I didn't say "sole" mindset, so you're replying to something I didn't say. I did say that the mindset was there and it contributed. I don't think there's much disagreement with that, particularly based on the NIOSH, Routely Commission Phase I, and Routely Commission Phase II reports.
Tony, once again you're replying to something I didn't say. That's a straw man logical fallacy.
I didn't have to read about what happened in Charleston.
I knew two of the nine, and I was one of the family escorts at the memorial service.
Michael is advocating against ever using 2.5 inch interior attack lines.
If CFD had done so, the water power might have made up for some of the other problems at the SSS fire. After all, if the fire had been overwhelmed with waterpower early on, there would have been no "fully involved" to flash over or collapse the structure. It's difficult to overwhelm a large-volume fire with a single reel line or 1.5 inch, regardless of the average fire in London, Tokyo, or Oz.
Hmmmm....might YOU be guilty of said "straw man fallacy".....I never advocated against ever using a 2.5 inch interior attack line.
I did state that I will not use one. (there is a big difference between advocating something, and stating what you will and or wont personally do.......READING COMPREHENSION)
And if the CFD had used 2.5 inch lines.....along with masterstreams (like I said I would do if the need arises for a 2.5 inch line) ....there you would have solved the problem and "the fire would have been overwhelmed with waterpower early on" <-----see how I did that, I directly quoted you, and didn't try to put words in your mouth or take things out of context.
Once again...PLEASE learn to quote someone properly (it will make you look alot smarter)
"When you shout your opinion and then state that your opinion "...won't change no matter what..." you've just showed us all who isn't thinking here." <-----that is what YOU said, quoting a small piece of what I said.
"MY INPUT is that using supply line as an interior line is USELESS, DANGEROUS, RIDICULOUS , a waste of time, effort and manpower......and simply not going to happen when I am running the line. And that won't change no matter what the FDNY (or West Philly) does."<----what I ACTUALLY said.
BIG difference between someone saying that their opinion won't change no matter what. And someone saying that the way they operate won't change NO MATTER WHAT THE FDNY OR WEST PHILLY does.
Pretty easy to argue your point if you keep misquoting someone or taking their words out of context (too bad I'm a little too smart for that....nice try tho)
And ifi I think that someone doing something SOLEY because _____ dept does it, makes them a mindless minion, then THATS my opinion. PLEASE...tell me who the Harvard Graduate School student is that "I called a mindless minion", I would like to talk to them.....and IF....after a discussion, they say that the only reason we do XX and YY is because ____ dept does it (not because it works for us, or WE researched it and it was adapted by us after trial and error) BUT SIMPLY because _____ dept does it....then I will GLADLY refer to them as a mindless minion.
I look in the mirror everyday, and I think for myself always....thanks for the concern.
Yes, I do and have fought fires (and WON coincidentally) in occupancies larger than 2,000 square foot single family residences.
YES...I am very familiar with NFA and Iowa fireflows......and instead of holding them above my head and declaired them to be the word of God.....I actually tried to prove them wrong (in certain instances) and did (in certain instances).
"Refusing to use the proper size hoseline for big box fires, high rise fires, or other large occupancies isn't safe, nor is it smart." Look...we agree on something.
Kali......Reading comprehension could make life so much easier sometimes.
Just incase you forgot to read the other stuff I posted....this one is just for you.
You will (or should) do what YOUR dept expects you to do.....meaning that if you worked or volunteered at my departments and didn't pull the lines you were ordered to use....you would be fired or placed on charges (career dept)....or you would walk back to the firehouse, grab your belongings and politely asked to never come back (volunteer dept)
If YOU had your feelings hurt by the "mindless minion" comment (since apparantly you read that part)....that must mean that you have required your dept to do things ONLY because "that dept" does it......and that is quite foolish for you to be doing to your dept. try to learn things...test them out...and if they work for you....THEN impliment them (I could care less....but your members will have more faith in you if you do things that way)
NEWSFLASH REWIND....pay attention now....I respectfully request you to show me where I slammed others as mindless (EXCEPT for the "leaders" of departments that change the way they operate ONLY because "so and so " dept does it that way) AND show me where I denigrated any dept....respected or not.
Please properly quote me and don't use my words out of context when doing so.....I will be EAGERLY waiting
Here is exactly what you said in reference to 2.5 inch hose..."MY INPUT is that using supply line as an interior line is USELESS, DANGEROUS, RIDICULOUS , a waste of time, effort and manpower......and simply not going to happen when I am running the line." Based on your statement, if you are never going to use it, and call it all of those perjorative names, then you're advocating against it. Ergo, no straw man involved on my part.
As to your other point, if CFD had used master streams early on, they would have needed to place them on the interior of the store. That would have required the interior placement of several of those 2.5 inch lines you dislike so much, not just one, and that wouldn't have been practical, given their manpower. A couple of 2.5 inch attack lines, on the other hand, would have been practical, given the circumstances. Not only that, but your supposed direct quote wasn't either direct or accurate. I've had smoke blown at me before, and I recognize the same sensation here.
Michael, to quote you..."Please pay attention, read....then RE-READ my posts..." Once again, you didn't quote me accurately. When you can, then feel free to respond to what I actually said, not to a partial, out of context excerpt as you did in the two immediately above.
As for things that contributed to the C9 LODDs, how about the reports that cite the use of 2.5 inch supply line as a contributing factor to those LODDs???
CFD now uses 5 inch supply lines, based directly on the SSS LODDs. That's a smart move, and I applaud them for it.