# I can't believe this



## hfdff422 (Dec 13, 2005)

Watch the news clip, I am generally not on the side of the news people, but this is pretty blatant. I cant even put into words how shocking this is.

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?sectionId=46&id=46227


----------



## coloradoemt (Dec 13, 2005)

I dont know what to think about this. Most of the video is dark and fuzzy at best, not to mention most of it is from quite a distance. I cannot see enough of the firefighters in question to pass judgement on them especially not having been on the call with them. I am not ready to crucify these guys for failing to keep the high standard they are expected to perform at with no mistakes whatsoever 24/7, just by looking at this video.


----------



## CaptainPanic (Dec 13, 2005)

Ive always believed that FF were always first in when it came to structure fires. With this being nationally broadcast and re-broadcast it is going to be hard for the two to find new jobs. Maybe we will see them at the local McDs flipping burgers...


----------



## hfdff422 (Dec 13, 2005)

One of the FF's dismounted the apparatus without any gear on, where I come from you wear bunker pants on every call- period, even on the bus. These appear to be career firefighters, they should come off the apparatus with full turnouts on. The fact that there are people inside and a cop is going inside and there is a firefighter outside spraying water into the structure is beyond my comprehension. That is basic 40hr class stuff there, you don't use an external attack when there is someone inside, even if it is a cop.


----------



## coloradoemt (Dec 13, 2005)

I am familiar with basic ff1 operations etc. My point is that the video is not clear enough to diffinatively state what is going on at this incident, or for me to make any judgements.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 13, 2005)

I can't get the video to load...


----------



## Lisa (Dec 14, 2005)

I live a very short distance from where this took place and I know one of the FF in question. I am also shocked, but I know the house was fully involved when their apparatus arrived on the scene. They did not think anyone could be saved at that point. As far as the police officer goes....if he was on duty(which he was not) and in uniform he would have been fired for his actions as well. It is a sad situation all around.....


----------



## hfdff422 (Dec 14, 2005)

If you are told there are people inside and there is only one window that does not have flames shooting out, you go in that window.


----------



## MedicPrincess (Dec 14, 2005)

Lisa- that is unfortunant....multiple people lost their lives, and these to, it appears by the video, failed to do their job in the meantime.  But I have to wonder, who made the decision not to enter the structure for those 2 FF in particular?  If everyone else on scene was involved in rescue operations, who told those two they were exempt from the rescue?  And if it was a command decision, why was a person in civilian clothing allowed to enter it after fire was already on scene?  And why did the one come off the truck without his gear on?  

When I did fire, being dispatched for a simple smoke investigation called for full turnouts.  Structure fire and you can bet your butt we were in full gear, and since our airpacks were mounted in the seats, we had those on by the time we rolled up on scene as well.  We came off the truck ready to fight fire, everytime, no questions asked.  And if we came off the truck without our gear, we were given the next shift off tho reflect on how we put our entire crew in danger.

You risk a lot to save a lot.  Victims inside is a whole lot.  Then an additional civilian entering the structure ups the stakes even more.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 14, 2005)

hfdff422 said:
			
		

> If you are told there are people inside and there is only one window that does not have flames shooting out, you go in that window.


 
Depends...

Just because there are people inside, doesn't mean you should hop off the fire truck and walk inside.. Then you would have dead firefighters too. There has to be some uniformity to it all. There is such thing as accountablility, one person can't just do a search.. Gotta have two. And someone has to know who is going in, and they have to be trained to do so.. and if they place is ablaze, you can't go in with out some way to lead yourself out, or escape.. You need a hose, an escape rope is also a good idea *tied to your waist, so you can follow it to get out.. and some irons, to clear debris, breach walls, and knock down doors.

If the house is fully consumed, no fire officer would.. or should.. EVER allow firefighters to enter. People die in a tragic, way, so in grief, people have to place the blame. That's human nature. 
The firemen may have been slow, but there were other firefighters there as well, and the house was almost completely involved.. Bunker gear only protects for about 25 seconds of direct flame, when it's new, so you can't just crawl into a mass of flames. Perhaps entry was not safe. Police are not trained or equipped to make entry, the guy saved a couple people, that's great. But where were the other victims in relation to that window?

Maybe the firefighters couldn't get to them w/ out the hose.. Ya need water to knock down the flames.. The big hose gets the water to the truck, also important. Firefighters have many jobs at fires, not just rescue, while that is primary, many factors have to fall in to place for rescue to even be considered, if it is possible at all. Just by the video, I'd say entry would have been too dangerous, that house was what we call "Fully Involved". When fire is through the roof, entry should not be made. That means a lot of load bearing beams are being compromised, and the structure is or will be in danger of collapse.

There are too many details missing. Just seems blame was placed awfully easy... So easy for the media to monday morning quarterback every profession. What was the cause of the fire?

