Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by SBrooks
    It boils down to this, gentlemen:

    If you wan't the money that the feds taxed from your citizens to come back, you've got to adopt NIMS.

    ****ty but true.

    They (we) take money in the form of Federal Taxes from jurisdictions, and then give it back with strings attatched.

    That being said, my department, DCFD, uses NIMS on every incident with a chief officer. We are also HEAVILY dependent on pre assigned SOGs. Like you, we know where everyone is supposed to be, based on the building type and their dispatch order. First & Third engine are the 'Attack Group'. Second Engine is in the rear. First & Second Trucks are front & rear, 'Vent Group'. The Squad is 'Rescue Group'. Radio comms are by Company # & Position. e.g. 'Squad 2, Team B to the chief, primary negative on the second floor', or 'Engine 30 to the chief, basement is clear'. Rarely are the NIMS designations used, but everyone knows what they are and what they mean. If we have to pair companies to get a task done (like you pair engines to pull a line), that workgroup would have a designation that would be used.
    So fire departments all over the country should be held hostage to doing things the way the Feds say?? Wow..I guess the fire service is weaker than I thought. If we are going to allow the feds to micro-manage every detail of our operations in the name of "this is what we say is best" and "uniformity" (because every city is exactly the same)....then as the guy from Connecticut eluded to...I look forward to a new generation of leaders in the fire service too...ones that hopefully, take it down a different path than the one we seem to be headed.

    SBrooks, question...how do you call an individual firefighter over the radio in these "groups" and sectors etc......Example: a member of "Team B" needs to radio a Mayday because he is lost and out of air...what does he call himself??
    MattyJ
    Forum Member
    Last edited by MattyJ; 11-13-2006, 04:18 PM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by MattyJ
      Hey Fred....you forgot 10-51!! EVERY guy on our job knows that one. A few terms you forgot, Square Rooter,Hairbag, Pop-Time, Johnny, 9x,6x,mutual,Onion Skin,coward stick,chicken in a bucket,or being assigned the "keys" or the "top" for the tour.
      LOL!!! I forgot all those...F*ck shop, 12x, Secret Overtime Club, AFID...boy too bad we didn't get in good with the feds and tell everyone to learn our lingo...but you know I'd rather just keep it to ourselves...what you see here....

      FTM-PTB

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by SBrooks
        It boils down to this, gentlemen:

        If you wan't the money that the feds taxed from your citizens to come back, you've got to adopt NIMS.

        ****ty but true.

        They (we) take money in the form of Federal Taxes from jurisdictions, and then give it back with strings attatched.

        That being said, my department, DCFD, uses NIMS on every incident with a chief officer. We are also HEAVILY dependent on pre assigned SOGs. Like you, we know where everyone is supposed to be, based on the building type and their dispatch order. First & Third engine are the 'Attack Group'. Second Engine is in the rear. First & Second Trucks are front & rear, 'Vent Group'. The Squad is 'Rescue Group'. Radio comms are by Company # & Position. e.g. 'Squad 2, Team B to the chief, primary negative on the second floor', or 'Engine 30 to the chief, basement is clear'. Rarely are the NIMS designations used, but everyone knows what they are and what they mean. If we have to pair companies to get a task done (like you pair engines to pull a line), that workgroup would have a designation that would be used.
        SBrooks,

        I'm glad it works for you and I appricate the realistic examples you've offered not the nonresponsive garbage we've been getting from Dept marshal...however I have a few questions...

        -Why does one group officers and companies under a made up identity together?.
        -I don't answer to the boss of Engine Co. 36 if I'm in Engine Co 37 do I?
        -How does one officer loose his authority over his men by being supervised by another company officer?

        If the a mayday from the back-up man from Engine Co. 37 he is further hidden in the command structure by what he was doing if his title was burried in the Attack group. So a backup man from Attack group 4 is in trouble...now we need to make sure we know who was in Attack group 4 before we can determine who is making the Mayday call if it is walked on or cut off as they often become. Everyone might now that a guy in Attack group 4 is in trouble...but not everyone is going to know where they are as opposed to Engine Co. 37 memeber who is 3rd due and due to a fire lets say in a basement of a Brownstone has the 1st line making entry into the 1st floor. I see this as a loss of accountablitiy and certainly not an improvement.

        I assure you if we were to adopt such procedures where the one supervisor in command of essentially 1 other officer and 10 men the city would attempt to thin the UFOA ranks. Doesn't this operation create a conflict with the span of control? It also conflicts with our operations in that each officer is responsible for different duties along with his men when we team up to stretch the 1st line.

        Forget the fact that we don't need to team up our Engines at all times so this attack group would be far from a given on its size and duties as in many parts of the city one Engine can have the line stretched and into operation before the 2nd due arrives. This hasn't been an issue for us...so why should we change. If our chiefs had a hard time managing the fireground then I'm sure it would have been addressed.

        On the ticket I know what the Engines are and baring any unusual occurances I know where they would be stretching just as I know where every member of both 1st and 2nd Due Ladders will be.

        Now there are two Inside teams in different locations who are tasked with searching for fire and life and removal of victims along with ventilation....Now what do we call them? Search? Vent, Rescue? But we have Rescue Co's so couldn't that lead to confusion over are we calling a Rescue Group or a Rescue Co. member? Same with the OVM? Why not just call him "two-four OV"...why call him "vent", or "search" or "rescue" or whatever....those titles seem a bit oversimplistic and don't really commincate who they are as the OVM and the ROOF both could be assigned the title of vent under this ICS as I understand it.

        Kind of hard for an officer to account for his members if a chief assigns them a title that the officer isnt aware of.

        Sounds great if it works for you, I just don't see the need for us to jump through a bunch of hoops for people I'll never see on the firefloor.

