The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Incident Commander: In The Vehicle or On The Street?
We are sending our Battalion Chiefs and Command staff through the Blue Card Command System, which was produced by the Brunacinis, and based on the updated Fire Command model that Phoenix has been using for years. Our department has been a "run it from the street" ICS model for years that has slowly evolved to running most ops from the back of their command buggy (outside). The Blue Card very strongly advocates running the IC from inside the command vehicle (F-250 in our case). This is a completely foreign concept for our Batt Chiefs and the idea so far is meeting some resistance. I would like to hear from anyone who has actually run IC from both positions and give me some pros and cons on the inside the vehicle approach. Thanks
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Timothy D. Stone Jr on
-
I would love to have that. But in a volunteer dept. we dont always have officers there or our cheifs. If we dont have any we have the highest ranked member running command. We have all been trained on how to handle the IC. Alot of times when I have had IC I have also had to run pump, even do inside attacks. I would love to just be able to stay in one place. Cant always do it though.
-
Permalink Reply by Larry Taggart on
-
I am only to familar with both IC concepts. I have also had many a discussion with AL about the I cann't see a thing IC concept. Al has been pushing this idea since the mid 80's and luckly it have not picked up much favor where I come from, just outside Chicago. The departments that do us it have also been the depts. that have also lost FF. If you put a command officer away from the scene he really is not in command except by radio. I have never seen that work yet. I am with you Battalion Chiefs in saying NO to this idea. Call me if you really want to talk about this IC sytem. Larry Taggart Battalion Chief ret 480 -855 -4927
-
Permalink Reply by Curt Varone on
-
The theory of running it from the vehicle is great - but in reality - I think it works only when you can get the command vehicle into a good position to observe what is going on... and even then I would have my concerns. How can you manage an incident if you are parked two blocks away due to vehicles blocking the scene? You might as well manage it from a high tech office at headquarters. In fact if every incident can be managed 100% from the vehicle, why even drive to the scene? Set up an office so your ICs can do their thing removed from the noise and problems of the fireground.
Personally, I don't buy it. You need a trained dispatcher on the radio channel to help the IC (ensure he does not miss messages, relay information, etc.), and at least one trained assistant on scene - but staying in the vehicle????? Stay in your office and manage the incident from there.
-
Permalink Reply by Roy Walker on
-
It will depend on as you say the size and equipment available in the command vehicle. Some posts incorporate monitors, computers, comunication and the ability to accomodate a unified command . This also tends to allow some isolation for command to focus on the task at hand with out distractions.
How ever if a cell phone command board and a clip board is all you can afford a command officer inside a cramped cab then maybe he is better of out in the open. He may have to put up with the current weather and usual distractions but some officers require that feel of things. This is a case by case analysis what may be useful to say a busy big city department versus a small rural department that may only run a handfull of calls a year will differ greatly and as always the money will dictate the feasability of each.
-
Permalink Reply by Harvey Harper on
-
I was a shift commander for 17 years and I have done it both ways. The complexity of the incident should determine which system should be used. If you have a typical single resident house fire you can probably do a good job from the street. If you have a large commercial fire going you better find a quiet place to work and trust your subordinates to keep you informed. And for disaster type incidents you should know how to work out of an EOC. Working from the street is usually easier and most people like it better but its not always appropriate.
-
Permalink Reply by Chief Mike on
-
I have success both ways - Depending on the incident complexity. An incident where I may have 4 or less subordinate activities going on, I might manage "from the street". This might be a vehicle crash that has EMS, Extrication, and a hose line off; or a vehicle fire, etc.
A more complex incident, I might elect to use the vehicle. I find I can keep my organizational system, accountability, and communications better from the vehicle (all my radio stuff is right there, more wattage!) We also have support and mutual aid agencies on different radio bands which often dictates using multiple radios.
One thing that I think makes this "command from the vehicle" work for me, is that on any incident where I have mutiple crews and activities going on I always try to assign an Operations officer. That's the guy that is right there at the hot zone managing what is going on with the crews. That allows me one contact person for the main operation, and I can focus on getting resources, contacting the Water Supply Officer, Safety Officer, Accountability, etc.
It is really hard to run the show from the buggy when you are an operational kind of guy. But, I have confidence in my Operations Officer and Safety Officer that they will get me the important info and requests for support they need. I see my role at that point is not just command of the ENTIRE scene, but the organizational hub that gets and utilized the resources effectively.
My department has mostly on-call personnel, with one person staffing our single station. We also utilize water shuttle operations on most working fires, and have automatic aid from usually two other departments on all potential structure fires.
-
Permalink Reply by glenn usdin on
-
We are mixing up IC's and company officers. IC's are the only person of the fireground whose sole task is to be thinking.
