The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
2-Person Staffing
Hi -- I'm currently preparing a feature article on 2 person staffing of both engine and truck companies. I had experienced it in the midwest, saw the concept in use in California and Arizona, and now notice it more and more on the East Coast, especially in departments which are phasing out its volunteers.
With 4-person minimum staffing being endorsed by the NFPA and several governmental agencies, why do department administrators implement what many consider to be an unsafe practice. It seems unusual. If your department employs 2 man companies, how do you manage to get all fireground positions filled in order to make an effective knockdown?
Your comments are appreciated -- Lou
With 4-person minimum staffing being endorsed by the NFPA and several governmental agencies, why do department administrators implement what many consider to be an unsafe practice. It seems unusual. If your department employs 2 man companies, how do you manage to get all fireground positions filled in order to make an effective knockdown?
Your comments are appreciated -- Lou
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Shareef Abdu Nur on
-
The question was, "If your department employs 2 man companies, how do you manage to get all fireground positions filled in order to make an effective knockdown?" The answer is, "You don't get all fireground positions filled and you do not get all fireground duties accomplished." It is an embarrassment to the fire service and all who serve to even consider 2 man companies. I know that there are many departments who operate this way by relying on mutual and automatic aid responses, but this is irresponsible at best. We have to come up with a better idea. A Chief once told me that he runs a 2 man Truck and a 2 man Engine because this way he gets both apparatus at a fire. The responsible thing to do would be to run a 4 man company(either Truck or Engine) and request mutual aid for the other apparatus. I know that we are all running with minimum manpower, but we have to be smarter about how we allocate what little manpower we do have. I apologize for ranting, but this is dear to my heart.
-
-
Permalink Reply by rfdjumper on
-
Lou,
I work in a dept that runs all 2 man companies (engine, truck and rescue), in a perfect world 4 men crews would be ideal. It had taken like 50 years to get a second man on most of the rigs. The city I work in once boasted a volunteer population of 10,000fireman, now there are 17; that translates to an over 99.9% career response. The department still operates like it did 30 years ago.
I'll tell how a typical structural attack happens and you can make your own conclusions.
1st engine-Driver will put engine in pump, if a hydrant is within reach of the front intake he will establish water supply. If not he will help flake out hose. Then wait for the call for water.
-Crewman will pull the line and take it in to the structure alone, call for water, put out fire.
2nd engine- driver will establish water supply, crewman will join 1st engine crewman in fire attack.
3rd engine- driver and crewman will go to back of structure. If need be they will bring 2nd line in or fire attack in any exposure building.
4th engine- driver and crewman will pull a RIT kit from the rescue truck and hang out in the front of the building. Also they may help throw ladders and etc in front.
1st truck-Driver gets the main up, ladders the building, crewman grabs TIC, Primary search, overhaul
2nd truck-Driver and Crewman, Vent work, overhaul
Rescue-Driver and LT. Search and utility control.
1 chief
Why is it this way? That is simple. Money! If a city has no tax base and they don't ever raise taxes then there isn't any money to do business the Right Way. Unless the recommendations from NFPA 1710 became actual law, I wouldn't expect city governments to actually care, and that's the way it is.
If you have any questions e-mail me. -
© 2025 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