        FTM-PTB

        PS- We are NIMS compliant...the Feds rubber stamped the cities CIMS protocol even though it is a joke when dealing with the PD and their meglomaniac Commish Popey. So I guess we will go about doing what we do and still bring in the Fed dollars. I just find is amusing that a number of people actually believe our operations need to be changed because some outsiders opinion is that they have a better idea than us for our fireground operations.
        FFFRED
        MembersZone Subscriber
        Last edited by FFFRED; 11-13-2006, 10:22 PM.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by FFFRED
          LOL!!! I forgot all those...F*ck shop, 12x, Secret Overtime Club, AFID...boy too bad we didn't get in good with the feds and tell everyone to learn our lingo...but you know I'd rather just keep it to ourselves...what you see here....

          FTM-PTB

          How about 10-18, 10-37-3. UGH lol
          Proud East Coast Traditionalist.

          Comment


          • #80
            I just started reading this thread and DAMN some people are hell bent of everyone adopting this whole NIMS thing. From what I have learned of NIMS (from that brain stimulating 2 hour online "class"), the whole big concept here was to provide a system of uniform PLAIN language that anyone from across jurisdictional boundaries could understand.

            While it seems that most people are ragging on FDNY's system (which they are not trying to push on anyone BTW), their system (despite what you hear) is just that...SIMPLE!! While I admit that the novice who hears a unit notifying the boro dispatcher of a "10-33 Code 2" might think their system is too complex, a) it works for THEM & b) on the fireground "handi-talkie" frequency, their terminology is very SIMPLE..."Ladder XXX to Battalion XX, we have extension to the 4th floor, we could use a line up here"...what's more simple than that??? It says who you are, who you're calling & what you need...isn't that the idea here when communicating by radio???

            As many have said, FDNY's system works for them, Chicago uses their own, LA & those other CA guys have theirs and it works for THEIR needs...while many will quote the instance of 9/11 (which was a truly unique, hopefully once in a lifetime event), most of these major city FD's (FDNY, Philly, LA, Chicago, etc.) will not typically need outside resources to assist them (fact, FDNY has more apparatus ON THE SHOP FLOOR on any given day than most major cities have all totaled) so adopting/using a nationwide system that doesn't work for them simply so everyone "can be on the same page" doesn't make sense IMO.

            Besides, how is FEMA qualified to tell emergency responders who have been managing disasters (big & small) for hundreds of years how to run things??? Isn't this the same agency that had a horse & pony show lawyer (Arabian horses no less) running the show...the same agency that spent $300 million (oddly enough, the same amount cut from the FireAct grants of '06) on mobile homes that weren't suited for the marshland of Louisiana and now pays double digit thousands per month in rent to store these rotting skeletons in an abandoned airfield??? Oh yeah, real qualified..."You're doin' a great job, Brownie"....

            This whole NIMS thing has just added more complexity to a system that is supposed to be simple. Case in point, NIMS advocates adopting plain language when dispatching...now while this sounds great in theory, here's the real deal...our county adopted NIMS (presumably to comply with the grant funding requirements) and you know what, our "simplified" communications take longer than they did before!!! We used to be toned out for a house fire like this "XYZ Fire Department, you have a signal 13 (structure fire) at ...", now with sthis uper duper terrific NIMS, it's been "simplified" to "XYZ Fire Department, respond to a reported residential structure fire"...this is supposed to be quicker & easier???

            While a uniform, nationwide system of plain language for all emergency responders is nice in theory, it just doesn't work...the cops successfully lobbied against it so that proves the point. They didn't want FEMA's nonsense to cost them their tactical edge...it's much safer to use a radio code to request back-up than to have to say (in plain language) "Dispatch, this is Car 54, I need back-up 'cause I'm outnumbered 4-1 by the perps in this stolen Lexus I just pulled over"...while our "tactical edge" is different (no perps in cars, well maybe depending on the area you work/volly in), as has been said, it's alot easier to say "Engine 1 to Chief 1, we have extension, we need a line on the 2nd floor" to get the job taken care of.

            Just my 2 cents...if your system works for you, then use it...if you can adapt it to work with other systems from agencies near you that will actually work with you, then great...until then I guess you can listen to the guy in the hawaiian shirt...Stay Safe...

            Comment


            • #81
              WOW... I didn't expect as many replys since when I started this thread. And I read every one. So thanks for the Informitive discussion. I guess I just like the Brunacini Command system. However I'm always open to other methods. However I don't think I could trust a Command system that is made up by individuals who have no experience the fireground as a jake and made their way through the ranks to be able to say or even suggest how a IC should be conducted. This includes RJ's "Rung Jumpers" who Bull$#!*** their way through the system. Why brass makes our job harder then it should be. Some safety reasons but by being to over safe is as deadly..

              Thanks Guys and Gals for the reading
              Jafa62
              Canada (eh)

              Comment


              • #82
                I will add that on major wildland events, using the NIIMS system (or when in California -Firescope) not to be confused with the current NIMS) we use most all positions, we use the forms and we have multiple page, written incident action plans and they are necessary.

                The important theme throughout is, have a system that works for your agency and use it. Understand what your neighbors use and how to interface with them.

                Yes we have all heard the adopt NIMS or else..... time will tell.
                Buckle Up, Slow Down, Arrive Alive
                "Everybody Goes Home"

                IACOJ 2003

                Comment


                • #83
                  I see alot of comments talking about the quality of the people that developed the system.

                  LA City, LA County, Santa Barbara County, Ventura County, CDF, USFS are a bunch of hacks?

                  I don't know if you realize it but these are the people that developed FIRESCOPE, not the guy in a hawaiian shirt (as you call him). FIRESCOPE is the foundation for NIIMS and NIMS.

