Author Topic: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08  (Read 41689 times)

Offline boredmatrix

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #50 on: September 18, 2008, 10:58:38 PM »
HAHAHAHAHA.......I can just hear em screaming on this forum now...

"HOW DARE THEY SEND A SAMFS CREW OUT OF THE CITY TO FIGHT OUR FIRES......."

Offline JamesGar

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Belair CFS
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #51 on: September 18, 2008, 11:00:16 PM »
I've got an impending sense of doom and the thunder clouds suround me!!!!

Got to say that it does work though!
James Gardiner
Belair CFS

Offline Cameron Yelland

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 425
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #52 on: September 19, 2008, 05:45:32 AM »
It sounds like a system that would work but as you say "ownership" would get in the way.

Cant say i blame them either though.  For starters we dont have the capabilities of the MFS to be able to do that at a large structure fire.  Second, why would the MFS want to give a big job and return to their area and run alarm after alarm?  Its basically one of the reasons they joined, to see the big one!

Compton CFS Brigade
Captain
(Formally Comp00)

Offline Darius

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #53 on: September 19, 2008, 09:01:45 AM »
Mt Barker closer to the city ??? Maybe a bit of a typo or has Barker moved recently.
No typo, 'Closest and most appropriate". They are close and appropriate considering they have a pumper, have an RCR capability, deal with Urban incidents on a regular basis and have a high quality of members.

but isn't their pumper and rescue the same truck?  so they can't send that miles away as it would leave a large area around Mt Barker without RCR coverage.  So it doesn't sound "appropriate" to me and there are many others that much closer too.

Offline TillerMan

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #54 on: September 19, 2008, 09:41:49 AM »
A good point here is making sure that the appliance attending the "job" has the capabilities to replace the one leaving. It's just a pity that no consideration is given to supporting MFS when new appliances are allocated. The Govt should put in a bit of cash for urban interface brigades especially in this day and age of Terrorist threats etc. Plenty of money has been poured into USAR, but no ones gonna be useing their USAR gear until the fire is out. Like James Belair should really still have a pump purely for the fact that you are so close to town.

I mean imagine if the Westpac building got blown up or something and needed say 2 4th alarms worth and they say Belair when you get here relay 4 lines of 64 from light square down to the scene..... "Ah sorry you will have to get a pumper to do that".... oh look the next 2 trucks coming in are tea tree gully and Athelstone..... makes life a bit hard really.

Offline JamesGar

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Belair CFS
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #55 on: September 19, 2008, 10:25:35 AM »
Agreed Tillerman, would be nice that some consideration surrounding appropriate appliance for the 'what if's' exist instead of an appliance that just gets by.

Some other consideration for Mutual Aid are the response of 'cells' or a task force equivalent, where if a large incident is underway instead of individual appliance responding to different locations. A cell of multiple capacity appliances responds into one area.

I guess this could be in a situation where the likes of a CFS Hazmat Pumper (Murray Bridge or Eden Hills), Rescue Pumper (Seaford - this is an example I know they are not a full rescue brigade), couple of 34Ps and a GO or DGO responding into one specific area or region. This would have the advantage of reasonable pumping capabilities, broader role capacity (RCR Hazmat etc) and the ability to not grab the most immediate brigades for Mutual Aid support.

My concerns about mutual aid for larger metropolitan incident comes from the commitment of resources from the immediate surrounding area deep into the metro area. If MFS where heavily committed to a northern incident and you had multiple COQ's heading north (TTG to 37, NSA to 22, Belair, Eden to 20, Burnside to 24, Happy Valley to 40, Stirling to 44...) and the likes of a 2nd or 3rd alarm incident to occur in the hills interface area (say the Waite Institute or Heysen Tunnels) the normal response into that area would be decreased. It really is a balancing act, and I think this is some of the thought that went into the COQ's on Monday.

I thing back to the 90's when early task forces where sent early to KI for fires where you would take couple of appliances from Southern Fleurieu, Kyeema, Victor and Mawson Groups to not leave any group significantly under resourced.
James Gardiner
Belair CFS

Offline bajdas

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,745
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #56 on: September 19, 2008, 01:01:33 PM »
With both the large scale USAR type incident and the task force cell idea, in theory it should include non-fire rescue, investigation and planning resources.

