Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nfpa 1917?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by ADC120 View Post
    I created this topic, so I think I have a say in what is relevant. Fire Medic, In the first post I asked for constructive dialogue. However, so far you have only criticized others who don't agree with your opinions.
    I would disagree with your assertion.

    I asked some legitimate questions. One of which was why your area needed ambulances that can travel over 72 mph. However, your response to me at least, clearly showed that you have no true need for such otherwise you would have been readily able to provide an explanation.

    I also stated an opinion that was in opposition to a particular poster's opinions and why I disagreed with that opinion. There was no criticizing, just a little calling BS on some statements.

    The response to that was pretty much full of hostility and NO actual substance to refute my comments. I think my response to that was pretty reasonable for the most part.

    So please explain to me where I was inappropriately critical of somebody else's view in the thread?


    When this happens, you discourage others who may have another opinion from posting, as they may fear every word being torn apart.
    Is that really my problem or is it lack of confidence in that person's own opinion? Besides, debating is in part about being critical of opposing opinions.

    Clearly in your last few posts, you have taken shots at people, instead of using constructive means to support your opinion.
    Yes, I'll concede that there were three comments that could be viewed as "shots". However, I had already cited appropriate support for my position for one of them at that point and was disappointed in the choice to provide a none answer to my question. The other two where in response to what were derogatory comments towards me and really didn't have much bite to them.


    This topic wasn't created to be a debate with one clear winner. Rather, I wanted to get different opinions from several different people. Sir, if you can't play nice with others, then you can go to the other threads.
    And you got those different opinions.

    I was playing nice. Did I swear or attack someone personally? No. I challenged a couple of people on their statements that I believed to be unsubstantiated or unwarranted.

    Leave a comment:


  • ADC120
    replied
    Originally posted by FireMedic049 View Post
    No.

    Call it a spat if you want to, but this is a discussion forum and the topic is essentially about the relevancy/need for the NFPA standards. Both of the posts in the "spat" were related to that topic and therefore no need to discuss it somewhere else.

    However, you are more then welcome to go read other threads if this bothers you.

    I created this topic, so I think I have a say in what is relevant. Fire Medic, In the first post I asked for constructive dialogue. However, so far you have only criticized others who don't agree with your opinions. When this happens, you discourage others who may have another opinion from posting, as they may fear every word being torn apart. Clearly in your last few posts, you have taken shots at people, instead of using constructive means to support your opinion. This topic wasn't created to be a debate with one clear winner. Rather, I wanted to get different opinions from several different people. Sir, if you can't play nice with others, then you can go to the other threads.

    Leave a comment:


  • FIREMECH1
    replied
    If you have a BLS rig, it is required, not mandated to have an AED.

    If you have a ALS rig, it is required that you have a portable, battery operated monitor/defibrillator. You are not required to have an AED.

    All of our Med Units are ALS and do not carry an AED. All engines/pumpers and trucks/aerials do carry an AED, as part of their BLS capability.

    FM1

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by islandfire03 View Post
    or the requirement to have an AED. Duh it's an ambulance In addition to a 25K monitor/defibrillator we already have they want an AED.
    I'm pretty sure that there would be an exemption on the AED requirement if your monitor/defibrillator has an integrated AED which has been pretty common for the past decade.

    I know that my state's ambulance licensing requirements include AEDs, but if I'm not mistaken ALS units are not required to have AEDs unless they are dual-licensed as a BLS unit also. In that situation the integrated AEDs are sufficient.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by islandfire03 View Post
    You kids want to take your spat to the PA fire boards ????
    No.

    Call it a spat if you want to, but this is a discussion forum and the topic is essentially about the relevancy/need for the NFPA standards. Both of the posts in the "spat" were related to that topic and therefore no need to discuss it somewhere else.

    However, you are more then welcome to go read other threads if this bothers you.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by Pa6050 View Post
    FireMedic049 if you want to load up your ambulance and fire truck with extremely expensive totally not practical safty devices go ahead but I dont want it and it should be my choice.
    As has been pointed out, unless the AHJ adopts the NFPA standard as law, you are free to omit those "extremely expensive totally not practical safety devices".


    As for who determined them useless I DID.
    And no one else's opinion matters?


    If all this was practical and cost effective the industry and customers would have done it already. The most ridiclous one is helmet holders you cant tell me someone was killed by a helmet, no way you, can you be that blind and stupid.
    Yeah, that one may be a little over the top, but I'm sure that somebody has been seriously injured, maybe even killed by loose equipment flying around in an accident - probably a rollover type. The requirement is in line with the overall objective of not having unsecured items in the cab and that certainly isn't "stupid".

    This is my last reply to you because I can tell you are one of the 49% of the american people that have the mental disease.
    I'm sad to hear that you won't be telling what all these "extremely expensive totally not practical safety devices" are.


    BTW, What mental disease would that be, education?

    Leave a comment:


  • islandfire03
    replied
    I will say that at 72 MPH on the interstate, You will be the slowest vehicle on the road.
    Our speed limits are 65 MPH now and anyone driving less than 75 is a traffic hazard.

    now on our rural roads some of them are a challenge at 25 MPH.

    Let's not even get into the FUGLY chevrons that nfpa requires now.
    or the requirement to have an AED. Duh it's an ambulance In addition to a 25K monitor/defibrillator we already have they want an AED.

    As for the seat belt warning system We try to stay seated and belted, but you cannot do it all the time.

    My ambulance sales rep figures these new requirements to make nfpa happy will add
    $ 4,500-6k in price increases that will be passed along to us, the customer.