                  You know all of these departments had their own systems, the USFS used the Large Fire Organization with good effect since at least the 40's. Because of the growing need to work together in Southern California these agencies (none located in Phoenix) came together to create a system that all could use. While I don't share the venom some of you on the East coast seem to have towards Chief Brunacini, don't mistake his IMS with our ICS. He has taken our system made a few modifications and sold it to structure departments across the county, its roots are recognizable but it is not the same thing.

                  I don't use that system so I can't speak to its effectiveness, ICS has worked well in California so there has been no need to use the Phoenix IMS, I'm really not sure why they thought there was a need since the SoCal agencies were using ICS on non-wildland incidents since about 1978 (Brunacini published his first Fire Command book about 1981).

                  As far as this being a money making scheme the Federal government makes the training materials available at cost, I recently bought all the I-200 books for about $20, how does that compare to IFSTA? (not to bash on IFSTA but if its evil to make a profit on ICS then is fire training, EMS etc immune?)

                  Yes there are people running around the lecture & book circuit making a profit on ICS but show me a segment of the emergency services that you don't find this.


                  As far as an example that is not that easy to do since I don't know your system, however you do realize that there are other departments besides FDNY that fight fire using ICS? Somehow they manage to do it in an efficient fashion.

                  As far as your examples.

                  The hose team would be called fire attack on what ever division they were working on, not where they started or passed through, so if they connected at the stand pipe on the 12th floor, then went up and over the 14th floor to attack a fire on the 13th floor (weird building you have there BTW) they would be Division 13 fire attack, or assuming you only have fire on one floor they would just be Fire attack group. (your post is back past what I can see as I post, so I might have your example slightly messed up).

                  I'm not sure where the idea that an entire company falls under one designation or designations can only be made by the IC.

                  Here is an example for you, Truck 12 arrives onscene, the IC tells the Captain to ventilate and secure utilities, we'll assume a well staffed truck company 1+5, the officer & 2 FF's climb the aerial to the roof, they become roof division (although they could be called Vent group), 1 FF goes around the building to secure utilities so he becomes Utility group. These tasks done the crew regroups and gets assigned to rescue and salvage working along side Rescue 2 and Truck 16. Rescue 2 takes 2 of the FF's from truck 12, these become part of Rescue group, the rest of Truck's 12 and 16 become salvage group. The Rescue group is split between the 3rd and forth floors so they become Division 3 and Division 4 rescue groups (reporting to the Division supervisor on the respective floors if you are wondering about accountability)

                  As far as how a typical fire might be organized

                  resources
                  4 engines (E1-4), 2 trucks (T1&2), 1 rescue (R1), 1 ambulance (Medic 1), 1 BC (Chief 11)

                  Staffing
                  engines 1+3, trucks 1+4, rescue 1+3, ambulance 2x EMT-P, BC 1

                  The structure

                  2 stories, light life hazard, non sprinklered, fire in the rear of the 1st floor, extension to the 2nd floor.

                  BC11 = IC

                  E1 = Div 1 fire attack (Capt E1 = Div sup 1)
                  E2 = Div 2 fire attack (Capt E2 = Div sup 2)
                  E3 = Exposure group
                  E4 = Rapid Intervention Crew

                  T1 = (Capt T1 + 2 FF) = Ventilation group (if extensive roof ops Capt T1 could be assigned Roof Div), T1 3rd FF = Utility group, D/O is operating the truck.

                  T2 = (Capt T2 + 2FF) = Div 2 search group, (FF T2 3 & 4) = Forcible entry group, D/O operating the truck

                  R1 = Div 1 search group

                  Medic 1 = Rehab group


                  Ok, I can see how this could seem complicated if you have set assignments E1 always takes the first fire floor etc), however what happens when E1 was on a medical and E7 is first on scene. Do all the other resources know E7 took E1's place? You come in as an extra call engine and are assigned to Div 1, when you get there you know you report to Div 1 not E1 or E7 etc.

                  Now I'm sure you FDNY guys have something in place to deal with out of place resources but I think you can see the value of always having the position called the same regardless of what resource is in that position.



                  BTW I am not suggestion FDNY doesn't have a working system, but FDNY's system is of no use anywhere outside NYC since we don't know how it works. As far as what system we should use for a national response, nobody has more resources than the Feds (60,000+/- emergency workers) + California (pop 30 million +) vs FDNY (15,000 +/- FF's), NYC (pop 8 million), so why not use our system we have the numbers and it does work.

                  For your day to day you can have your 10 codes and company assignments all you like but if you come out of NYC I don't really want to hear about a square rooter with a 10-51.

                  No disrespect meant to anyone but this discussion is quickly becoming an FDNY is broke, no ICS is broke instead of a we do (or don't) need a national system for national responses.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by NonSurfinCaFF


                    As far as an example that is not that easy to do since I don't know your system, however you do realize that there are other departments besides FDNY that fight fire using ICS? Somehow they manage to do it in an efficient fashion.

                    As far as your examples.

                    The hose team would be called fire attack on what ever division they were working on, not where they started or passed through, so if they connected at the stand pipe on the 12th floor, then went up and over the 14th floor to attack a fire on the 13th floor (weird building you have there BTW) they would be Division 13 fire attack, or assuming you only have fire on one floor they would just be Fire attack group. (your post is back past what I can see as I post, so I might have your example slightly messed up).
                    It would happen in the event that another line would be needed....supplimental lines have been hooked up in odder spots...and even streached up the outside of a building, though windows (to take up weight), then down a hallway. As far as using the word "Division"...that term is used here to define a geographic response area that is commanded by a Chief. So that term is usless here inregards to stating what floor.