Why deploy multiple combined fire/rescue appliances when you can put a dedicated rescue, dedicated urban fire & dedicated rural fire vehicles/crew in the mix ? It would seem to me that more equipment & skills would be available to the strike force cell.

Then the combined fire/rescue appliance can cover the original patch.

PS. Interesting to see that the large MFS Incident Command bus got a run at the Salisbury HazMat incident.
Andrew Macmichael
lives at Pt Noarlunga South.

My personal opinion only.

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #57 on: September 19, 2008, 02:14:26 PM »
2090 woulda definately been worthwhile at the hazmat...think about the planning capabilities for evacuations?

Agreed Tillerman, would be nice that some consideration surrounding appropriate appliance for the 'what if's' exist instead of an appliance that just gets by.

Some other consideration for Mutual Aid are the response of 'cells' or a task force equivalent, where if a large incident is underway instead of individual appliance responding to different locations. A cell of multiple capacity appliances responds into one area.

I guess this could be in a situation where the likes of a CFS Hazmat Pumper (Murray Bridge or Eden Hills), Rescue Pumper (Seaford - this is an example I know they are not a full rescue brigade), couple of 34Ps and a GO or DGO responding into one specific area or region. This would have the advantage of reasonable pumping capabilities, broader role capacity (RCR Hazmat etc) and the ability to not grab the most immediate brigades for Mutual Aid support.

My concerns about mutual aid for larger metropolitan incident comes from the commitment of resources from the immediate surrounding area deep into the metro area. If MFS where heavily committed to a northern incident and you had multiple COQ's heading north (TTG to 37, NSA to 22, Belair, Eden to 20, Burnside to 24, Happy Valley to 40, Stirling to 44...) and the likes of a 2nd or 3rd alarm incident to occur in the hills interface area (say the Waite Institute or Heysen Tunnels) the normal response into that area would be decreased. It really is a balancing act, and I think this is some of the thought that went into the COQ's on Monday.

I thing back to the 90's when early task forces where sent early to KI for fires where you would take couple of appliances from Southern Fleurieu, Kyeema, Victor and Mawson Groups to not leave any group significantly under resourced.

Yeah tis quite interesting, if ya laid it out all right after the First layer "The already current and prepared EMA Brigades" the second layer would be:

GP Pump: Coromandell Valley, Roseworthy, Bridgewater, Aldgate, Norton Summit, Clarendon, Aldinga Beach
Hazmat Pump: Balhannah, Murray Bridge, Yankalilla, Nuriootpa, Willunga
RCR Pump: Virginia, Mt Barker, Meadows, Blackwood.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2008, 03:05:35 PM by Zippy »

Offline JamesGar

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 227
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Belair CFS
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #58 on: September 19, 2008, 03:16:53 PM »
Lots of brigade would fit into that process I think.

Does anyone have photos of Monday's job?
James Gardiner
Belair CFS

Offline Cameron Yelland

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 425
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #59 on: September 19, 2008, 04:30:11 PM »
Someone has to draw a line in the sand though.  You cant fund trucks on the worst case scenario, their simply isnt enough money to go around.  Agreed perhaps Urban Interface brigades should have pumpers or perhaps some sort of Urban Interface appliance capable of urban work but that is where it should end, otherwise brigades could argue, if such and such, and such and such are committed we will need a pumper. blah blah blah!  :-D
Compton CFS Brigade
Captain
(Formally Comp00)

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #60 on: September 19, 2008, 05:57:12 PM »

Some other consideration for Mutual Aid are the response of 'cells' or a task force equivalent, where if a large incident is underway instead of individual appliance responding to different locations. A cell of multiple capacity appliances responds into one area.

I guess this could be in a situation where the likes of a CFS Hazmat Pumper (Murray Bridge or Eden Hills), Rescue Pumper (Seaford - this is an example I know they are not a full rescue brigade), couple of 34Ps and a GO or DGO responding into one specific area or region. This would have the advantage of reasonable pumping capabilities, broader role capacity (RCR Hazmat etc) and the ability to not grab the most immediate brigades for Mutual Aid support.

