N.F.S.I.M.S -VS- I.C (Brunacini Way)

[engineer2000]

FFFred:

like I said you are reading to much into this. When finished with an assignment within group. IC will have another assignment ready put into place. If fire is under control, people start going into rehab or getting their equipment back on the engines and placeing themslves available for next in call.

For radio communication. It would be Pump Engine 1 - Interior, need more pressure.
Our county has individual names on the radio like Captain is Engine 1, Engineer is Pump Engine 1 and Firefighter is FF Engine 1 or Engine 1A. So if I got trapped it would go: Ops or Div A (whatever your assigned to)- Pump Engine 1 down. The call letters for each individual may be different from each dept. There is no unversal names per person.

As for accountability for first incoming without Battalion Chief. The BC arrives and assumes IC and radios for Personnal accountability report by asking each company how many on your unit. All tags are left in a accountability board @ CP.

We agree to disagree. That's ok.
Stay safe out there in FDNY.

PS - No clowns here.

[VinnieB]

FFFred:

like I said you are reading to much into this. When finished with an assignment within group. IC will have another assignment ready put into place. If fire is under control, people start going into rehab or getting their equipment back on the engines and placeing themslves available for next in call.

For radio communication. It would be Pump Engine 1 - Interior, need more pressure.
Our county has individual names on the radio like Captain is Engine 1, Engineer is Pump Engine 1 and Firefighter is FF Engine 1 or Engine 1A. So if I got trapped it would go: Ops or Div A (whatever your assigned to)- Pump Engine 1 down. The call letters for each individual may be different from each dept. There is no unversal names per person.

As for accountability for first incoming without Battalion Chief. The BC arrives and assumes IC and radios for Personnal accountability report by asking each company how many on your unit. All tags are left in a accountability board @ CP.

We agree to disagree. That's ok.
Stay safe out there in FDNY.

PS - No clowns here.

Ok....so is anyone else confussed?????

We aren't told what to do.....everyone already knows what thier job is. Large Multiples are slight exception. This is the point we report to the command post. And receive our orders in short, simple, to the point terms.

I think the problem is that 99% of the world has no concept of our operations. We have a great system in place already, there's no need for drastic change. And like FFRED says, most of our members were members of other depts before joining FDNY, many are still vollies....so there is good working knowledge of NIMS and the ICS.

Another point....because of our system, every member of the fire ground knows were each other is, or should be, without ever seeing him. The first Due Nozzleman knows were the second due OV is and vise versa....that is accountability.

[FFFRED]

FFFred:

like I said you are reading to much into this. When finished with an assignment within group. IC will have another assignment ready put into place. If fire is under control, people start going into rehab or getting their equipment back on the engines and placeing themslves available for next in call.

This is the kind of discussion I prefer. I appricate that you are offering some realistic examples of how this NIMS is to work. The idea that you should be able to walk right into my firehouse and seemlessly work with the rest of us is unrealistic and exceedingly unlikely. The entire concept of NIMS is based on a utopian view of the nation and its fire services by some persons who are apparently extreemly inexperienced and lacking in first hand knowledge about the vast differences between California Grass fires and Tenenment and highrise fires on the East Coast.

And like I said, by your IC reassinging members tasks and giving them completly new titles it creates circumstances where confusion over who is filling what role and who is supervising who.

I gave one example where the Roof man after completing his inital duties drops down to VES the top floor. Now the Chief who under your system has to A. Tell him to do this and B. Give him a new "Handle". Isn't he going to be completely swamped with radio traffic for this unecesary excersise in semantics? It also requires that his aide properly track who he is, Ladder XX roof, what his handle was "Division 7 Vent Group" and what he will become- "Division 6 Search Group 2". Now does the officer of this man's company, realize he has been reasigned this new title by the IC? How does the Aide keep up with the dozens of reasignments that constantly occur under this system?

How is this not overburdensome micro-management of a fireground? Are your firemen not trusted to know their jobs and duties and have to have their hand held by the Chief at all times like this?

Also we could return to the question...what do we call Engine Co. 47? They hook up in a highrise apartment building on the 13th floor the Entrance to the duplex apartment is on the 15th floor and the main body of fire is on the 14th floor. What do we call Engine Co. 47? According to ICS, IMS and NIMS we need to give them a designation as to their duties and in this case location...as in Fire Attack Group1 Division 14...however as the Engine pushes in on the 15th they certainly aren't on the 14th Division (formerly known as a floor) and they will move down to the 14th as they deal with the fire on 15.