                    Here is an example for you, Truck 12 arrives onscene, the IC tells the Captain to ventilate and secure utilities, we'll assume a well staffed truck company 1+5, the officer & 2 FF's climb the aerial to the roof, they become roof division (although they could be called Vent group), 1 FF goes around the building to secure utilities so he becomes Utility group. These tasks done the crew regroups and gets assigned to rescue and salvage working along side Rescue 2 and Truck 16. Rescue 2 takes 2 of the FF's from truck 12, these become part of Rescue group, the rest of Truck's 12 and 16 become salvage group. The Rescue group is split between the 3rd and forth floors so they become Division 3 and Division 4 rescue groups (reporting to the Division supervisor on the respective floors if you are wondering about accountability)
                    There lyes the problem with why most do not undertand our ops. Fire off....we all know what we are going to do up to the "all hands". You will NEVER hear the 1st Due truck boss tell the roof man to go to the roof and vent....that because the roofman knows what he's has to do. Your above example is exactly whats wrong with the system. You say to heck with 10 codes, but have no problem using some obsure vocabulary.



                    Ok, I can see how this could seem complicated if you have set assignments E1 always takes the first fire floor etc), however what happens when E1 was on a medical and E7 is first on scene. Do all the other resources know E7 took E1's place? You come in as an extra call engine and are assigned to Div 1, when you get there you know you report to Div 1 not E1 or E7 etc.
                    Yes, it comes over the MDTs and is announced over the dept radio. If E7 if first due, and has E-1 beat hands down...then 7 gets the first line, with 1 helping with 7's stretch. (Engines) 1st due has the fire, 2d due helps with 1st dues stretch, unless a 2d line is needed Immerdiatley, 3d due gets the 2d line, and 4th due helps 3d due stretch. (Trucks) 1st due has the fire floor, 2d Due has the floor above, 3d Due is the FAST truck, and Rescue and Squad are used as needed. Mostly to augment the 1st and 2d due trucks. Rescue and Squad have positions similar to a truck company, and they are in position to ALL converge on a problem that may arise.

                    Now I'm sure you FDNY guys have something in place to deal with out of place resources but I think you can see the value of always having the position called the same regardless of what resource is in that position.
                    Pointless.....first off, we don't consider units that don't arrive in sequence "out of place resources". We are thier to put the fire out, and therefore are in the right place. If E-7 is 2d Due on the ticket, and gets there WAY before E-1 who is first due.....then E-7 has the first line.....there is never any confussion on that, heartache maybe, but no cunfussion. Every fireman on my job, aside from the new probie, knows his first, second, and third areas...and for the most part the same for the surrounding companies.

                    BTW I am not suggestion FDNY doesn't have a working system, but FDNY's system is of no use anywhere outside NYC since we don't know how it works.
                    Who's "we"....most of the vollies in the areas that surround NYC, utilize a variation of our system. As do the other surrounding cities....in NY and NJ. One of my old depts pretty much used the system to the letter...so...I don't know who "we" is.

                    As far as what system we should use for a national response, nobody has more resources than the Feds (60,000+/- emergency workers) + California (pop 30 million +) vs FDNY (15,000 +/- FF's), NYC (pop 8 million), so why not use our system we have the numbers and it does work.
                    Hmmm..interesting....California is a "state", New York City is a "City"...apples to oranges. New York State on the other hand, has:
                    18 million people
                    96,593 Vollies
                    17,472 paid
                    334 Paid on call
                    13,681 Fire Police
                    5,533 CFRD
                    17,045 EMTs
                    1849 Paramedics

                    That would make it apples to apples.

                    For your day to day you can have your 10 codes and company assignments all you like but if you come out of NYC I don't really want to hear about a square rooter with a 10-51.
                    Gee how did we ever make it in NO And if you come here, leave your NIMS/ICS fan club kit at home.
                    VinnieB
                    Forum Member
                    Last edited by VinnieB; 11-14-2006, 01:46 AM.
                    IACOJ Member

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Ok, I'll make it simple the attack team would be on what ever Division they were working on not where the line was hooked up or route it took.

                      I don't understand your fire ops because I'm 3,000 miles away and work in a heavily ICS based system. However this repetitive theme of everybody else making a plan after they get onscene is nonsense, my guys are trained to do their job with little direction from me. We pull onscene all I have to say is were putting a hose lay up the right flank or we're tooling up and cutting line for CDF's hose lay. They know what tools to grab, who gets what etc, if we're putting in hose they hook up and get going I'm usually already up ahead scouting the line, I know they will be right behind me.

                      When I worked on a structure department it was pretty much the same, FF behind the Captain grabbed the irons, FF behind the driver pulled the hose.

                      1st in engine attacked the fire 2nd due dropped a supply line then pulled a back up line behind the 1st due.

                      I don't know where this idea comes from the the west coast makes it up as they go along.

                      Must be nice that your apparatus never breaks down, gets in a wreck, or is off on a medical when a fire call comes in, must be a unique place to live.

                      We is much of the west coast and all of California, we is the ICS groupies.

                      Yes, California is a state, and NYC is a city. California is a state that has ONE well executed, well tested command system across the entire state. It is also a state where the PD & Fire can get along and work together, where public works or the Fish & game can be easily integrated into an operation if needed. I use California as an example because it is 1/10 of the US population, it also just happens to use the system the Feds use so at least 1/10 of the responders in this nation already use NIMS in essense, this post has shown me that there are some large departments in the East and South using the system.

                      Add into this that the feds are using NIMS anyway, plus they are paying for the emergency (if FEMA is there they are writing the checks), and supplying grants to FD's so yes it does seem reasonable that they ask you to learn their system if you want to play with them. If the FDNY was signing my paycheck I'd learn what ever system you asked me to.