My concerns about mutual aid for larger metropolitan incident comes from the commitment of resources from the immediate surrounding area deep into the metro area. If MFS where heavily committed to a northern incident and you had multiple COQ's heading north (TTG to 37, NSA to 22, Belair, Eden to 20, Burnside to 24, Happy Valley to 40, Stirling to 44...) and the likes of a 2nd or 3rd alarm incident to occur in the hills interface area (say the Waite Institute or Heysen Tunnels) the normal response into that area would be decreased. It really is a balancing act, and I think this is some of the thought that went into the COQ's on Monday.

Great ideas, yet the CFS needs to change to adopt some modern concepts. The provision to send RCR and Hazmat Strike teams does exist, yet it rarely seen. You almost need to create a CoQ Strike team setup, as suggested that comprises of Hazmat and Rescue resources and could go and sit at 20 stn when the need arises.

The other issue that needs to be address is the "Hazmat Pump" and "Rescue Pump". Both of these physically exist in the CFS yet there is no provision for naming or special calling them. There is also no provision for them in the green book, which causes issues as they are no recognised as a rescue resource even though a Rescue Pump can handle 99% of RCR jobs. Bring back the old Rescue system, or at the very least break it into Rapid Intervention/Rescue/Heavy Rescue.

This then brings in the $$$ cost of up grading current Rescue stations to a level of equipment/vehicles required to fill the classifications, or the cost of training other brigades and operators. I see no reason, apart from the cost, why every rescue brigade cannot have two appliances with rescue gear funded and recognised as rescue resources. Stand alone or Rescue pumpers, this allows versatility and the ability to CoQ and respond out of areas without diminishing the response to the Brigades own Rescue area.

With both the large scale USAR type incident and the task force cell idea, in theory it should include non-fire rescue, investigation and planning resources.

Why deploy multiple combined fire/rescue appliances when you can put a dedicated rescue, dedicated urban fire & dedicated rural fire vehicles/crew in the mix ? It would seem to me that more equipment & skills would be available to the strike force cell.

Then the combined fire/rescue appliance can cover the original patch.

Didn't take long for the "What about us in Orange!". :P

Of course the SES are getting a run in a USAR job, the CFS doesn't even know what USAR stands for. In terms of CoQ Rescue response into the city, the Metropolitan SES Units couldn't Rescue their way out of a wet paperbag with a steak knife set - do you really want to wait for crews from Laura and other places out in the sticks? I understand what you are saying, but if the CFS got smart, they could easily have some very versatile setups.

Someone has to draw a line in the sand though...

I can't wait to see CoQ used as the basis of an argument to get a new truck. Hell that three storey building might catch fire in our area, we need a Skyjet at the MINIMUM!
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline safireservice

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #61 on: September 19, 2008, 09:28:22 PM »

I can't wait to see CoQ used as the basis of an argument to get a new truck.
I think it was mentioned somewhere on here thats exactly why a certain brigade should get a certain new truck wasnt it?
Treat everyone as if they are an idiot, until they prove you otherwise.

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #62 on: September 19, 2008, 10:05:04 PM »
I think it was mentioned somewhere on here thats exactly why a certain brigade should get a certain new truck wasnt it?

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #63 on: September 19, 2008, 10:16:27 PM »
"HELLLLOOO PEOPLE" all this panic over nuthin, remember the government are getting the......Skycrane, thats right ,yeah.. I know you forgot, the Skycrane fixes everything.. so just lieback and enjoy the ride..ooohhh skycrane you big bad expensive ariel panacea.
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #64 on: September 19, 2008, 10:24:08 PM »
SKY CRANE OH HOLY SKY CRANE, SAVE US

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #65 on: September 19, 2008, 10:26:14 PM »
Why can't I land my Skycrane at 20stn!?!
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline Zippy

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,540
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #66 on: September 19, 2008, 10:27:43 PM »
HELITAK 736, you can take a stop for call.

Offline safireservice

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #67 on: September 19, 2008, 10:31:17 PM »

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
Or a brigade that doesnt really have an area?
Treat everyone as if they are an idiot, until they prove you otherwise.