Just my opinion.


----------



## CaptainPanic (Dec 14, 2005)

Wow. Thanks for input ALex, I have no training or education in FF operations whatsoever so I cant really make an educated comment. But I do however understand that there is more to a FF than just rescue and hosework. And I'll direct and honest, theres no way I could ever hack it as a FF, one something about running into a burning building just scaresthe crap out of me, and secondly Id be afraid I got trapped in there and died a miserable death.


----------



## hfdff422 (Dec 14, 2005)

Alex, you are quite correct in your statements, I just have a hard time swallowing an exterior attack being performed during or at the immediate conclusion of rescue operations. And coming off of any apparatus at any emergency without approprate PPE is gross deriliction of duty. You can't acheive appropriate accountability with firefighters with no gear. But, no you cant go into every building, and you can't save everybody. The risk is always weighed and hopefully the appropriate decisions will be made. It is reasonable to risk life to save a life, and if there is one room that is not engulfed in flames then you check that room. I won't even go into the ineffective firefighting tactics that appeared to be being used.(wrong site)


----------



## FFEMT1764 (Dec 14, 2005)

This is absolutely the most unexplainable thing I have seen in my 12 years in public safety.  This is something I would have expected from a backwoods untrained volunteer department that had 2 brand new firefighters respond to the fire...but for this to happen in a paid department- unexcusable.  In my county if you dont respond to a fire call with you PPE and immediately involve yourself in fire and life safety you are usually removed from the department either by the officers or the board of directors.  My county has 3 paid departments and 14 volunteer departments, which means we do alot of exterior attacks, but we ALWAYS make a safe but consciencious effort to rescue people and even pets from all fires. While some times it is unsafe to attempt a rescue, the actions of these two firefighters was so grossly negligent that the state attorney general should be looking into criminal negligence charges and I am certain that the families of the victims will be in civil court with the two firefighters and the city, and the families will undoubtedly be awarded a tremendous sum of money for the negligent acts of the fire personnel.

If I ever saw this in person I can promise you that I would offer my services as an expert witness to the victims families. I hope that firefighters, EMS persons, and law enforcement everywhere take ote of this and learn from the mistakes of these firefighters.


----------



## Lisa (Dec 14, 2005)

There is an update to this story...go to wbir.com....click news then click news videos...sorry i couldn't get a link to work.

Anyway.....I would agree that if the FF's were not doing their job then yes they should be terminated. However, as you will see in the new video, one of the ff's was doing as he was told (this is the one I know). He has abtained a lawyer and is appealing this decision. He was reprimanded before for going in a structure alone sems like now they are reprimanding him for not going in and moving too slow. 
Mostly likey those who lost their lives were already dead before the fire dept got their...I agree with what was said.....why have more deaths because of lousy judgement.
Also...the "hero" in all this (the police officer) was not on duty at the time, he just lives a few houses down.
This ff has endured death threats so bad that he and his family have had to move out of the county. His wife is cuurently having escorts to and from work!!.
Like I said before sad situation all around!!


----------



## ExpatMedic0 (Dec 14, 2005)

I think I can see some of both sides, indeed we do not know the full story and its easy to point fingers, but at the same time You don't need to know anything about fire fighting or rescue ops to see a guy puling people out of a window. Why not help the guy out? wouldn't any decent citizen give the off cop a hand? at that time they dident even know he was a cop....
Sure we don't know what started the fire, could be hazmat, could be a unsafe scene for some reason.... but if that's the case why is the truck right next to the house with fire fighters outside of it strolling around with no safety gear? I am not saying the firefighters should run into the house with no protection and attempt a unsafe rescue with no plan, but even there department stated that "despite the rescue efforts underway these guys failed to perform", there department also stated they failed to have there turn outs on, which is obviously a violation of there SOP's for whatever they where toned out for if there fired for those reasons. It appears to me they weren't fired for not entering a unsafe house and letting people burn to death, they where fired for not performing and violating there SOP's which could be argued to possibly have lead the death of those people . Its easy for us to point fingers, and I sure would like to hear there side of the story, but it sure dosent look good no matter how you look at it.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 15, 2005)

If only two showed up in a rig, you must consider one was driving. And one was wearing just bunker pants.. and it is very difficult to drive an apparatus with a standard transmission, while wearing full turnout gear. And not all firefighters are there for entry. Someone has to stay with the apparatus, and operate the pump... 

I can't drive a standard with a coat or gloves on, and some rigs have such small petals, you can't wear boots either. Are they going to check into that? Blame the fire apparatus mfg too?  

I think the media blew this way out of proportion, and made the dept. look bad.. Therefore they couldn't just sit around and try to explain how they do their operations.. Someone had to take the fall.