                      NO was a cluster, in part because they government there had no functional plan (something NIMS is trying to avoid). I'm sure the FDNY was able to adapt and overcome because you have professional, highly qualified and very experienced firefighters, can you vouch for every other FD in the nation and say the same? I didn't think so, can you supply the resources (money, will & trainers) to ensure every department can at least fuction at a basic level with every department in their county or state. No, only the Feds can do that, and it is becoming quite apparent that even it may be too big a task for them too. We will continue to have, 9/11's, Katrina's etc, but hey lets not do anything to get it right the next time.


                      I haven't seen anybody (ok, maybe 1 or 2) that has said FDNY, CFD, BFD, DFD, PFD etc can't fight fire safely and aggressivly under their existing systems, what I have seen is several people from some of those departments imply that pretty much the entire west coast and much of the rest of the nation doesn't have a clue how to fight fire. The damn things keep going out, I guess we must be lucky.


                      I have tried to be clear to the point and non-insulting explaining ICS, I have not said or implied (at least I didn't mean to if I did) that FDNY does not have a good workable system.

                      I have alot of respect for the East coast firefighting methods, I even like Leather helmets (unlike some of my fellow left coast FF's). But I'm done here, the books are available, the training is online for free, stick your head in the ground or adapt, improvise and overcome because NIMS is coming like it or not. I'm sorry departments that have there stuff together are having to deal with this but for every department that does, there are probably 5 that don't.

                      If it makes you feel any better we are getting all this training shoved down our throats too and we invented the thing.

                      Hey its FEMA, they are good at 2 things writing checks and trying to tell everybody else how to do their job (Our IMT's usually come back with grey hair after watching FEMA try and manage an incident).

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by NonSurfinCaFF
                        Fish & game can be easily integrated into an operation if needed.
                        Next time I need fish and game at a fire I'll be wishing I had this fancy system. Does anyone else get the feeling that the entire west coast is made up of those asthmatic kids with thick glasses from freshman year of high school? Do you make it to the firehouse with your lunch money?
                        ChicagoFF
                        Forum Member
                        Last edited by ChicagoFF; 11-15-2006, 01:18 AM.
                        I am a complacent liability to the fire service

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by NonSurfinCaFF
                          Hey its FEMA, they are good at 2 things writing checks and trying to tell everybody else how to do their job (Our IMT's usually come back with grey hair after watching FEMA try and manage an incident).
                          This is why we have a lot of skepticism toward drinking the NIMS kool-aid and completely remaking a system that already works. Your system works very well for you, the incident management system my small department uses works for us, and FDNY's system works for them. All the systems are similar and follow standard ICS doctrine.

                          NIMS vs my FD's (and many others) incident command structure:

                          Common Terminology-locally, regionally, state, or nation-wide? FEMA has yet to clearly define what this means. Locally, we do not have terminology problems with the police or EMS. If a term is unfamiliar, we ask what is means.

                          Modular Organization-Command positions added as required.

                          Management by Objectives-Always-extinguish the fire, make a rescue, control hazard, standby, etc.

                          Reliance on an Incident Action Plan-Pre-determined; the firefighters know what to do based on training, SOP's and experience. No one here waits for a chief to show up before going to work. With the exception of haz-mat, we rarely have use for written IAP's. The basic components of an IAP (what needs to be done? Who does it? How do we communicate? What if someone is hurt?) is covered by SOP's and modified based on the situation.

                          Manageable Span of Control-Part of our ICS for years.

                          Pre-designated Incident Mobilization Center Locations & Facilities-We call them fire stations . A formal command post is setup as needed, staging areas, if needed. We have never used bases, camps, helibases, or helispots.; these are wildland firefighting locations.

                          Comprehensive Resource Management-On scene by IC, off site by dispatcher. We have been doing that long before I joined the FD.

                          Integrated Communications-Technology and $ limit this. We use face-face communications, also addressed by unified command.

                          Establishment and Transfer of Command-long time practice.

                          Chain of Command and Unity of Command-standard practice.

                          Unified Command-when needed, been doing it long before it was called unified command.

                          Accountability of Resources and Personnel Deployment-Part of the IC's job since my FD formed 120 years ago.

                          Information and Intelligence Management-Part of the IC's job, long before NIMS arrived.

                          Is my department non-compliant because we call a floor a floor and not a division?
                          KenNFD1219
                          MembersZone Subscriber
                          Last edited by KenNFD1219; 11-14-2006, 08:20 AM.
                          -------------------
                          "The most mediocre man or woman can suddenly seem dynamic, forceful, and decisive if he or she is mean enough." from "Crazy Bosses"
                          -----------------------------------------------
                          Genius has its limits, but stupidity is boundless.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Here is an example for you, Truck 12 arrives onscene, the IC tells the Captain to ventilate and secure utilities, we'll assume a well staffed truck company 1+5, the officer & 2 FF's climb the aerial to the roof, they become roof division (although they could be called Vent group), 1 FF goes around the building to secure utilities so he becomes Utility group. These tasks done the crew regroups and gets assigned to rescue and salvage working along side Rescue 2 and Truck 16. Rescue 2 takes 2 of the FF's from truck 12, these become part of Rescue group, the rest of Truck's 12 and 16 become salvage group. The Rescue group is split between the 3rd and forth floors so they become Division 3 and Division 4 rescue groups (reporting to the Division supervisor on the respective floors if you are wondering about accountability)
                            I know ICS/NIIMS is really geared towards larger incidents, involving hundreds if not thousands of resources. I have issues with using it on smaller incidents that take less time to complete, such as a building fire. My main problem is with changing someone's designation everytime they complete a task. In your example, the truckie assigned to utilities becomes the Utility Group. Let's say completing these tasks takes only five minutes. They then report back to IC and are assigned another unit designation, based on whatever the next task they are given to complete. I've seen the same firefighters change groups five or more times in one single incident. As for someone who's tried to mangage this, I find it a royal pain to remember who is who, where they are, and what they are supposed to be doing. It is so much easier in my opinion to remember permanently assigned unit numbers and just assign tasks to them as needed. Now, if you're managing a long incident with many resources to move, feed, and shelter...then I understand why you would want a system like this.
                            Member IACOJ

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by NonSurfinCaFF
                              I see alot of comments talking about the quality of the people that developed the system.

