Please, say it isn't so

[latigo]

I am sure none of the FF involved will respond, but have any of you read this? http://www.firehouse.com/news/2002/4/5_Pmdcrash.html

Here we have a truck company, being told to disregard, but lying to dispatch, and continuing just so they can have the run over another truck. So they then blow a red light and have a crash, putting 2 elderly ladies in the hospital. This is really good for public relations, huh? Is having one more run that important to these people? What were they thinking, or more acurately, why weren't they thinking?:mad: I classify this right along with FF arsonists. They may not be quite as bad, but have a similiar effect on all of us.

[JayTL]

I don't know if we have the whole story yet but if it is the case of them trying to take a call then they have certainly paid the price. Its unfortunate that civilians had to pay a price as well.

We should wait it out or see if anyone from that area will comment on it. I hope its not true.

[TruroFAO]

you can read about the incident in question <a target="new" href="http://www.thewatchdesk.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=204">here</a>. its a good website which concentrates on metropolitan washington dc area departments...lots of the guys there are also fh forums members here...

[captstanm1]

I read the story with interest. The site the last post gave has some discussion similar to our forums discussion. They are attempting also at least by raising the ???....to make it a volunteer vs career issue.

Bottom line here is.... "IF" what we read in the paper was correct someone is gonna be up to their neck in an aligator pit. It is not volunteer vs career.

We (the entire service) need answers.

Why did it happen?
Why did they not go in service?
Is this an acceptable practice for that Department? (volunteer vs career)
Thank god our injuries were minimal...but...were the Office & Driver suspended pending an investigation?

[SilverCity4]

Just entering the intersection against a red light and having an accident is bad enough. The driver will get a fine for that, I suppose.

Who told dispatch that they were closer than they were? The officer on board? If so, what would you do if you were the driver?

Messy, messy. Look for lawsuits in this one.

[Halligan84]

Why is everyone so focused on the fact that they fudged the location a bit to get on the job? Who cares, everyone stretches a little bit to get in on something going like that school was. Isn't the fact that they entered an intersection against the red at over 40 mph and nearly killed 2 women really the WHOLE issue? If that is the way that you normally drive, doesn't matter where your going or what you did, it was either this run or another that was going to get these guys.

[ADSNWFLD]

I agree, telling the dispatcher the wrong info isn't right, but running a red light at any speed is almost unforgivable.

My full time department has a comprehensive drivers safety program and with the exception of a shift commander's car any accidents that our vehicles have been in have been while the apparatus was standing still.

My opinion is that the driver and officer should be suspended and the driver never be alowed to drive again. ( the other post said he has been in two other accidents prior)

It is our duty, full or part time, to serve the public. We have to make it to the scene in order to do that. I'll be the first to admit that it is very hard look down the street at a header or glow in the sky and stay focused while driving. But if you can't then you shouldn't be driving. I'm sure most of you know someone on your department that you aren't comfortable driving with. Help him become a better driver or stop him from driving. It is just that simple.

If your an officer it is your job to see that the rig arrives safe to the call. If you don't feel comfortable with some one then drive yourself.

OK time to get off of the soapbox

Stay safe and see you in Indy.

[mark440]

The driver is rumored to have been in two other accidents. That is not confirmed. Please don't speculate. Offer sympathy and then use this crash as a learning tool for your own departments. ADSN/WFLD, it is not just that simple. We have a person (who happens to be an Officer in my VFD) that also likes to drive. He is a piss poor driver. Everyone has told him and the Chief this and still nothing has happened. I cannot count how many near misses I have been in with him. He thinks red lights and siren void him of any responsibility. I have told him on many calls that he needs to slow down and drive like firefighter and knock the sh*t off. It doesn't work. If you have any suggestions I'd be happy to try them.


*Mark

[Bones42]

Mark440 - Document it. Show it in writing to the Chief. Remind the Chief who's @ss is going to be in the sling when/if this person causes a problem. Bring it up at a company meeting. Once it is known and public, the Chief "should" have a harder time ignoring the information. Get others who have the same feelings to speak up also.

Just remember - this will probably not make you very popular with certain members.

[CaptainGonzo]

Originally posted by Halligan84
Why is everyone so focused on the fact that they fudged the location a bit to get on the job? Who cares, everyone stretches a little bit to get in on something going like that school was. Isn't the fact that they entered an intersection against the red at over 40 mph and nearly killed 2 women really the WHOLE issue? If that is the way that you normally drive, doesn't matter where your going or what you did, it was either this run or another that was going to get these guys.


To answer Brother Halligan84...