Also.. You can't go in w/ out SCBA.. and NFPA forbids the driver seat from being equipped with n SCBA unit, as many quint or quad cab rigs have.
Therefore, the driver will hop out, and not have full TOG or an SCBA on.
This person should not leave the rig, if they are planning on using it to fight the fire. And if they are planning on going in, someone has to lay LDH to a water source, i.e. another pumper at a fill site, or a hydrant. Someone has to hook that hose to either a manifold or a wye to direct water to both apparatus, someone has to direct attack lines.. This small hose they talk about, was an inch & three quarter, a standard hose size in all of the world. 1 3/4" & 2 1/2" - Attack; 3" - Blitz; 4" & 5" Supply; 6" Hard Suction.

And you can't just run up and go in.. Even if laws throw out the two in, two out rule; that doesn't count in a rescue. But it's still not safe. Someone should do a safety walk around.. Look for downed power lines, fuel leaks, propane and nat. gas tanks or pipes, victims, etc.

I don't see that anything was done wrong, b/c >WE< don't know their SOP, plan of attack, the training of the two personnel, who was in charge, etc. Someone is just blaming the firemen b/c their family could not escape.

I still want to know the cause, what time was it, was the home equipped with working smoke alarms, was the fire investigated by an arson team, etc.. More details.


----------



## FFEMT1764 (Dec 15, 2005)

LDH? What's that? And as for the hydrants statement...our idea of hydrants is a pop off that flows 200 gallons an HOUR. So for us LDH=Dump tank.  And these days apparatus mfg's are making computer controlled  pumps, once you put the truck in pump you set it and forget it, as long as it has a water source.  So maybe the dept's SOP's need a looking at too.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 15, 2005)

LDH: Large Diameter Hose.. Common word in the fire service..

Computer operated pumps? Where? Maybe digital equipment. At a working fire, you never 'set it and forget it'.. Unless you want to be going to a few funerals. 2 for the 2 guys inside who became trapped when their hose went flat, because the water supply went nil, and nobody was there to switch to the booster, and tell them to get out.. and the third for the apparatus, while it runs on high throttle, dry, no circulating water.. while you're wondering why you have two guys inside burning up.. your pump burns up too, and grinds to a molten halt.

Now you have lost a front line apparatus, and two firemen..

Just because you don't have to stand there and turn a throttle knob to the desired pressure on an oil filled gauge, doesn't mean you can just up the numbers on the digitalized throttle and walk away. 


And when the technology does get to the point, where it can find it's own water source... hook up to it, and tell the guy inside that it's running low, blow it's own air horn when the building is going to collapse, and take a five gallon barrel of foam out of it's own compartment, set in down and fill the cafs itself... Nobody will be able to afford it. 

I recall, in the city, being horrified at the technology. Coming from areas with all volunteer services that had better technology, better gear, and newer equipment than the CofP.. Only new apparatus were tower ladders and heavy rescue trucks. BUT... With less technology, you have less room for error and equipment failure.



**to answer the rude PM:

Yes.. I went to a technical school to get certified as a Paramedic. I took several fire tech classes, and have a certificate in Fire Service Technology.
They include, but are not limited to: Swift Water Rescue, Ice Rescue Mod 1, Basic Vehicle Rescue, AVR (Special Vehicle Rescue Tech), School Bus Rescue, Confined Space Rescue, High Angle Rescue, Structural Search and Rescue, Firefighter One, Self Contained Breathing App., Pump 1, Pump 2, Rural Water Supply, Engine Company Operations, Truck Company Operations, Essentials 88, Incident Command, and Fire Officer Mod 1. 

No. I'm not just some hick with a first aid kit and a garden hose.

Thank You, I'll keep that in mind.

I have to leave for work now.


----------



## CaptainPanic (Dec 15, 2005)

I think Alex made some good points here. He said that with less technology there is less room for equipment failure. And I believe that 100%. 

Being GREATLY uneducated in FF operations, even I would be deathly afraid to set and forget the pumper, that machine has DEADLY power. What would happen if someone didnt attach the hose correctly to the tank and it spewed off?? I would hate to see that happen on scene of a major structure fire.

Somebodys got to be there to man the truck / apparatus whichever word is more favorable for FFs. I dont think you could ever replace human dependibility on-scene, that is if that person knows their job and does it exceedingly well.

My mom always told me this when I wanted to use a calculator and this might be applied to all technological toys:
The computer is only as smart as the person operating it. Dont think the computer knows what needs to be done exactly when.

And I know Alex knows what hes talking about, he's been there, he's experienced it, and he's dealt with various situations that I have not.

