire or remove the fire from the victim. Which of those is correct, as with almost every other decision we make on the fireground, is dependent upon the situation, our available resources and the information we have at the time.
Often at single family dwelling fires, where there usually (not always but quite often) is one or two victims that require rescue, it may very well be most appropriate for the first arriving personnel who discover a victim while advancing a line to the interior to stop and quickly remove the victim from the hazardous interior of the house. These victims can often be removed quickly, over a short distance through windows or doors that are close by. If a first arriving crew is able to successfully rescue a victim at a house fire and the structure burns to the ground because fire attack was halted or delayed, we would absolutely consider that a win, as we should. But, what about situations where there may be multiple victims in immediate danger as well as others, perhaps dozens, that will be in immediate danger soon? What about fires in duplexes, fourplexes, hotels, motels, apartment buildings, college dorms, boarding houses, townhomes, assisted living facilities, etc. Are you going immediately into evacuation/search/rescue mode or are you devoting your initial resource(s) to getting water on the fire as quickly and decisively as possible? Bring that question up at the firehouse kitchen table next time and see where it goes!
To get a better understanding of our own situation, let’s step back and take a look at what others do in similar situations. Showing up with very limited initial staffing at a fast moving fire with many victims in immediate danger pretty much defines what aircraft rescue firefighting (ARFF) personnel are trained to deal with. When ARFF firefighters arrive with six to eight personnel at the crash scene of a 737 aircraft with 132 souls on board and heavy fire showing, they don’t stretch 1-3/4” handlines to the interior and begin to drag individual victims out of the fuselage of the plane. The best chance they have of saving the most lives is to show up and immediately hit the fire with everything they have as quickly as possible, creating rescue corridors to allow ambulatory victims, with the assistance of the flight crew to get themselves out, while buying valuable time for, and removing the immediate hazard from, those unable to rescue themselves. Putting the fire out, or at least drastically reducing the amount of fire, as quickly as possible makes everything better for everyone all the way around.
Sitting in a non-stressful environment, reading this article, it may seem like a simple common sense decision to “just go put the fire out”, but it must be a decision you think about before the incident happens and that you are prepared to make. It is a difficult decision that you are going to have to make at 2:00am, when you are advancing a line down a long hot hallway towards a fast moving fire in an apartment and you begin to encounter victims down in your path. Do you stop and begin to drag bodies out or do you step over them and continue to move the line down the hallway to get water on the fire? It’s an emotional decision that you will have to make, quickly in an extremely stressful situation. It’s a decision you have to discuss with your crew before it happens, so they are prepared when you make it.
Take a look at how our brothers and sisters in law enforcement have changed their tactics when faced with that same decision while responding to active shooter incidents. Since the 1999 active shooter incident at Columbine High School, law enforcement has been rethinking their approach to responding to these incidents. Instead of arriving, barricading the area, evacuating people from inside and treating it as a hostage incident, officers are now being trained to enter and engage the shooter as quickly as possible. In doing so, they will undoubtedly encounter injured and dying victims. At that point, every officer will have to make a conscious decision to either stop, provide aid and attempt to remove each victim encountered, or to move past them to find and engage the continuing threat. In a recent report titled “The Police Response to Active Shooter Incidents” the Police Executive Research Forum states that, “Active shooter polices are built around the reality that even a one-minute delay in responding may result in multiple additional fatalities. Officers should focus on stopping the shooter as their priority, rather than assisting victims whom they may encounter as they search for the shooter. The priorities are: (1) stop the shooter; (2) assist the wounded; and (3) evacuate people from the scene” (Police Executive Research Forum, 2014). It’s a tough decision, but law enforcement knows that their best chance at saving the most lives involves finding and eliminating the growing threat as quickly as possible. The longer they wait the more time allowed for the shooter to continue to target more victims including officers attempting to aid injured civilians. Even with a limited number of initial arriving officers, engaging and neutralizing the threat as quickly as possible makes everything better for everyone. It stops the forward progress of the shooter, protects other threatened civilians from further harm, reduces the continued risk to responding officers and allows help to reach victims already injured.
