Not very long ago, the Boston Fire Department instituted a new policy that gave members the option of wearing 3/4 boots and coat as opposed to bunker pants and coat.
In the wake of the recent LODD of FF Donald Franklin of Ladder Co. 44, some in the FDNY are questioning whether "bunker gear" is the way to go.
http://newyorkpost.com/news/regionalnews/21454.htm
COMMISH BACKS FIRE GEAR
Tuesday,January 16,2001
By CHRISTOPHER FRANCESCANI
Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen yesterday defended the use of heavy protective bunker gear after a 42-year-old member of the Bravest became the third firefighter to die of a heart attack in three months.
"There are definitely negatives to bunker gear," Von Essen told The Post. "You get tired sooner because of the weight of the gear, [and] exhaustion comes on more quickly, but the tradeoff is the unbelievable protection you get."
Burns are down 70 percent since the bunker gear was introduced in 1995.
Firefighter Donald Franklin, a 16-year department vet, collapsed Saturday after battling a blaze that killed a couple in their Bronx home.
Earlier this month, a Queens firefighter suffered a fatal heart attack on a treadmill just after his shift, and in November, a Bronx firefighter succumbed at his firehouse moments after returning from battling a blaze.
Critics charge that while the bunker gear has allowed firefighters to go deeper into fires and remain inside longer, the added weight, stress and increased body temperature is taking its toll on the hearts of the men.
Rudy San Filippo, Manhattan trustee for the Uniformed Fire Fighters Association, claims that the heavily insulated, highly fire-resistant fabric is just too weighty and constricting.
"Nobody's done a study on what the actual damage to hearts is," he said. "I'd much rather have the old gear back. It's like day and night, it's so much lighter."
In the early 1990s, the Fire Department resisted switching to the bunker gear, citing the possibility of firefighters overheating and suffering exhaustion.
But as burn rates rose and firefighters clamored for better equipment, the department launched a pilot program that led to the department-wide switch in 1995.
Von Essen said the decision to adopt bunker gear, which was made before his appointment as fire commissioner, "is a decision that was made by almost every department in the country, and no one has experienced a rise in heart attacks because of them."
Uniformed Fire Fighters Association spokesman Tom Butler backed up Von Essen.
"Clearly, there are some tradeoffs" to bunker gear, Butler acknowledged.
"The union hopes, and I'm sure the department hopes, that some of these issues can be addressed - regarding fatigue and increased body temperatures - through increased training and physical conditioning."
So, is it time to take a second look and perhaps weigh more carefully the pros and cons of our heavy, insulating, almost fully encapsulating gear?
In the wake of the recent LODD of FF Donald Franklin of Ladder Co. 44, some in the FDNY are questioning whether "bunker gear" is the way to go.
http://newyorkpost.com/news/regionalnews/21454.htm
COMMISH BACKS FIRE GEAR
Tuesday,January 16,2001
By CHRISTOPHER FRANCESCANI
Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen yesterday defended the use of heavy protective bunker gear after a 42-year-old member of the Bravest became the third firefighter to die of a heart attack in three months.
"There are definitely negatives to bunker gear," Von Essen told The Post. "You get tired sooner because of the weight of the gear, [and] exhaustion comes on more quickly, but the tradeoff is the unbelievable protection you get."
Burns are down 70 percent since the bunker gear was introduced in 1995.
Firefighter Donald Franklin, a 16-year department vet, collapsed Saturday after battling a blaze that killed a couple in their Bronx home.
Earlier this month, a Queens firefighter suffered a fatal heart attack on a treadmill just after his shift, and in November, a Bronx firefighter succumbed at his firehouse moments after returning from battling a blaze.
Critics charge that while the bunker gear has allowed firefighters to go deeper into fires and remain inside longer, the added weight, stress and increased body temperature is taking its toll on the hearts of the men.
Rudy San Filippo, Manhattan trustee for the Uniformed Fire Fighters Association, claims that the heavily insulated, highly fire-resistant fabric is just too weighty and constricting.
"Nobody's done a study on what the actual damage to hearts is," he said. "I'd much rather have the old gear back. It's like day and night, it's so much lighter."
In the early 1990s, the Fire Department resisted switching to the bunker gear, citing the possibility of firefighters overheating and suffering exhaustion.
But as burn rates rose and firefighters clamored for better equipment, the department launched a pilot program that led to the department-wide switch in 1995.
Von Essen said the decision to adopt bunker gear, which was made before his appointment as fire commissioner, "is a decision that was made by almost every department in the country, and no one has experienced a rise in heart attacks because of them."
Uniformed Fire Fighters Association spokesman Tom Butler backed up Von Essen.
"Clearly, there are some tradeoffs" to bunker gear, Butler acknowledged.
"The union hopes, and I'm sure the department hopes, that some of these issues can be addressed - regarding fatigue and increased body temperatures - through increased training and physical conditioning."
So, is it time to take a second look and perhaps weigh more carefully the pros and cons of our heavy, insulating, almost fully encapsulating gear?
Comment