Wouldn't it make more sense if the Chief could just call for Engine Co. 47 and ask the officer what his progress is and the Co. Officer could report that they have a medium fire condition on 15 and making their way down access stairs to 14 in what appears to be a duplex appartment.

As for the officer needing to call for more presure...in highrises we first call the Controlman to do so...and only if he can't provide any more pressure do our officers call for the Engine to increase the pressure in the system. My point was what do you call him?

For radio communication. It would be Pump Engine 1 - Interior, need more pressure.
Our county has individual names on the radio like Captain is Engine 1, Engineer is Pump Engine 1 and Firefighter is FF Engine 1 or Engine 1A. So if I got trapped it would go: Ops or Div A (whatever your assigned to)- Pump Engine 1 down. The call letters for each individual may be different from each dept. There is no unversal names per person.

"Interior", now see who the hell is Interior?(around here about 30-40 guys could be on the interior at any one time at a typical fire) On what line? Recall that the idea of this NIMS is for a common language so we can work with you and you can work with us. If you were to state this at a job here, no one would have any idea what they hell you were talking about although our ECCs could take a good guess.

So Ralph could be called FF Eng1 or Engine 1A? Is this correct? How Does
"Engine 1-A" not get confused with "Engine 1-8"? Why are there two names for the same guy? How does this aid in accountability? There is no universal names for personell? How again does this aid in accountability?

No wonder you aren't allowed more than an arms length away from your officer at any time.

As for accountability for first incoming without Battalion Chief. Th0e BC arrives and assumes IC and radios for Personnal accountability report by asking each company how many on your unit. All tags are left in a accountability board @ CP.

How is it your Chief doesn't know how many men are working in certain companies? How does your dept develop SOPs with vast variations in manpower? When manpower isn't standard...it is hard to expect operations and performance to be as well. Why clutter the air with what should be superfolous information?

The more I learn about this ICS,NIMS or whatever it is called this week...the more I believe it was created by amatures behind a desk and the less and less I like it.

FTM-PTB

[Bones42]

Don't worry FFFred, by the time the "roof" man comes down 10 floors (after going up them to the roof) to get to the IC and get reassigned to VES (and move his accountability clip on the board) he will be too tired (climbing those 10 floors again) to handle any other operations.

[FFFRED]

Don't worry FFFred, by the time the "roof" man comes down 10 floors (after going up them to the roof) to get to the IC and get reassigned to VES (and move his accountability clip on the board) he will be too tired (climbing those 10 floors again) to handle any other operations.

He'd probably be in the hospital! ...the roof rope and tools gives the roof man the greatest burden of all the Truckies in terms of weight he must lug around.

I really find it amazing how many proffesional fire departments are so micro-managed and how many firemen aren't trusted to use some initative and experience to get their jobs done without some boss always looking over thier shoulder and giving them orders.

FTM-PTB

[TurdFergeson]

As for accountability for first incoming without Battalion Chief. The BC arrives and assumes IC and radios for Personnal accountability report by asking each company how many on your unit. All tags are left in a accountability board @ CP.

If the accountability tags are at the CP, then why does the IC have to get a radio report from each company as to who is with them? In my experience, this personal accountability report does nothing but hamper operations on the fireground. Our BC will all but stop operations every 20 minutes to get a PAR. How does this help anything? If the tags are at the accountability board at the CP, then no PAR should be conducted. If there is no qualifying event (i.e. explosion, colapse, mayday report), then no PAR should be conducted. Some people would be amazed at how quickly a fire could be put out if the powers that be would let us fight fire.

[Lewiston2FF]

Now the question I have is on a multiple alarm does the battalion have a ticket with who is 1st due, 2nd due, 3rd due? I know that a battalion covers multiple 1st due areas so, does he memorize what the alarm cards are for each area? Or, is that the aides responsibility? From the sounds of it you are using an incident management system, the language is the point of contention your IMS relies on preplanned assignments based on riding position and your arrival at the assignment (ie: first due, second due).
I will agree with FF 1962 that as long as the guy in charge of a group can speak the NIMS language and translate it to his group in their language it will work. This is what allows the system to work. I will not be one of the people that thinks that NIMS will solve all of our problems. I think that there are instances that it will work and some that it doesnt.