Even in single family house fires, the best way for the first arriving engine company to protect victims may be to quickly advance a line to confine and extinguish the fire in order to protect the survivable spaces within the house where victims may still be alive.
Apartment building fires that start on an exterior balcony due to discarded smoking materials is not an uncommon occurrence. Firefighters are often greeted with a fast moving fire extending up the exterior of the building and impinging upon the soffits, threatening to enter or already in the attic.
These fires are often called in by a passersby because occupants of the building are unaware of the presence of the external fire. In some cases the building’s fire detection and alarm system has not activated. Often the first inclination of firefighters is to enter and begin evacuation and search operations for occupants, while advancing a line to the interior apartment in an attempt to confront the fire extending up the outside of the building. In these cases, the seat of the fire is on the outside of the building. As with an ARFF response, the best way to protect the most lives may be to hit the extending exterior fire fast and hard utilizing the first arriving engine company’s deck gun or a 2 ½” line deployed to the exterior of the building if apparatus cannot readily access the area of the external fire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZTFCeW3wf0
Interior lines can then be advanced to the interior to assess for extension of fire inside the building, especially in the attic. If the alarm system has not activated, firefighters can initiate it utilizing a manual pull station, allowing occupants to begin evacuating. Quickly hitting and overwhelming the fire also applies to those house fires that start on the back deck from a grill or other exterior ignition source and is extending up the outside of the rear of the house when the fire department arrives. Some would say that this initial exterior tactic is a defensive operation and we should not be defensive if there are occupants in the building. We need to re-examine our definition of offensive and defensive strategy, defining them not based on the location of your attack (exterior/interior) but rather on your strategy. Aggressively attacking the seat of the fire from any location in order to knock down the main body, buys you time and enables you to protect occupants and to quickly follow up the exterior attack with a more effective and safer interior attack. That’s about as offensively aggressive as you can get.
When considering fire attack to help achieve rescue, the following two points are also important:
I’m not saying that we should abandon rescue or that civilian life safety should be a lower priority so that we can go in and fight fire. Just the opposite, I’m saying that we should consider the best way to effect rescue and ensure the protection of life, based on the situation. If you arrive initially with enough resources to attack, confine and extinguish the fire while simultaneously searching for and rescuing victims, great. If not, assess the situation, the resources you have, and the information available to you, and be prepared to make the decision to either remove the victims from the fire or remove the fire from the victims.
Rescue is always our number one priority. It always has been and it always will be, it’s really why we do what we do. However, there are two very appropriate ways of addressing rescue: remove the victim from the fire or remove the fire from the victim. Which of those is correct, as with almost every other decision we make on the fireground, is dependent upon the situation, our available resources and the information we have at the time.
Often at single family dwelling fires, where there usually (not always but quite often) is one or two victims that require rescue, it may very well be most appropriate for the first arriving personnel who discover a victim while advancing a line to the interior to stop and quickly remove the victim from the hazardous interior of the house. These victims can often be removed quickly, over a short distance through windows or doors that are close by. If a first arriving crew is able to successfully rescue a victim at a house fire and the structure burns to the ground because fire attack was halted or delayed, we would absolutely consider that a win, as we should. But, what about situations where there may be multiple victims in immediate danger as well as others, perhaps dozens, that will be in immediate danger soon? What about fires in duplexes, fourplexes, hotels, motels, apartment buildings, college dorms, boarding houses, townhomes, assisted living facilities, etc. Are you going immediately into evacuation/search/rescue mode or are you devoting your initial resource(s) to getting water on the fire as quickly and decisively as possible? Bring that question up at the firehouse kitchen table next time and see where it goes!
