Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turnout Gear or SCBAs or Both

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

  • #16
    What about SCBA project for all new SCBAs, upgrading mobile cascade (only fills 2200 now), RIT pack, and TIC justified through RIT since they don't have one at all. I tried to talk them into waiting for CEDAP on the TIC and they seem to think it should be with AFG. I told them why pay 5% when they can get it for free but they would rather pay the 5% and have it now (tried to explain that it could be longer going through AFG than CEDAP potentially). I'm just concerned it would bring down the overall score of the app. Like Kurt said, mixing a 5 and 4 makes you a 4.5 and why give up the .5 when you could get the highest score possible. Not my department so can't stand up on the table and throw a huge fit until I get my way, just trying to be neighborly and offer some advice. Curious what others thought.

    Comment


    • #17
      Upgrading the compressor, are you talking about adding a booster pump, or going with the bigger bottles? I teach some of the RIT classes, and all of the academy documents push the RIt having a camera dedicated to the team. I have some mixed feelings about the TIC. It is a great tool, but has been pushed so much that guys are starting to rely on the screen instead of taking in their surroundings. But I could see it as plausable to include it. Bugel, Earl, thanks for the input, its good to get the out of the box opinion to help you tweak the fine points.

      Comment


      • #18
        Not2L8--works great if...you got RIT team already trained but not yet equipped. We wrote a SCBA/cascade/fill/RIT package last year with a department at the seminar. They filled 75 bottles for 5 or 6 departments at a recent barn fire--with headroom to spare. Just like it's 'sposed to work!!

        earl

        Comment


        • #19
          Derrick,

          Just upgrading the mobile cascade. The compressor is alright and it is fixed at the station but the cascade is mounted on their special services vehicle and it is only 4500 bottles (which you need 6000 to fill 4500) and the hoses don't have the correct raiting.

          Earl,

          They're in the same boat...have the training but don't have the equipment. Just concerned about being competitive and making sure they get all the points they can.

          Like Derrick said, nice to have an outside point of view.

          Comment


          • #20
            Notl84u2,

            I would impress on them that they will be matching more than 5%. The AFG has reduced funding for the TIC's by at least $1,000 for those that have been awarded this year.

            CEDAP should be the way to go. No cost, training included. As you pointed out, probably have it quicker if awarded through CEDAP than the AFG.

            There is no standard that states a TIC is required for a RIT (that I have been able to locate) that would help justify the TIC.

            The closest thing is the following:

            NFPA 1500 states, “A rapid intervention crew/company shall be fully equipped with the appropriate protective clothing, protected equipment, SCBA, and any specialized rescue equipment that could be needed given the specifics of the operation under way”

            Comment


            • #21
              Dumas Can I see you grant? We are trying fot the same this year.

              Comment


              • #22
                Bugle...first let me say....you're the man! I don't know how you remember all of this stuff from the PG and NFPA and where to go to find it when you need it but I wish I could do that. Me, I read something and then later on I come acrossed something that has to do with whatever it was I read and I remember seeing something about it that one time and then I can't remember where I found it at. You're truly a great resource.

                I agree with the TIC. I think it's "doable" but I'm still concerned with why take the chance when when we know we have a solid grant for the SCBA, upgrades to fill station, and RIT.

                As far as standards go though, I guess the same could be said for the RIT pack correct? It's not statutory based because NFPA just says "any specialized rescue equipment." I mean could we try to use it for a statutory basis?

                I still think CEDAP is the way to go for the TIC. Of course I may be singing a different tune if we don't get funded for ours this year.

                Thanks for the comments

                Ryan

                Comment


                • #23
                  The same can be said for the RIT equipment also, but there is one difference between that and the TIC. All SCBA that meet the current or even the past standard must have a RIC/UAC. That safety feature isn't any good without the equipment to support that SCBA. The RIT ties in nicely with the SCBA.

                  Didn't have to go far for the quote from NFPA. Came from my narrative from last year.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by onebugle View Post
                    The same can be said for the RIT equipment also, but there is one difference between that and the TIC. All SCBA that meet the current or even the past standard must have a RIC/UAC. That safety feature isn't any good without the equipment to support that SCBA. The RIT ties in nicely with the SCBA.

                    Didn't have to go far for the quote from NFPA. Came from my narrative from last year.
                    What is a "RIC/UAC"??

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by onebugle View Post
                      The same can be said for the RIT equipment also, but there is one difference between that and the TIC. All SCBA that meet the current or even the past standard must have a RIC/UAC. That safety feature isn't any good without the equipment to support that SCBA. The RIT ties in nicely with the SCBA.

                      Didn't have to go far for the quote from NFPA. Came from my narrative from last year.
                      Ah yes a proper arguement for proper reserach done right the first time and SAVED for use later on in other grants. Cuts down on that "crunch time" factor. Amazing!
                      Kurt Bradley
                      Fire/EMS/EMA Grant Consultant
                      " Never Trade Skill for Luck"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        RIC/UAC:

                        Rapid Intervention Crew/Universal Air Connection

                        Comment

                        300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                        Collapse

                        Upper 300x250

                        Collapse

                        Taboola

                        Collapse

                        Leader

                        Collapse
                        Working...
                        X