1. They lied....totally unprofessional!

2. They ignored dispatch protocols for a little bit of glory.

3. They ignored the rules of the road and blew through a RED light at an estimated 43 MPH.

4. They almost killed two people and themselves.

5. A CHIEF was driving the truck...Chiefs belong in their command vehicles.

6. By leaving their response district, they put the residents of their response area at risk. They also put their brother firefighters at risk by ignoring the dispatch protocols....now someone else had to fill the void caused by their "uninvited response".

7. They put potential victims of the fire at risk by lying about their location.

[mark440]

Bones, thanks for the suggestions, I have tried it. And, I am not one of the most popular people anyway. I am not a big fan of a lot of things that people in that FD do.

"2. They ignored dispatch protocols for a little bit of glory." From info I have gained from reliable sources, Chief 33 told them to continue because they would be due on the second alarm anyway. It was PGPSC that put T-9 back into service, not the responding Command Officer.

I am not defending anyone or anything. Just trying to bring accurate and valid info into the conversation.

*Mark

[firemangeorge]

They intentionaly misrepresented their location.
Possibly by as much as three miles.
Unacceptable.
Immediate suspension.
If found guilty after a full investigation, terminate.

Very simple: Freelancing cannot be tolerated on or OFF the fireground.

[Halligan84]

Gonz,

I can agree with everything ya say except the lying. Lying with some sort of intent that would deceive the public or lessen service is one thing, i'd consider this another. This added a truck to the box. It's tradition, many firefighters would sell out their grandmother to get on the line and wouldn't consider it a lie. I'd seriously consider the integrity of anyone on this board that told me they NEVER slid a little closer to something in the next due that sounded working or decided to do some "block inspections" to be on radio. Having heard a little about the PG "system" laying the dispatch or box systems inadequacies wholely on these guys heads is just wrong. Their entire system relies on dispatch checking to see who is where, who is closer and who is in charge and asking for what! Its crazy.

To me the whole issue is the driving. If they didn't wreck this time, it probably would have been next time in their own first due. I question why the INSANE driving isn't the major issue here? Is this common? 43 through a redlight? I'd think more people would be outraged over that. As far as the Chief driving, in vol situation I know it happens, rather it not, but sometimes he is the only driver, sometimes he is the guy that has the most horns and likes to drive (big problem)

[TruroFAO]

Gonzo...due respect:

Have you been to Bladensburg or Prince George's County before? Chief officers REGULARLY ride or drive apparatus to make up manning. Most have buggies, yes, but they do ride the trucks. Most stations have three chiefs each, so they can afford to do this. Also, their 'response area' is pretty ambiguous. It's a countywide department comprised of 47 different stations. Each has a first due, yes, but it's a countywide department. Also, the truck in question would've certainly gone on the 2nd alarm, and was infact dispatched on the initial until the first due chief told one of his engines to go back for their tower.

I'm with Mark...not trying to persecute, just keep the discussion accurate.

[captstanm1]

I am with you Gonzo...

Yes...of course the way the operator was driving is certainly an issue, but those that said it was ok for them to misrepresent themselves ion order to "add" a truck to the box are thinking "inside the box" (guess they can not belong to the new organization???)

From a liability standpoint, saying you are one place and being another is not a good thing. If you are dispatched from point A then your response times should be X...so if you say you are at Point A and are actually at POINT D...(but the dispatcher dont know)...how will you answer the question of why your 2 minute response from POINT A took you 8 minutes??? In this case...we certainly could not say we were driving safe....could we?

I know of other cases (wont say where) that units have responded to calls from their station (jumped the call) before they were even dispatched because they heard the call and knew it was a "good one" and would possibly be more units called. They responded so as additionaly units were dispatched, they could bid on it and say ENGINE ### to dispatch...we are closer....!

It certainly will be interesting to see how this ends up.

[EastKyFF]

When a dispatcher "cancels" us, we defer to the commanding officer. Once he has heard the info dispatch has, HE cancels us if need be. As mentioned, it's our a-double-s in the sling if we cancel when we shouldn't.

This case is a little different, but I would have still deferred to the IC. If he/she is still expecting to need the other truck's services, they could--

1. Roll on hot
2. Roll on cold
3. Stage at or near present location--if they're the 2nd truck in anyhow, they'll probably sit in staging for a minute anyway.

Regardless of their choice, if it's documented that a qualified commander made the decision, then their status as responding or not is essentially o-tay.

The big fat lie about their location is dumb and merits some serious alpha charlie time.

[mongofire_99]

Just d#mn