To get a better understanding of our own situation, let’s step back and take a look at what others do in similar situations. Showing up with very limited initial staffing at a fast moving fire with many victims in immediate danger pretty much defines what aircraft rescue firefighting (ARFF) personnel are trained to deal with. When ARFF firefighters arrive with six to eight personnel at the crash scene of a 737 aircraft with 132 souls on board and heavy fire showing, they don’t stretch 1-3/4” handlines to the interior and begin to drag individual victims out of the fuselage of the plane. The best chance they have of saving the most lives is to show up and immediately hit the fire with everything they have as quickly as possible, creating rescue corridors to allow ambulatory victims, with the assistance of the flight crew to get themselves out, while buying valuable time for, and removing the immediate hazard from, those unable to rescue themselves. Putting the fire out, or at least drastically reducing the amount of fire, as quickly as possible makes everything better for everyone all the way around.
Sitting in a non-stressful environment, reading this article, it may seem like a simple common sense decision to “just go put the fire out”, but it must be a decision you think about before the incident happens and that you are prepared to make. It is a difficult decision that you are going to have to make at 2:00am, when you are advancing a line down a long hot hallway towards a fast moving fire in an apartment and you begin to encounter victims down in your path. Do you stop and begin to drag bodies out or do you step over them and continue to move the line down the hallway to get water on the fire? It’s an emotional decision that you will have to make, quickly in an extremely stressful situation. It’s a decision you have to discuss with your crew before it happens, so they are prepared when you make it.
Take a look at how our brothers and sisters in law enforcement have changed their tactics when faced with that same decision while responding to active shooter incidents. Since the 1999 active shooter incident at Columbine High School, law enforcement has been rethinking their approach to responding to these incidents. Instead of arriving, barricading the area, evacuating people from inside and treating it as a hostage incident, officers are now being trained to enter and engage the shooter as quickly as possible. In doing so, they will undoubtedly encounter injured and dying victims. At that point, every officer will have to make a conscious decision to either stop, provide aid and attempt to remove each victim encountered, or to move past them to find and engage the continuing threat. In a recent report titled “The Police Response to Active Shooter Incidents” the Police Executive Research Forum states that, “Active shooter polices are built around the reality that even a one-minute delay in responding may result in multiple additional fatalities. Officers should focus on stopping the shooter as their priority, rather than assisting victims whom they may encounter as they search for the shooter. The priorities are: (1) stop the shooter; (2) assist the wounded; and (3) evacuate people from the scene” (Police Executive Research Forum, 2014). It’s a tough decision, but law enforcement knows that their best chance at saving the most lives involves finding and eliminating the growing threat as quickly as possible. The longer they wait the more time allowed for the shooter to continue to target more victims including officers attempting to aid injured civilians. Even with a limited number of initial arriving officers, engaging and neutralizing the threat as quickly as possible makes everything better for everyone. It stops the forward progress of the shooter, protects other threatened civilians from further harm, reduces the continued risk to responding officers and allows help to reach victims already injured.
Even in single family house fires, the best way for the first arriving engine company to protect victims may be to quickly advance a line to confine and extinguish the fire in order to protect the survivable spaces within the house where victims may still be alive.
Apartment building fires that start on an exterior balcony due to discarded smoking materials is not an uncommon occurrence. Firefighters are often greeted with a fast moving fire extending up the exterior of the building and impinging upon the soffits, threatening to enter or already in the attic.
These fires are often called in by a passersby because occupants of the building are unaware of the presence of the external fire. In some cases the building’s fire detection and alarm system has not activated. Often the first inclination of firefighters is to enter and begin evacuation and search operations for occupants, while advancing a line to the interior apartment in an attempt to confront the fire extending up the outside of the building. In these cases, the seat of the fire is on the outside of the building. As with an ARFF response, the best way to protect the most lives may be to hit the extending exterior fire fast and hard utilizing the first arriving engine company’s deck gun or a 2 ½” line deployed to the exterior of the building if apparatus cannot readily access the area of the external fire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZTFCeW3wf0Interior lines can then be advanced to the interior to assess for extension of fire inside the building, especially in the attic. If the alarm system has not activated, firefighters can initiate it utilizing a manual pull station, allowing occupants to begin evacuating. Quickly hitting and overwhelming the fire also applies to those house fires that start on the back deck from a grill or other exterior ignition source and is extending up the outside of the rear of the house when the fire department arrives. Some would say that this initial exterior tactic is a defensive operation and we should not be defensive if there are occupants in the building. We need to re-examine our definition of offensive and defensive strategy, defining them not based on the location of your attack (exterior/interior) but rather on your strategy. Aggressively attacking the seat of the fire from any location in order to knock down the main body, buys you time and enables you to protect occupants and to quickly follow up the exterior attack with a more effective and safer interior attack. That’s about as offensively aggressive as you can get.