    Some requirements such as the seat belt warning are fine for apparatus as the voluntary use didn't happen. Other requirements are just adding more expensive items to the already astronomical price of fire trucks.

    Leave a comment:


  • mitchkrat
    replied
    Tend not to agree with max speed in NFPA

    I appreciate all that NFPA has done for safey - but I don't agree with the one size fits all standards on speed.

    NFPA is a standard - were as the speed limit set by the state legistlatures is the law that controls the maximum speed of all vehicles using that road. Our legistlature is looking at raising the max speed on some highways to 75. I believe most states also have laws limiting the max speed of emergency vehicles.

    I do believe is driving no faster than the road, weather and the type of call dictates.

    Leave a comment:


  • happyvalleyff
    replied
    I thought the fire discussions got heated at times lesson learned not to **** off the EMS people LOL.

    Leave a comment:


  • islandfire03
    replied
    You kids want to take your spat to the PA fire boards ????

    Leave a comment:


  • Pa6050
    replied
    FireMedic049 if you want to load up your ambulance and fire truck with extremely expensive totally not practical safty devices go ahead but I dont want it and it should be my choice. As for who determined them useless I DID. If all this was practical and cost effective the industry and customers would have done it already. The most ridiclous one is helmet holders you cant tell me someone was killed by a helmet, no way you, can you be that blind and stupid. When is enough enough when an ambulance cost is $500,000 and a commercial fire engine is $750,000. This is my last reply to you because I can tell you are one of the 49% of the american people that have the mental disease.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by Pa6050 View Post
    Why do people like to have every aspect of their lives and jobs controlled by the government i just dont get it. All this bull crap is going to do is drive the price up more so we really cant afford new equipment.There is not a problem with the way ambulances are now.
    Actually there are problems with the way ambulances are now. However, the industry is slowly making progress addressing some of it.

    Attendant safety is a big problem. Many get injured or killed in crashes because they or equipment aren't restrained. The industry is working on solutions, but we still have a lot of work to do.


    Not one more life will be spared by all this bull crap.
    I would wager that somebody has already been saved by "all this bull crap".

    Just like all the useless BS they drempt up for fire apparatus.
    Could you name a few and who determined that they were in fact "useless"?

    lodd numbers did not drop at all because 95% of lodds were from medical reasons not apparatus being unsafe their fighting a problem that dont exist.
    Actually problems do exist and one of those problems is us. Some of the NFPA standards are the direct result of us not doing something we should have been doing.

    Why do we have integrated PASS in our SCBA? Answer: Because firefighters were getting injured or killed in fires and they hadn't turned on their PASS before entering.

    Why do we have red seatbelts and seatbelt alarms? Answer: Because firefighters were getting injured or killed in apparatus accidents due in whole or part because they weren't wearing a seatbelt.

    Leave a comment:


  • FireMedic049
    replied
    Originally posted by ADC120 View Post
    I am not going to defend of justify any of our policys on this fourm, nor would I ask anyone else to defend their areas. I assume you would know what is best for where you serve, as I would know what is best for my area.
    Spoken like somebody who can't defend their position.



    Besides, I didn't ask you to defend or justify anything. I only asked you to explain something.

    Leave a comment:


  • Catch22
    replied
    Originally posted by Pa6050 View Post
    Why do people like to have every aspect of their lives and jobs controlled by the government i just dont get it. All this bull crap is going to do is drive the price up more so we really cant afford new equipment.There is not a problem with the way ambulances are now. Not one more life will be spared by all this bull crap. Just like all the useless BS they drempt up for fire apparatus. lodd numbers did not drop at all because 95% of lodds were from medical reasons not apparatus being unsafe their fighting a problem that dont exist.If I want to go 73mph i will do it, If i want to move while treating a patient I will do that too because im sick of all this ****.
    To add to what boxalarm had to say, what's to say that the LODD's we see aren't due to noncompliance with NFPA standards? While I won't say all of them can be related to noncompliance, I'm willing to bet some could have been prevented.

    Beyond that, what about the injuries to firefighters, or even injuries/deaths to civilians? Within the last few years I can cite a number of instances where compliance to just one section of NFPA 1500 would have prevented deaths/injuries. The Houston and St. Louis incidents where trucks collided at intersections when one didn't stop for red lights (the Houston one killed a woman). Massillon, OH where a man and child were killed by a ladder truck busting an intersection. West Des Moines, IA where a 16 year old girl was killed by an apparatus busting an intersection.

    EMS has their incidents, as well. I just don't have any off the top of my head to cite.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoxAlarm187
    replied
    Originally posted by Pa6050 View Post
    Just like all the useless BS they drempt up for fire apparatus. lodd numbers did not drop at all because 95% of lodds were from medical reasons not apparatus being unsafe their fighting a problem that dont exist.
    Well, I commend you with being passionate, but your 95% is way off. From the USFA LODD 2010 summary:
    • 52 Stress/Overexertion 61.1%
    • 11 Vehicle Collision 12.9%
    • 5 Struck by 5.88%
    • 5 Other 5.88%
    • 5 Caught/Trapped 5.88%
    • 4 Fall 4.70%
    • 2 Collapse 2.35%
    • 1 Unknown 1.17%


    And remember that NFPA isn't the government, its a committee comprised of industry representatives and field users alike. And if your department chooses not to follow NFPA 1901 (or any other NFPA pamphlet for that matter) then that's your business. After all, it's not a law, it's a nationally recognized standard. The only risk in doing that is explaining to the judge and jury why you chose to disregard a national accepted standard when purchasing your vehicle.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X