                              LA City, LA County, Santa Barbara County, Ventura County, CDF, USFS are a bunch of hacks?
                              To us in many respects they have little to nothing in common with our operations, buildings and culture as it deals with firefighting. You guys deal with forest fires and ranch houses with tile roofs in cul-de-sacs...and your system works well for you and your fires...and that is fine...feel free to knock yourselves out...however to many of us who have seen its real world application (at least for me not in California to be fair) it is a joke and a garbage system for assisting in the command and control of the fireground.
                              I don't know if you realize it but these are the people that developed FIRESCOPE, not the guy in a Hawaiian shirt (as you call him). FIRESCOPE is the foundation for NIIMS and NIMS.

                              You know all of these departments had their own systems, the USFS used the Large Fire Organization with good effect since at least the 40's. Because of the growing need to work together in Southern California these agencies (none located in Phoenix) came together to create a system that all could use. While I don't share the venom some of you on the East coast seem to have towards Chief Brunacini, don't mistake his IMS with our ICS. He has taken our system made a few modifications and sold it to structure departments across the county, its roots are recognizable but it is not the same thing.
                              Is there really much difference? A bunch of depts that had poor discipline and poor coordination that worked together on a regular basis, decided that they needed a better method for themselves...and I salute that...good for them. This might be a newsflash to you...but too much of the country...ICS, IMS...whatever you want to call it is all the same and a good portion of persons exposure to it comes from who gets the articles published and who fills auditoriums full of empty headed inexperienced chiefs from all over gods green earth. You might not see it that way...but allot of these dopes pushing for this cure-all for the entire nation are not from the depts you listed.
                              I don't use that system so I can't speak to its effectiveness, ICS has worked well in California so there has been no need to use the Phoenix IMS, I'm really not sure why they thought there was a need since the SoCal agencies were using ICS on non-wild land incidents since about 1978 (Brunacini published his first Fire Command book about 1981).
                              Once again...that is fine, you created it for you. That is fine...I personally think it is a little heavy on the bureaucracy but much of your fires are drawn out week long endeavors in the wild land so I'm sure it works just fine for you.
                              As far as this being a money making scheme the Federal government makes the training materials available at cost, I recently bought all the I-200 books for about $20, how does that compare to IFSTA? (not to bash on IFSTA but if its evil to make a profit on ICS then is fire training, EMS etc immune?)
                              Its one thing to teach based on your 1st hand experience with fires and emergencies and another to create a system which you really haven't tested all that much and spend more time away from your department lining your pockets with lectures where everyone is told this is the best system to go with...it has nothing to do with the Feds...although I'm sure a number of brothers have lined up nice jobs in retirement because of this NIMS stuff.
                              Yes there are people running around the lecture & book circuit making a profit on ICS but show me a segment of the emergency services that you don't find this.
                              We've had many men over the years do lectures and books...however they aren't the COD (most weren't even Chiefs) and they aren't traversing the globe telling everyone else how to run their departments when their own dept is lacking in basic operational knowledge to keep them out of a pine box.
                              As far as an example that is not that easy to do since I don't know your system, however you do realize that there are other departments besides FDNY that fight fire using ICS? Somehow they manage to do it in an efficient fashion.
                              Yes and there are also many more who don't really use your ICS either much like Chicago...as noted here. I'm sure if your ICS works for them..that is their business. More power to them.
                              As far as your examples.

                              The hose team would be called fire attack on what ever division they were working on, not where they started or passed through, so if they connected at the stand pipe on the 12th floor, then went up and over the 14th floor to attack a fire on the 13th floor (weird building you have there BTW) they would be Division 13 fire attack, or assuming you only have fire on one floor they would just be Fire attack group. (your post is back past what I can see as I post, so I might have your example slightly messed up).
                              You understood me correctly for the most part. I described a Duplex apartment that goes down from the 14th floor to 13 and there is NO access on 13. I'm sure 95% of our buildings and layouts would be considered "weird" by your standards.

                              So if there is fire on the 13th and extension that must be fought through on the 14th...they are first Division 14 Fire attack and then become Division 13 fire attack as they make their way down the stairs? Am I understanding this correctly? Then lets say we have a wind-blown fire where there are two Engines (4 counting the men backing that line up) pushing 2-2 1/2 handlines down the hallway on the 48th floor of a Hi-Rise MD...Or lets say a commercial fire where there are actually 3 lines in operation on the same floor? What do we call Each company or team of companies advancing down the hall way? Although if you are calling only one officer that officer is I suppose commanding the other which now makes him subordinate and he effectively now is supervising up to 10 other men.(for us anyhow)