When considering fire attack to help achieve rescue, the following two points are also important:
- Getting water on the fire quickly to support rescue means that you also must be flowing enough gallons per minute to make a difference. Advancing a 1 ¾” to confront a 2 ½” fire because it’s quicker defeats the purpose if you are not able to put the fire out. Speed comes from skill, and skill comes from training and repetition. Be as good with the big line as you are with the 1 ¾”.
- “Softening the target” supports rescue. The recent UL/NIST studies have shown that when done properly, getting water on the fire quickly, even from the exterior, improves conditions throughout the structure and makes the interior more survivable for victims as well as supporting a more effective interior attack following the external application of water.
I’m not saying that we should abandon rescue or that civilian life safety should be a lower priority so that we can go in and fight fire. Just the opposite, I’m saying that we should consider the best way to effect rescue and ensure the protection of life, based on the situation. If you arrive initially with enough resources to attack, confine and extinguish the fire while simultaneously searching for and rescuing victims, great. If not, assess the situation, the resources you have, and the information available to you, and be prepared to make the decision to either remove the victims from the fire or remove the fire from the victims.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Saturday, September 6, 2014
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Hump Day SOS - New Culture Puts Customers # 2 - Fire Engineering Training Community
Hump Day SOS - New Culture Puts Customers # 2 - Fire Engineering Training Community
View Blog
"Our customers are #2" Are you kidding me!!!!!!
I had a long conversation with a friend of mine yesterday who is currently working on his fire science degree. He told me one of his professors made the statement that the fire service culture needed to change and that the customer was no longer number one and that the fire fighters were number one. We discussed this for quite some time as I looked for additional cues of intent the professor part.
The statement itself is incorrect by all logical context however I am only assuming that it was used in the context of fire fighter safety. Even used in the context of fire fighter safety the statement is dangerous and whatever context it was presented in seems to fit a new “no risk” approach to all hazards by some fire service members.
If we are teaching our young firefighters that the customers are number two, then we are telling them that no risk is acceptable in the attempt to save a life. I’m all for teaching them how to size up a building to look for potential areas of survivability, to look for situations that are un-survivable, to know the limits of their PPE, to understand fire behavior in various types of building construction all to expand their knowledge in the attempt to help manage risks. However, the customer is always number ONE and having members equipped with knowledge, skills and abilities to make good decisions we manage the risks factors to rescue the customers or each other. This cannot be interpreted as a blank check that supports a philosophy that “we go in every fire no matter what because there might be someone in there”. Instead we need to concentrate our efforts on equipping our firefighters with training and knowledge that allows them to operate smart in a profession built on honor, sacrifice, service and courage.
The Maltese Crosses were intentionally left blank in the poster because a fire service culture purported to place the customer second will ultimately result in the demise of the fire service. A fire service empty of honor, sacrifice, service and courage. Image a restaurant making the statement, “We will serve you what we like” or a store stating, “We will sell you what we want”…….
In the quest to improve the safety of our profession we need to turn our efforts towards perfecting skills, creating opportunities to gain experience with scenario based hands on training, through studying the cause and effects of firefighter injuries and deaths (the real story not the sterile report), from learning from our own mistakes (no one is exempt from them), and designing promotional processes that result in the promotion of good decision makers not just good multiple choice test takers or table top masters or those who attend the most committee meetings. But we should NEVER abandon and relegate our customers to number 2. Doing so is nothing more than a safe way out from dealing with the real problems in the fire service.