-CP


----------



## hfdff422 (Dec 15, 2005)

He was kidding about the LDH comment, and I was trying to stay away from tactics discussions outside of rescue since this is an EMS site. Who in the world would have sent you a rude PM, your points are reasonable and thoughtful, even if I disagree with some. I respect all of your thoughts on this, but was most horrified by that firefighter doing the exterior attack.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 15, 2005)

Everyone has their opinion, I'm just sharing mine, and I respect that of others.. We can all agree and disagree, that's what is so great about this country.

When someone dies in a fire, the people who are in charge of that rescue are damaged 'inside' for life. They failed. But that's not a judgement from someone else, that is their judgement on themselves. Speaking for myself, as a firefighter, even if everything is done, every possible effort is made, I still felt like a failure. Losing an elderly woman to a fire probably shaved more off my life than losing a child in the back of the rig. In EMS, we have tools and technology that works for us, and can pull someone back from beyond. But in a fire, the work is done with tradition, and technology discovered a hundred years ago.. and most of the time, resuscitation would be a horriffic, and unforgiving task. 

Every 60 seconds fire doubles in size, it gets hotter, bigger, eats more oxygen, and gives off more toxins. Survival rate after sixty seconds in that enviroment is less than 10%. The biggest enemy during a fire is time.


----------



## emtff99 (Dec 15, 2005)

*Speaking as a Firefighter with quite a few years/experience/training to back it up, I think Alex has best summed up everything quite well. I really don't think I could add much more other than to say I seriously agree with Alex.*


			
				TTLWHKR said:
			
		

> Everyone has their opinion, I'm just sharing mine, and I respect that of others.. We can all agree and disagree, that's what is so great about this country.
> 
> When someone dies in a fire, the people who are in charge of that rescue are damaged 'inside' for life. They failed. But that's not a judgement from someone else, that is their judgement on themselves. Speaking for myself, as a firefighter, even if everything is done, every possible effort is made, I still felt like a failure. Losing an elderly woman to a fire probably shaved more off my life than losing a child in the back of the rig. In EMS, we have tools and technology that works for us, and can pull someone back from beyond. But in a fire, the work is done with tradition, and technology discovered a hundred years ago.. and most of the time, resuscitation would be a horriffic, and unforgiving task.
> 
> Every 60 seconds fire doubles in size, it gets hotter, bigger, eats more oxygen, and gives off more toxins. Survival rate after sixty seconds in that enviroment is less than 10%. The biggest enemy during a fire is time.


----------



## coloradoemt (Dec 16, 2005)

TTLWHKR said:
			
		

> If only two showed up in a rig, you must consider one was driving. And one was wearing just bunker pants.. and it is very difficult to drive an apparatus with a standard transmission, while wearing full turnout gear. And not all firefighters are there for entry. Someone has to stay with the apparatus, and operate the pump...
> 
> I can't drive a standard with a coat or gloves on, and some rigs have such small petals, you can't wear boots either. Are they going to check into that? Blame the fire apparatus mfg too?
> 
> ...


 
I am quoting this post in its entirety simply because it was very good. Well said!!! This makes me feel a bit idiotic as I would have liked to have said the same thing but could not put anything together. To all of you out there who are very eager to convict and condem, it is my opinion that having not been there you are a bit offline. Who knows what happened before the video started rolling, what was said among those onscene, what actions the vidoe did not capture. 

I would also like to point out, again, being in EMS we are ALL expected to perform perfectly, all the time. If we do not the general public is more than willing to crucify us. We in EMS should not be willing to do this to our own as willingly.


----------



## FFEMT1764 (Dec 16, 2005)

Just as a side note, a nearby department purchased a new KME truck late last year and if you hook it up to a hydrant that has a good commercial water supply the truck will pump itself, if it runs out of water it shifts to the booster on its own, and if the booster goes below 1/4 the horn blows, and when the pump runs dry it will automatically shut itself down, take the truck out of pump gear and place the pto into neutral.  This truck cost them $450,00 mind you, but for a small town witha small member combo dept it was worth the $$ to be able to make an attack with 2 people on scene first, or to do a quick rescue with those 2 people, and when more ff's show up they can run the truck. I know that this truck will do all this because I program radios for this dept and have several close friends who work there, and I got the free tour of this truck and got to play with it some. It very cool, being a ff and all I love it.  For my dept I am the master pump operator, but thats because I can figure out most anything mechanical in less than 5 minutes.  Guess I have a gift.  But thats my 2 cents on that.


----------



## hfdff422 (Dec 16, 2005)

After investigating further, and hearing so many differing opinions, I am quite convinced that the one firefighter should be reinstated (no gear). However, the second firefighter should be suspended or terminated. The officer in charge of the scene was the real culprit in this entire situation though, making countless mistakes and not effectively leading fireground operations. Mabye no more lives would have been saved, but the operations should have and could have been affected more succesfully.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Dec 16, 2005)

*K* eeping
*M* echanics
*E* mployed


----------