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #68 on: September 19, 2008, 10:38:17 PM »

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
Or a brigade that doesnt really have an area?




now who could that be?  :evil: hhaahhaaa
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #69 on: September 19, 2008, 10:40:13 PM »

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
Or a brigade that doesnt really have an area?
now who could that be?  :evil: hhaahhaaa

Now now, they saved REALLY hard for that truck, and it took them YEARS! Don't get worried about the fact that they don't have a area of their own to use it in, they just bring their toys to jobs that other people have!
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline jaff

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #70 on: September 19, 2008, 10:48:13 PM »

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
Or a brigade that doesnt really have an area?
now who could that be?  :evil: hhaahhaaa

Now now, they saved REALLY hard for that truck, and it took them YEARS! Don't get worried about the fact that they don't have a area of their own to use it in, they just bring their toys to jobs that other people have!

Can just see it now in the "jobs wanted" section of the next Volunteer magazine.
Have new truck will travel....anywhere...desperate ...PLEASE VYO
Just Another Filtered Fireman

Offline safireservice

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 450
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #71 on: September 19, 2008, 10:57:10 PM »
Anyway they had a bit of a story about the hazmat on the news the other day and they said either the person or people that did the damage either knew what they were doing or were extremely lucky not to be dead right now. Seems the company will be closed for a while until they fix the damage.
Treat everyone as if they are an idiot, until they prove you otherwise.

Offline 6739264

  • Forum Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,806
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • RETARD RETARD RETARD Need I say more?
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #72 on: September 19, 2008, 11:51:27 PM »

On a second reading, I believe you are correct. No use getting a truck for a brigade based on the risk in someone elses area, and the fact that it "Might" get used. Jesus, all the aerials in SAMFS might get used, I think we need one, JUST IN CASE!
Or a brigade that doesnt really have an area?
now who could that be?  :evil: hhaahhaaa

Now now, they saved REALLY hard for that truck, and it took them YEARS! Don't get worried about the fact that they don't have a area of their own to use it in, they just bring their toys to jobs that other people have!

Can just see it now in the "jobs wanted" section of the next Volunteer magazine.
Have new truck will travel....anywhere...desperate ...PLEASE VYO

"Adelaide Fire, are you SURE you don't require a pumper at that bin alight in Cockburn?"
To think they employed me as a drooling retard...

Offline Firefrog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 792
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #73 on: September 20, 2008, 09:11:15 AM »
All very amusing 8-) Let's try to keep it roughly on topic though.......

Offline Alan J

  • Forum Lieutenant
  • ****
  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Certified Flamin' Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: 3rd alarm Hazmat, Salisbury 15/09/08
« Reply #74 on: September 20, 2008, 11:33:59 PM »
Some interesting internation concepts for Mutual Aid...

The UK utilises a process of the responding Mutual Aid resource will commit to the incident which caused the mutual aid request, releasing the requesting service back to their own area of cover.
<snip>
Just my thoughts, I think there is certainly some benefits to flipping the mutual aid processes. Could be a little politically sensitive and hard on the 'ownership' of incident from local crews, but it is tried and tested in other services.

Comments?


Not only is it tried & tested in other services, but it is tried and
tested in CFS. eg Yorke Penn fires this last summer - outside crews
relieved local crews at "the big one" so that local crews could
respond to the usual stuff. Same for repeat NSW fires - CFS/CFA/QRFS
took over the fire-fighting so that locals could a] have a breather,
& b] respond normally to local stuff.

Ownership & management of the fire didn't go to the visiting team -
just the work.  Same applies to Mutual Aid jobs. MFS doesn't relinquish
control of a fire at O'Halloran Hill just because most of the appliances
are white.  CFS wouldn't relinquish control of a hazmat at (for example)
Dublin just because a bunch of red appliances got called in. 

So it shouldn't be a real issue for our own mutual aid - merely an
excuse for the usual wind-bags to moan that the world is coming to
an end.  Again.

Alan J.
Cherry Gdns CFS

Data isn't information.  Information isn't knowledge. 
Knowledge isn't wisdom.