Risk nothing to save nothing but have well trained competent members that will risk a lot to save a life as they keep the customers number one.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Friday, August 8, 2014
Thursday, August 7, 2014
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Captain Bowen's Story on Vimeo (Air Managment)
Three years ago (July 28) the Asheville Fire Department lost Captain Jeff Bowen in a fire. Out of that tragedy comes lessons learned for AFD. Please click on the link below for a short clip about not on the fatal fire but the importance of air management.
Interior Operations Warning Signs
Interior operations warning signs. Keep an eye out for the following fireground situations, and be prepared to take the appropriate measures:
Fall: through a floor, a roof, a ceiling, or something falls on you.
Air: experience an SCBA malfunction or other air emergency.
Caught: entangled or otherwise stuck.
Trapped: by fire, collapse, or disorientation.
Name: Identify yourself.
Unit: Provide unit designator and location.
Conditions: Describe your situation/condition and fire conditions or entrapment level.
Actions/Air: Explain actions taken and air remaining.
Needs: Identify what you need for your rescue
- Active working fire, delayed entry, or loss of "time recognition" by crews or the incident commander (IC).
- Multiple companies assigned to enter through one entry point.
- Roof division companies retreating from the roof as crews are preparing to go inside.
- Air is rapidly drawn in zero visibility and heat is banking down.
- Interior crews can hear but not see the fire burning above them.
- Interior crews are working under a mezzanine.
- Crews feel "uncomfortable" with the situation they are in.
- A crew member's SCBA low-air alarm activates and the crew continues searching for the seat of the fire.
- Interior crews flow water for several minutes but make no progress on the fire.
- Interior crews hear the sound of roof ventilation operations conducted behind them.
- Crews are unable to communicate with the IC or division/group supervisors.
- A crew or crew member is in trouble and fails to recognize it.
- An "Emergency Traffic" call is delayed or not initiated.
- Crews are deep inside a commercial building with 1¾-inch lines instead of 2½-inch lines.
- Prior to building entry, fireground companies and the IC fail to recognize basic construction features that should influence decisions and actions.
- Crews and ICs do not follow the "order model" for communications, or they use unclear terms and send mixed messages.
- Company officers are not monitoring the air supply status of their crews and are not practicing proper air-management techniques.
- All members operating on the fireground fail to evaluate and apply the risk management philosophy to their assignment.
Use the FACT acronym to identify a Mayday situation.
Use the NUCAN acronym to report a Mayday.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Sunday, July 20, 2014
After LODD, Asheville Fire Changes SOPs
ASHEVILLE – Inside the building, it’s 620 degrees and so smoky the firefighters can only see a few feet ahead.
Undaunted, they move into the burning building in a four-man team, laser-focused on finding a fellow firefighter who’s gone down and issued a call that chills a firefighter’s soul: “Mayday! Mayday!” His air is running out, and he’s in serious trouble.
With the mayday call, he gave them critical information about where he was — on the fire hose, which snakes through the burning building.
The first team follows the hose through downstairs, then upstairs, locating their colleague trapped beneath a collapsed ceiling. They make sure he’s OK and put him on supplemental air.
Click to enlarge images. Visit article at Citizen-Times.com to view more images.
Undaunted, they move into the burning building in a four-man team, laser-focused on finding a fellow firefighter who’s gone down and issued a call that chills a firefighter’s soul: “Mayday! Mayday!” His air is running out, and he’s in serious trouble.
With the mayday call, he gave them critical information about where he was — on the fire hose, which snakes through the burning building.
The first team follows the hose through downstairs, then upstairs, locating their colleague trapped beneath a collapsed ceiling. They make sure he’s OK and put him on supplemental air.
Click to enlarge images. Visit article at Citizen-Times.com to view more images.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)