                              Why should it be necessary for our chiefs to designate a new title to the companies operating on the spot as opposed to just calling for that particular Engine or Ladder Co? This is that layer of unnecessary Bureacracy I was speaking of.
                              I'm not sure where the idea that an entire company falls under one designation or designations can only be made by the IC.
                              The 1st concept was partly mentioned by a forum member who offered it as an example when we team up Engines as we often do since roster staffing became the norm. And if one reads the available information online regarding ICS, everyone must answer to only one supervisor. Furthermore the concept of the IC assigning all companies to tasks as he sees fit is also policy according to the training materials available online. There is only one IC...he sets the plan, he assigns tasks according to his IAP.
                              Here is an example for you, Truck 12 arrives onscene, the IC tells the Captain to ventilate and secure utilities, we'll assume a well staffed truck company 1+5, the officer & 2 FF's climb the aerial to the roof, they become roof division (although they could be called Vent group), 1 FF goes around the building to secure utilities so he becomes Utility group. These tasks done the crew regroups and gets assigned to rescue and salvage working along side Rescue 2 and Truck 16. Rescue 2 takes 2 of the FF's from truck 12, these become part of Rescue group, the rest of Truck's 12 and 16 become salvage group. The Rescue group is split between the 3rd and forth floors so they become Division 3 and Division 4 rescue groups (reporting to the Division supervisor on the respective floors if you are wondering about accountability)
                              See we start off with variable titles for similar job assignments that are given out on sight by the Chief. This is a big part of where we disagree with this style of pick-up football firefighting. To think that you can at one fire be summoned on the handie-talkie by the name "Roof Division" and on the very next be doing the exact same task...but be called the "Vent group" seems a bit sophomoric to me...especially for professional depts. You are playing pick-up football...we have a gameplan....big difference in efficency and accountability not just in location of memebers but also accountability for tasks being completed.

                              Then we take members and give them new names that I suppose depend on who takes what task? Right now I'm "Utility group man" but in 5 minutes I'll be a member of "Division 3 Salvage" under what officer I can't possibly know.
                              As far as how a typical fire might be organized

                              resources
                              4 engines (E1-4), 2 trucks (T1&2), 1 rescue (R1), 1 ambulance (Medic 1), 1 BC (Chief 11)

                              Staffing
                              engines 1+3, trucks 1+4, rescue 1+3, ambulance 2x EMT-P, BC 1

                              The structure

                              2 stories, light life hazard, non sprinklered, fire in the rear of the 1st floor, extension to the 2nd floor.

                              BC11 = IC

                              E1 = Div 1 fire attack (Capt E1 = Div sup 1)
                              E2 = Div 2 fire attack (Capt E2 = Div sup 2)
                              E3 = Exposure group
                              E4 = Rapid Intervention Crew

                              T1 = (Capt T1 + 2 FF) = Ventilation group (if extensive roof ops Capt T1 could be assigned Roof Div), T1 3rd FF = Utility group, D/O is operating the truck.

                              T2 = (Capt T2 + 2FF) = Div 2 search group, (FF T2 3 & 4) = Forcible entry group, D/O operating the truck

                              R1 = Div 1 search group

                              Medic 1 = Rehab group
                              You have accountability for a company...we have accountablity down to the individual...ICS would be a reduction in accountablity for us.
                              Ok, I can see how this could seem complicated if you have set assignments E1 always takes the first fire floor etc), however what happens when E1 was on a medical and E7 is first on scene. Do all the other resources know E7 took E1's place? You come in as an extra call engine and are assigned to Div 1, when you get there you know you report to Div 1 not E1 or E7 etc.
                              It isn't based on the company...it is based on who is 1st, 2nd, 3rd due to the box...period.(And then each member of the company has an assignment, tools and position he needs to take based on the type of building) If Engine Co. 1 is OOS at some BS EMS run which in most cases ends up being nothing...Engine 7 as in your example who is normally 2nd Due lets say...is now 1st Due on the ticket. The ticket will NEVER have Engine 1 as responding to Box 1234 because they are unavailable on an EMS run...the dispatcher will list the next closest companies to that box that are assigned on that alarm and place them on the ticket...E1 is NEVER part of the equasion.

                              Do your dispatchers routinely dispatch companies that are on other alarms?
                              Now I'm sure you FDNY guys have something in place to deal with out of place resources but I think you can see the value of always having the position called the same regardless of what resource is in that position.
                              Perhaps I misread what your wrote...but no position for you is ever called the same as it is all based on what floor that person might be on at any given time operating.

                              Our OVM might start as 5th Division Vent group from the bucket but then after VESing the top floor Deadmans room in a Brownstone he would move down and become the 4th Division Vent Group...meanwhile a Chief who mistakenly at 0330 miscounted the floors and temporarily calls out for the 5th Division Vent Group is looking for the Roof Man but gets no one because the Roof man is Actually the 6th Divsion Vent Group and doesn't answer.

                              This also takes away any and all accountablity if a collapse should occur...we are going to have a hard time ensuring that in the confusion that all members given certain names are the ones we are looking for...it is just one more thing that can get written down wrong or miscomunicated and then we are going to have problems.

                              So in short I don't see the value in your system for us...to us it has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese...but again..it works for you so have at it.
                              BTW I am not suggestion FDNY doesn't have a working system, but FDNY's system is of no use anywhere outside NYC since we don't know how it works. As far as what system we should use for a national response, nobody has more resources than the Feds (60,000+/- emergency workers) + California (pop 30 million +) vs. FDNY (15,000 +/- FF's), NYC (pop 8 million), so why not use our system we have the numbers and it does work.
                              We don't care...your system does no good here and thats all we care about.

                              You have the numbers huh?...

                              I'll take a line from a classic documentary about this job...while I don't know if it still holds true today as the film was from the mid 1970s it isnt far off..."the New York Fire Department responds to more fires than the cities of Chicago, Detroit Philliadephia and Los Angeles COMBINED". That was consistantly for decades and still today, I'll bet it hasn't changed that much.

