Bunker Boots

[K55]

Can you wear Bunker boots that meet or exceed the CFS/AFAC standards for structural firefighting? Getting sick of 2 sets of gear, 1 set of boots

[ltdan]

I don't know where you stand if you hurt yourself, but I know of brigades what were "bunker" type boots for CFS activities.

[RescueHazmat]

At work I wear the Haix FireHunter structural boots whenever wearing my bunker gear.. Have been told that the boots wouldn't be able to be worn at CFS as they have not been approved?.. So wear my taipans for CFS..

If I had my choice, and was allowed, I would go an buy a personal set of Haix just for CFS if we were allowed to wear them..

[K55]

Interesting. I would have thought that haix style boots exceeded the standard.

[Red Message]

As far as I'm concerned, as long as it meets the standard...

[Firefrog]

SAMFS wear Haix, SAMFS is part of safecom like SACFS, so would there be an argument supporting the wearing of Haix?

[pumprescue]

Tried and denied, something about ankle support, I did remind them they are a little better than the old knee length boots we used to wear.

I also reminded them that we are all part of the same service as SAMFS wear them, so why can't I, then I was told SAMFS are having trouble with them, so I gave up trying.

[RescueHazmat]

Interesting. I would have thought that haix style boots exceeded the standard.

They do.. However, as pumprescue said, the argument was something along the lines of ankle support, and they are not standard CFS issue or something to those lines..

[pumprescue]

I honestly thought it was a fairly lame answer I got, but who am I to go against what CFS says 

[Red Message]

Yeah it can be a tough one. Between the two types of boots I have found that the Structural type zipper boots are much more supportive of the ankle compared to the Bunker style boot. This may differ between brands of bunker boot, especially with boots like the Haix Florian Pro that allege better ankle support.

[jaff]

Do we as a mainly rural based fire service ,need the bunker style boots?
Do they offer better protection?
Do they offer more comfort?
Do they offer a cost benefit,compared to what is already supplied?
What are the cost differences between the two different styles?
Are they "needed" because our paid brothers have them?

These are all genuine questions and NO slur is intended!

Cheers Jaff

[Red Message]

Jaff, I think the question asked is more to do with members purchasing their own items of equipment and using them, rather than the CFS as a whole purchasing more boots.

To answer your questions though, I'd suggest that 99.9% of brigades and members would have no benefit from bunker boots.

[bajdas]

Jaff, I think the question asked is more to do with members purchasing their own items of equipment and using them, rather than the CFS as a whole purchasing more boots.

To answer your questions though, I'd suggest that 99.9% of brigades and members would have no benefit from bunker boots.

SES purchase the same zip boots for all members, so a cost saving should be to the agency for the larger purchasing quantity.

The SES volunteers are being advised not to use own equipment, unless it is on the Unit's asset list. This is because if something does go wrong or your equipment failed, insurance could be a problem.

Just some reasons from another view point.

[uniden]

One major advantage of the Haix bunker boots is that they dont allow your pants to ride up and expose your skin whilst down on the floor of a building. They are pretty damn comfortable too.

[RescueHazmat]

Jaff - To answer:
Do they offer better protection? - Yes, for Structural fires definately. They offer higher leg protection, and alot more protection if the foot/leg was to go through a floor or roof. - Obviously the protection is also greater for rural jobs, but that goes into the next question, would they be more comfortable for rural incidents? Probably not. - Well, no. I wouldnt wear them for a rural incident.
Do they offer more comfort? See above.
Do they offer a cost benefit,compared to what is already supplied? Comes to the old question, does cost outweigh safety?.. - For internal/Structural firefighting, my personal opinion (based on experience), they offer excellent protection and for structural/internal firefighting, I wouldn't go past them.. In regards to what is already supplied.. Well, I guess you can only aswer that if you put your foot through a floor and suffer 3rd degree burns because your boots didnt offer any lower shin coverage.. Its a 'Tomatoes Tomato's' type debate..
What are the cost differences between the two different styles? Pick up your Taipan / blundstone / comfort wear / Redback - Then look on here http://www.code-2.com/FIRE-HUNTER-AF-p/501601.htm .. You can see the differences etc and can see why they are a far more superior piece of equipment for structural / internal fire related incidents.
Are they "needed" because our paid brothers have them? No. But if we are volunteering to put our lives on the line, should we have the best out there for the job?.. Not for me to answer, but I have my opinions.

In closing, they are an excellent boot for wearing while inside structure fires / internally fighting fire. - Does every BA member need a set?.. No. - Would it be nice if every BA member had a set? Of course... - If we were allowed to wear them, would "I" buy myself a pair after wearing them already in my current profession and knowing what they offer? Definately..

Guess its up to everyone to make up their own minds.. - But at the moment, I don't think they can be worn for CFS duties, so I guess the decision is kind of already made..