I want my IC in a safe secure location, NOT in the elements. I want him/her to be the one person on the fireground who is charged with listening/thinking for everyone else. Everyone else is a tactical person, doing this or that. The IC needs to be listening and WATCHING, but not IN THE SMOKE/ICE/SNOW/HEAT/RAIN/SUN. Presumably the IC is a seasoned veteran who has years of credentials of being in the "thick" of it with the troops. The IC doesn't have to prove he/she knows what winter/summer is like.
The company and staff officers should be the ones reporting back on actual conditions, FROM those conditions. If you are freezing/soaking/sweating, as much as the troops can feel you there, you are not in a position to be the sole person on the scene to be thinking about the safety of the operating forces.
There is a difference between an IC and a dispatcher. Both need to have excellent communication skills. But only the IC is charged with the responsibility of bringing home the forces.
You won't see an air traffic controller at the end of the runway directing jets amidst the blast and noise. Why should an IC be in the smoke directing the troops?
Somehow the fire service underground has taken the position that you can't do tough interior firefighting at the same time as running effective command. Why not do both?
Bottom line, just read the fire service fatality reports. Most of them refer to breakdowns in command, or total lack of it. Firefighters die at times because nobody was watching what was going on, or situations got very bad very quickly and no command function was in place to stop unsafe actions.
Make your IC job easier, remove distractions and environmental effects, get in the command vehicle and listen to what what is going on, watch what is going on, take in reports from your support officers and decide what to do.
-
-
Glenn
Its great to hear from you again my friend! We need to agree to disagree on this point. Again - the theory of the IC in the vehicle is great. But in many cities the IC's vehicle is parked 1-2 blocks from the fire scene. Places like Providence are not like Phoenix with nice wide streets - 2 engines and a ladder take up a block in front of the IC's vehicle. Add a few police cars, snow bank-narrowed streets, illegally parked cars and you might be 2 blocks out. If an IC is supposed to be able to manage from his car under those conditions - 2 blocks away - he should stay in his office and manage it from there. I think we both agree that is not acceptable.
Also as for the air traffic controller analogy - that is not how I see it. Asking the IC to stay in his vehicle is like forcing the pilot to stay in the control tower and fly the plane remotely. Yeah sure the pilot should rely on his instruments and radio communications with the tower to guide him but the pilot should be in the plane. But why can't he fly the plane from the plane and be able to use his senses in addition to the instruments.
The better analogy would be a dispatcher serving as an air traffic controller - helping the pilot (IC) - not flying the plane for the pilot.
Great discussion though!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Ron Ayotte on
-
No.. I don't hold the probie's hand and mop the floors with him. If there are properly trained and have pride in the job, and your line officers know what is expected of them, you do not have to worry about the small stuff getting done.. you also don't have to worry about the important stuff getting done on the fireground, either.
Damn... has the fire service become the old Soviet Military, where Comrade Ivan couldn't take a dump without permission from the Kremlin?
Your insinuation that command makes a coffee request because the IC has been standing behind the "buggy" is facetious at best.... a good IC worth his salt will take care of his personnel first and worry about his numb tootsies after his personnel have been taken care of
-
-
Chief Varone.. I had the pleasure of attending one of your Senior Fire Officer Seminars put on by the Massachusetts Department of Fire Services.
I agree with you 100%.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
If the IC has "numb tootsies" then he's distracted. The IC needs to be fully focused, not distracted.
-
-
Since Glenn Usdin brought up the air traffic controller analogy... let's look at it from a pilot/firefighter point of view, since some aircraft flight terms coincide with fire operations , such as crew resource management and situational awareness.
Picture the controllers at the FAA regional centers as the fire alarm dispatchers... they make sure that the right aircraft (apparatus) follow the right routes and attitudes to reach their destination (the fireground).
Once the aircraft approaches the boundaries of the airport's airspace, the air traffic controller at the regional center transfers control for inbound flights (firefighter version: staging) at the airport to the inbound controller (staging officer) and they are requested to switch to the approach frequency (fireground channel). Once they land, ground control (the IC) takes over and direct the aircraft (firefighters) to the proper gate (fireground assignment). The Ground controller sits in the tower with a 360 degree view of the airport (The IC should have a done a 360 of the fireground.. either personally or assign someone to do it and report back to him/her). The pilot (company officer) will report when he has reached the gate (assignment) Once the luggage has been unloaded and the aircraft provisioned and refueled (task completed) the flight crew (the engine/ladder/rescue company) goes to rehab if available and another crew takes up for the next flight... if it is a small regional airline and doing short flights, (a working or all hands fire) the crew may be tasked with another flight (fireground assignment).
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
