The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Why make a fire defensive, when it doesn't have to be?
Hello all. I live in a Rural area and am a volunteer with a Rural Department. I have been noticing a few issues as of late and would sincerely value your input. One of my biggest concerns is mentioned in the title. It seems that every fire we respond to mutual aid or otherwise, no matter how large or small, from a seemingly simple room and contents, to a fully involved structure is deemed by the powers to be as unsafe. If we were just going to surround and drown, what is the point of even having the title of Firefighter? I thought the point of our job was to save lives AND property...not just to watch a small fire get bigger. I'm a firm believer that if you have interior qualified personnel, and a pumper on the scene capable of containing the fire, then why not? If an interior attack can be effectively done, then do it!
I don't have a whole lot of experience, but I do have enough experience AND common sense to know what I can and cannot do on the scene. If any of you have any input you can offer me on this, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
I don't have a whole lot of experience, but I do have enough experience AND common sense to know what I can and cannot do on the scene. If any of you have any input you can offer me on this, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Montpetit on
-
Hmmmm...How about a simple answer.....We are getting sick of killing Firefighters for nothing.....End of discussion.....Paul
-
-
Well Lutan1...Guess that's as good a reason as any.....besides, we have already discussed going to hell and the guys at our Firehouse decided we would all go together and put the damn place out....!!! Paul
-
Permalink Reply by jdstamp on
-
risk assessment, risk a little to save a little, risk a lot to save a lot.
-
Permalink Reply by Smoke Eater on
-
This topic shouldn't even have reached this point!!! We all know and have been trained (at least I hope) about scene size up, safety, and risk vs. benifit... right? So we know that some departments are more agressive than others. That may be their preferences. I too am an agressive firefighter but I also take a good long look at what I'm getting myself into before I go into it. There is no need to go rushing in "balls to the walls" (sorry ladies) and risk getting ourselves hurt or killed. I'm tired of hearing about another firefighter gone in the line of duty and then come to find out it could have been prevented had they just taken the time to "read" the situation. I hope that I did not anger or offend anyone, I just can't believe some of the comments.
Please....Stay safe out there
Josh
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
The rule is not just for IDLH - it includes areas that may rapidly become IDLH.
In single-family dwelling fires, that's pretty much the entire house.
If you're not carrying an infrared thermometer, TIC, and an atmospheric monitor that measures a minimum of oxygen percentage, LEL percentage, and carbon monoxide, then you really can't tell whether you're in an IDLH environment or not.
-
Permalink Reply by John M. Scheibel on
-
Guess I am new to this Forum, but I will speak my peace about 2 in 2 out... to the Person who feels that Building Size and Involvement dictates 2 in 2 out..I guess you need to answer the question or observation that was " Crystal Clearly" stated to us all at the FDIC, just last year.... 2 FF's were killed when they fell through the Floor in the Cincinnati area, when upon arrival, they entered a building on a reported Structure Fire with a Handline, and fell through the floor, and ultimately became TWO of Our LODD's for Year 2008. Do you think that that 6x6 Hole, they fell through is BIG Enough to Dictate 2 in 2 out ? 34 years of Firefighting and 20 years as a Fire Instructor would tell me so... Where is Billy Goldfeder when you need him most...? LOL
Thank you...
-
-
Hey Philly, it's not anything in Jeff's original post. It's just what some people have said that makes it sound like balls to the wall. I understand Jeff has a legitimate question. But we all really need to take a broader look at what we are going into so that we can come home to our families. Besides if I'm reading my post right, I didn't hint at anything saying "Jeff said this or that".
-
Permalink Reply by Rob M on
-
Here's another one, one of our chiefs received a "thank-you" letter from an insurance company for letting a barn burn to the ground. The reason behind it was it was cheaper for the insurance company to simply rebuild than to have to either repair or demolish AND rebuild the barn. It is easy to replace houses, barns, cars, and other property; but you cannot replace a life, civilian or firefighter. And if I remember the academy correctly, my safety priorities are 1) Mine, 2) My partner(s), 3) My patients, 4) Everyone else's; thus if my patient(s) are not in the structure, and there is a high risk, then there is no reason for myself, my crew, or anyone else to go hard charging into hell to save a structure and thus unnecessarily place lives in danger. I understand your desire to go knock fires from the interior, but how will your friends, family, and fellow firefighters feel if you are on a LODD notification. tombstone courage leads to having your name on a tombstone prematurely. The last thing anyone wants is to be enshrined in Emmitsburg, because it means that we lost and fire won. You will have plenty of fires that you will be able to get at on the interior, don't sweat it, one of those decisions may one day save your life and many others.
-
-
Philly since I've noticed that you are always right and everyone else is wrong let me explain it a little slower so you can understand it. OK when I said balls to the walls, since you are so stuck on that, it wasn't to suggest anything anyone said. I was simply saying that we need to slow down and take in the whole picture. It just all goes back to explaining why his superiors are always so leary to make entry. And why do you question what everyone says on here? Do you just like to stir the pot or what?
-
Permalink Reply by rfdjumper on
-
Alright, I'm chiming in.
First off, West Philly- Yo brutha I'm with you.
To all who think you can out manage and out plan a fire, I wish you the best.
I'm still waiting to see how they're going to put a middle of a row 2nd floor middle bedroom fire of a vacant row home; going defensive without losing the whole row.
-
-
Hey Cap,
I'm not Philly, but I have his back on this one.
As Philly explained the "balls-to-the-wall" reference is an aviation term. It refers to throttling aircraft engines to full power by jamming the "balls" (the knobs atop the throttle levers) to the "wall" (the vertical part of the aircraft instrument panel. In other words, Philly was using a literal term from another profession to describe a full-on interior attack.
I have my occasional differences of opinion with Philly, but I can tell you that he is thoughtful, intelligent, and not anywhere as arrogant as you appear to think. He's opinionated - sure...what firefighter isn't? He has a lot of real-world experience in a major U.S. city, and he's been to more fires and emergencies than some FFN members will see in a lifetime.
He asks a lot of questions because he believes in challenging things that he sees as wrong, incomplete, or not fully thought-out...or that don't apply the same to a Philadelphia high-rise or row house as it does to a lightweight single-family dwelling or a Type IV auto body shop in your town or mine.
If you don't like his opinion, come up with a sensible, persuasive alternative.
We'll listen to both of you.
Ben
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