[Red Message]

The Haix Fire Hunter is a good boot, Lion have them in Adelaide for about $325, last time I looked. They are pretty much the best of the best when it comes to Bunker boots, and as such, you know that they will never be purchased by the CFS

I know a few people who have been purchasing the Harvaik L3 boot http://www.firetrader.com.au/prod17.htm
I've seen those retail for around $80. They are made of rubber, and to be honest I'm not a fan of those types at all. Very little ankle support and an odd fit in general.

RescueHazmat, I agree with most of what you're saying, except regarding rural fires. Perhaps its because of my hilly local area but I think that ankle support is paramount in rural firefighting boots, and its hard to compare the laced up zippers and the bunker style boots when it comes to this. I also have found that most bunker boots are a fair amount heavier than other styles of boots. Of course it all comes down to the individual experience we have with boots. Try Redbacks vs. Taipans for example, same style, world of difference.

Uniden, if your turnout pants are riding to the middle of your shin and higher, perhaps you need to have them resized? With both PBI and Nomex + liner turnout pants, I've never had them ride up above the top of my boots, there's always been a few inches overlap at the very least.

The other point would perhaps be the versatility of the boots we currently have. They are great for all fire and rescue applications and provide very good bang for their buck. Maybe the stance the CFS need to take with certain things is to approve equipment for use, but not supply it. Mind you, the CFS then have to have both the manpower and the money to test and review different items of equipment.

[RescueHazmat]

The Haix Fire Hunter is a good boot, Lion have them in Adelaide for about $325, last time I looked. They are pretty much the best of the best when it comes to Bunker boots, and as such, you know that they will never be purchased by the CFS

I know a few people who have been purchasing the Harvaik L3 boot http://www.firetrader.com.au/prod17.htm
I've seen those retail for around $80. They are made of rubber, and to be honest I'm not a fan of those types at all. Very little ankle support and an odd fit in general.

RescueHazmat, I agree with most of what you're saying, except regarding rural fires. Perhaps its because of my hilly local area but I think that ankle support is paramount in rural firefighting boots, and its hard to compare the laced up zippers and the bunker style boots when it comes to this. I also have found that most bunker boots are a fair amount heavier than other styles of boots. Of course it all comes down to the individual experience we have with boots. Try Redbacks vs. Taipans for example, same style, world of difference.

Uniden, if your turnout pants are riding to the middle of your shin and higher, perhaps you need to have them resized? With both PBI and Nomex + liner turnout pants, I've never had them ride up above the top of my boots, there's always been a few inches overlap at the very least.

The other point would perhaps be the versatility of the boots we currently have. They are great for all fire and rescue applications and provide very good bang for their buck. Maybe the stance the CFS need to take with certain things is to approve equipment for use, but not supply it. Mind you, the CFS then have to have both the manpower and the money to test and review different items of equipment.

I agree with you re: rural fires (I think).. I would prefer my lace/zip up Taipans for rural incidents.. - I think this is what you also meant?

[rescue5271]

have only seen these boots in CFA but they no longer issue them,there was a problem with them years ago..I guess you could always go and ask the man at the top....

[CFS_Firey]

Maybe the stance the CFS need to take with certain things is to approve equipment for use, but not supply it. Mind you, the CFS then have to have both the manpower and the money to test and review different items of equipment.

Why not simply say "Anything at or above this standard is allowed". Someone at AFAC has already spent the money and manpower developing the standards, so theoretically thats all the CFS needs...

[Evac]

There is nothing stopping an individual wearing a boot that meets or exceeds the current CFS standard... why? show me where it is written that you will wear "x" boot??

[OMGWTF]

Im pretty sure it doesnt matter, as far as im aware there is no real standard for boots... just a requirment for structure boots to be fitted with steel or reinforced toe caps...


Im also pretty sure some of the boys up at STC use the Haix Boots...

[Red Message]

Yeah, there is a standard, AS/NZS 4821:2006 - Firefighters Footwear, deals with the whole lot.

[Gilly]

I wore a pair last night at the Wingfield dump fire, and im glad i did. Saved my socks and feet being soaked in garbage run-off. The taipan style isn't the best sealed boot.

[K55]

Yeah, there is a standard, AS/NZS 4821:2006 - Firefighters Footwear, deals with the whole lot.

What does this standard mean in relation to International standards? Could only find the International standard when browsing the sites.

[Red Message]

What ISO standards did you find? Oddly enough, nothing but the Australian standard is mentioned on any of the manufacturers pages for Aussie footwear - don't know where you were looking?

As far as other standards for boots and PPE you've got things like NFPA 1971 & 1977 standards for Structural and Wildfire PPE respectively, can't be bothered looking for the European ones at the moment.