I wont drink the Kool aid. But I have taken the courses for the sake of funding.

[FFFRED]

Now the question I have is on a multiple alarm does the battalion have a ticket with who is 1st due, 2nd due, 3rd due? I know that a battalion covers multiple 1st due areas so, does he memorize what the alarm cards are for each area? Or, is that the aides responsibility? From the sounds of it you are using an incident management system, the language is the point of contention your IMS relies on preplanned assignments based on riding position and your arrival at the assignment (ie: first due, second due).
I will agree with FF 1962 that as long as the guy in charge of a group can speak the NIMS language and translate it to his group in their language it will work. This is what allows the system to work. I will not be one of the people that thinks that NIMS will solve all of our problems. I think that there are instances that it will work and some that it doesnt.

I wont drink the Kool aid. But I have taken the courses for the sake of funding.

I don't know if that question was for me...but our Chiefs or his Aide can and do recieve the information as to the companies responding on the multiple alarms. They can get it verbally over the radio and they can get it on the MDT.

If you listen to our dispatchers during a multiple you will hear them occasionally read off the companies shortly after the Chief asks for the additional companies or alarm to the Chief in comand or his aide.

Yes, of course we are using a system....but the problem when you read the NIMS materials, it doesn't even come close to conforming to this common terminonlogy utopia that some think is realistic or even possible. To many of us there is signifigant portions which contradict our procedures and experinece and frankly don't make much sense at all.

Much of what I'm hearing makes me think there are many amatures and micro-managers running numerous FDs accross this country. Having to wait for an IC to tell you what to do at all times...and having him decide what each company will do upon arrival at a fire is a concept that I last recall reading in historical texts from my job around the 1st half of last Century.

I think anyone who is truly concerned about this NIMS stuff would welcome critical comments as to the weaknesses found in the system.

FTM-PTB

[Lewiston2FF]

I don't know if that question was for me...but our Chiefs or his Aide can and do recieve the information as to the companies responding on the multiple alarms. They can get it verbally over the radio and they can get it on the MDT.

If you listen to our dispatchers during a multiple you will hear them occasionally read off the companies shortly after the Chief asks for the additional companies or alarm to the Chief in comand or his aide.

Yes, of course we are using a system....but the problem when you read the NIMS materials, it doesn't even come close to conforming to this common terminonlogy utopia that some think is realistic or even possible. To many of us there is signifigant portions which contradict our procedures and experinece and frankly don't make much sense at all.

Much of what I'm hearing makes me think there are many amatures and micro-managers running numerous FDs accross this country. Having to wait for an IC to tell you what to do at all times...and having him decide what each company will do upon arrival at a fire is a concept that I last recall reading in historical texts from my job around the 1st half of last Century.

I think anyone who is truly concerned about this NIMS stuff would welcome critical comments as to the weaknesses found in the system.

FTM-PTB

Thank you for fielding the question, it was directed at anyone in the FDNY (yourself, E229Lt, Vinny et.al. ) I would think without some written detail of who is where on the ticket it would be confusing when calling for them to check on the progress of their assignment. For example on a multiple the BC wants to know how the work is going on the roof, he would have to know who showed up when. This is not a critique more an attempt at understanding. I do see the simplicity of your system on your bread and butter fires, yes I listen to the online scanners. Your system works for you and that is fine, for some the NIMS works for them, that too is fine. We have found a system that works for us, it would be considered micromanagement by your standards but the fires still go out and we arent saving basements. In some respects I would like to see our system move more in the direction of yours, but the wheels of change turn slowly in the fire service, and I feel that will be a bit of a ways off.

I think the bottom line is do what works for you, and when in rome have someone that speaks italian with you!

[FFFRED]

Thank you for fielding the question, it was directed at anyone in the FDNY (yourself, E229Lt, Vinny et.al. ) I would think without some written detail of who is where on the ticket it would be confusing when calling for them to check on the progress of their assignment. For example on a multiple the BC wants to know how the work is going on the roof, he would have to know who showed up when. This is not a critique more an attempt at understanding. I do see the simplicity of your system on your bread and butter fires, yes I listen to the online scanners. Your system works for you and that is fine, for some the NIMS works for them, that too is fine. We have found a system that works for us, it would be considered micromanagement by your standards but the fires still go out and we arent saving basements. In some respects I would like to see our system move more in the direction of yours, but the wheels of change turn slowly in the fire service, and I feel that will be a bit of a ways off.

I think the bottom line is do what works for you, and when in rome have someone that speaks italian with you!

Great point...basicly after the 1st alarm companies the Chief just fills in the blanks or relieves companies as they tire out. If he calls a second alarm because of a need for more ladders to conduct searches...when those Ladders arrive he will tell the officer what he needs as in "I need floors 22 thru 26 searched." The officer then will take his men and divide them up, usually along the lines of inside and outside teams and do what he thinks needs to be done in terms of the search. He gives a report back to the Chief and then awaits a new assignment or gets more information about specific appartments during his search.

In that respect our systems are similar to this NIMS or should I say NIMS is similar to our system...it is just under this NIMS as we have seen stated in this discussion and many others is that from the begining there is one guy who stands around and decides how this fire is going to be fought and entire companies of 3 or 4 men are committed to one and only task along with some new designation that changes througout the incident with no set universal name for any one task as it could be by location, task or both...or as one member wrote...just "Interior".

I think your final suggestion is what makes the most sense and expresses what has worked for years...just as it did in Katrina...the men on the ground made due with what they had and learned very quickly how each department differed from the other...even though none of our men to my knowledge spoke Creole...they were able to work together at fires and got the job done, despite not having this prerequisite NIMS 100-200 training.(The training that the idiots in FEMA and DHS presumably had.) NOFD shouldn't have to operate and talk like us and we shouldn't have to operate and talk like the NOFD.

Basicly what I'm getting at is that everyone should focus more on improving their local operations and their companies proficencies at the basic evolutions that we use day in and day out(because that is what we are going to do at a large incident) and less about complying with some poorly thoughtout Federal extortion...err I mean mandate that will supposedly have us all on the same page.

I think it is clear from certain discussions on these forums...guys like me, Turd Furgeson and Chicago won't ever be on the same page as guys like...well you know. Hense my point about Micro-management. My Battalion interacting with a Battalion from some of these places would be far from seemless and probably get some peoples panties in a bunch. The more anal-retentive non-trusting types on here would have a huge problem if guys like me were sent to help them for what I think are obvious differences in operational methods and tactics...common terms or not.

Which also raises the question...even if we started using the same terms...it is clear that operationally we are so different...would any of the semantics matter?

FTM-PTB

[Lewiston2FF]

Which also raises the question...even if we started using the same terms...it is clear that operationally we are so different...would any of the semantics matter?

FTM-PTB

I agree. But as has been said by those in past threads and in this one, we show up at your party (not likely but for the sake of example roll with me on this) we play by your rules and vice -versa. Now, I do believe there is a reason people like your BC, DCs and above are going out and getting time on wildland fires, so that when the FDNY is called to go to things like Katrina someone speaks the language fluently enough and can make the translation. The grunts on the ground are told in terms they understand and they go do their job, thats all that matters.

If you ever head out to the falls I'll buy the first round. Ask the Lt.

[FFFRED]

I agree. But as has been said by those in past threads and in this one, we show up at your party (not likely but for the sake of example roll with me on this) we play by your rules and vice -versa. Now, I do believe there is a reason people like your BC, DCs and above are going out and getting time on wildland fires, so that when the FDNY is called to go to things like Katrina someone speaks the language fluently enough and can make the translation. The grunts on the ground are told in terms they understand and they go do their job, thats all that matters.

If you ever head out to the falls I'll buy the first round. Ask the Lt.

I agree that this is how it will probably play out...however many FD's aren't taking the same approach we are and are wholesale throwing their local operations out the window and adopting NIMS terminology and structure. We sort of know what a group is, most will never understand the need to call a floor a division...etc. However we have not materially changed our operations to suit the needs of some larger Federal Gov't Bureacracy. We do things roughly the same way we did them before NIMS. We just don't use those terms or that method of operation which apparently according to the guys who use it in their cities works well for them and their style of operations.

I know for a fact even if a Chief from some of the departments I used to run Mutual aid with and even a few Chiefs in my former Depts had us in their jurisdiction...when he states he wants task "ABC" done...some of them are acustomed to it being performed a certain way with certain people and lets say certain local precautions.(I'm trying to be gentle here.)

We have litterally 1000s of pages of procedures and we operate the way we know how to with a team of men who know what we are doing and we know what they are too be doing. I can think of many places where the friction between us or lets say a Chicago FD and other FDs would be palpable. I should know I've worked in a few of them.

In NO...the NOFD members were very understanding of letting our members operate the way they knew how to and our members were respectful and interested in taking advice from the local firemen who knew the area, buildings and equipment better than we did.

Our members worked well because we are used to operating on our own with each member responsible for assesing the situation and being responsible and accountable for his precribed duties. We focus on the basics and that is why it worked so well in NO...not because we had some silly ICS or NIMS certification on our walls at home.

I know for a fact that this situation wouldn't exist in some of the places I worked...for the simple fact that the large Metro city we were adjacent too had many conflicts and problems over the years with some of the adjoining suburbs FDs not liking the methods that they used to fight fire. (ie. Searching without a hoseline or VES...etc.) This was the city right next to them, not a group of firemen from the other side of the Country. This was how they knew how to fight fire (and did it well considering they went to many more fires than their suburban counterparts.) yet they still had friction.

I think you can see where I don't think this NIMS is going to solve much and efforts should be focused elsewhere to improving local/regional operations which comprise 99% of your work and not the 1% chance of some major catastrophy that requires much of the same skills used for the other 99% of your incidents.

FTM-PTB

[firefighter1962]

.....so that when the FDNY is called to go to things like Katrina someone speaks the language fluently enough and can make the translation. The grunts on the ground are told in terms they understand and they go do their job, thats all that matters.

Exactly..... Higher-ups in the NMIS command structure are going the set the prioties in a mass incident. Someone is going to know that (or hopefully should know) that the FDNY are experts at multi-story building fires, and assign them to that task. They get the job done like they always have, and the FDNY commander and conveys the information back to the NMIS command in THEIR jargon. Now the NMIS boys scratch that one off of their list and the FDNY strike team is ready for reassignment.

Now to complicate matters, the FDNY commander determines that more ladders are required for their task. Once again the FDNY commander requests this in NMIS jargon. Logistics determines that only 1 ladder unit from NOFD and one ladder from LAFD are available, and dispatches them to the scene. Since each fire department is under their own command, the assignments get passed out in NMISese, and each respective department does it their way.

The hose pulling firefighters from differnent departments that encounter each other on the fire ground either communicate to one another is NMIS jargon, or in the best way that they know how. At this level it will probably be speaking in firefighter. Much the same as if you were in France and someone says "bonjour", you shrug your shoulders, and find a way to communicate the best way you know how.

Stay Safe

[ChicagoFF]

If you have multiple companies working on the same floor. IC only wants to here from one person on that floor. The Division Leader. You don't need five different companies talking to the IC from the same location. Division will report to Ops or IC. If you use ICS on a regular basis. You should have no problem.

Floors are big places. What is the hassel with a company reporting something first hand from one end rather than try to describe what is going on to a middleman so that he can pass it on to someone else? And we had far more than 5 companies operating up there. It still worked fine.

[ChicagoFF]

Let's suppose we have a crew of bricklayers from wherever and only one of them knows how to speak English. The boss comes along and tells the one bricklayer what to do, and he tells the rest of them in whatever language. Guess what? The job gets done and done well. You can have a multinational group, and as long as the top guy of each group can speak the common language, it's going to work.

Now let's suppose that nobody on the bricklaying crew knows how to speak English. It's going to be a Charlie Foxtrot, plain and simple.

First off, when was the last brick crew you met where anyone spoke english? Secondly, laying bricks is pretty universal - brick, mortar, brick, mortar, repeat.... Just like firefighting. Are you telling me that if I showed up in BFE somewhere to help them out, it would be too hard for them to say "Hey, that buildings on fire - go put it out." I assure you that we could figure it out pretty quick.

But the bottom line is - You will never see me in your hometown riding an engine. Outside of the MABAS system in Illinois you won't likely see CFD guys helping out anywhere unless they go on their own. And, outside of MABAS, you will never be asked into the city. It's just that simple. If you do come in, you will be handed a radio and left to do your job - taking in runs and putting out fires. It's not that complicated.