                              That isn't bravado or bragging that is a historical reality and it is from those numbers of runs and fires that our collective experience has molded and developed our operational procedures for over 140+ years...not some plan for grass fires developed a few years ago. Over those 140+ years 1,134 men have died and 100,000s have been injured and many in turn provided the lessons on which our procedures are established. Men fell off roofs, were lost in collapses, ran out of air... Our operations were not developed without much pain and sacrifice and have been tested over and over again...1,000,000s of fires and emergencies over 140 years and you are going to tell us you have the numbers....

                              A national response huh? Guess who NOFD called directly for help....the clueless FEDs with all their resources? Hell No. They called us and our members didn't have any problems about working with the brothers from NOFD...both got a good look at how the other operates...which I could say our operations are much different from theirs but it all worked out. Just as it did in 1904 when we sent men and Engines to Baltimore...the only problem they had was the inability to hook up to the hydrants due to a difference in the threads. They operated together and contemporary books don't speak of problems comunicating...unless the Mexicans have taken completely over out there and everyone is speaking spanish...I'm sure we'd do just fine there too.
                              For your day to day you can have your 10 codes and company assignments all you like but if you come out of NYC I don't really want to hear about a square rooter with a 10-51.
                              Don't worry we aren't going to tell you to use our operational system...we could suggest that you might actually like it...but I'm not going to force it down someones throat with Federal extortion...err I mean mandates.
                              No disrespect meant to anyone but this discussion is quickly becoming an FDNY is broke, no ICS is broke instead of a we do (or don't) need a national system for national responses.
                              I honestly think the concept of everyone having to use the same system...same terminology and all the rest is a bit much for our normal operations...like I said...just like us in some respects you developed your system to work for you...did you ever think that it might not work for everyone else?

                              FTM-PTB
                              FFFRED
                              MembersZone Subscriber
                              Last edited by FFFRED; 11-14-2006, 11:21 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by NonSurfinCaFF
                                Ok, I'll make it simple the attack team would be on what ever Division they were working on not where the line was hooked up or route it took.

                                I don't understand your fire ops because I'm 3,000 miles away and work in a heavily ICS based system. However this repetitive theme of everybody else making a plan after they get onscene is nonsense, my guys are trained to do their job with little direction from me. We pull onscene all I have to say is were putting a hose lay up the right flank or we're tooling up and cutting line for CDF's hose lay. They know what tools to grab, who gets what etc, if we're putting in hose they hook up and get going I'm usually already up ahead scouting the line, I know they will be right behind me.

                                When I worked on a structure department it was pretty much the same, FF behind the Captain grabbed the irons, FF behind the driver pulled the hose.

                                1st in engine attacked the fire 2nd due dropped a supply line then pulled a back up line behind the 1st due.

                                I don't know where this idea comes from the the west coast makes it up as they go along.
                                Our officers don't have to say a thing up to the all-hands. If the boss knows he has good men working with him...I've known some real quite guys who only said..."Lets go" and we did the rest.

                                Our Chief doesn't have to tell the OVM or the roof man what to do after his initiall assigment is done..in most cases he knows what to do...and if the officer needs something else he will tell them...the Chief doensn't have time to reassign all those men to tasks...that is why we have company officers.

                                Must be nice that your apparatus never breaks down, gets in a wreck, or is off on a medical when a fire call comes in, must be a unique place to live.
                                Sh*t happens here as often or more often than anywhere you work and it doesn't seem to be a problem. As Vinnie stated..if we are 2nd Due on the ticket and get to the block before the 1st Due and they are no where to be found...then we become 1st due...it isn't that difficult to figure that out.

                                We is much of the west coast and all of California, we is the ICS groupies.

                                Yes, California is a state, and NYC is a city. California is a state that has ONE well executed, well tested command system across the entire state. It is also a state where the PD & Fire can get along and work together, where public works or the Fish & game can be easily integrated into an operation if needed. I use California as an example because it is 1/10 of the US population, it also just happens to use the system the Feds use so at least 1/10 of the responders in this nation already use NIMS in essense, this post has shown me that there are some large departments in the East and South using the system.
                                Good for them...perhaps they had poor disipline and idiot chiefs who didn't bother to develop a workable system for them and decided to take your system which I suppose works for them. As for Fish and Game...are you on drugs?...I've never been to a fire that required Fish and Game...besides we don't need ICS for the Fish and Game fella to approach and speak with our chief if for whatever reason he needed to be.

                                Add into this that the feds are using NIMS anyway, plus they are paying for the emergency (if FEMA is there they are writing the checks), and supplying grants to FD's so yes it does seem reasonable that they ask you to learn their system if you want to play with them. If the FDNY was signing my paycheck I'd learn what ever system you asked me to.
                                I already stated we are NIMS compliant.(we got a rubber stamp even though our CIMS document is full of BS and conflicting procuedures) Our top Chiefs use parts of it to plan large scale events. Much like similar to your week long forest fires...but we don't see the need to throw out our fireground operations for some unproven flow chart nonsense.

                                NO was a cluster, in part because they government there had no functional plan (something NIMS is trying to avoid). I'm sure the FDNY was able to adapt and overcome because you have professional, highly qualified and very experienced firefighters, can you vouch for every other FD in the nation and say the same? I didn't think so, can you supply the resources (money, will & trainers) to ensure every department can at least fuction at a basic level with every department in their county or state. No, only the Feds can do that, and it is becoming quite apparent that even it may be too big a task for them too. We will continue to have, 9/11's, Katrina's etc, but hey lets not do anything to get it right the next time.
                                Wait...first you state the Feds use NIMS and then here you claim the government had no functional plan? Regardless of a plan...I thought this NIMS would take care of that..afterall that is what "Brownie you doing a great job" was using correct? If the Feds used NIMS and it didn't work...why aren't you calling to develop something else since your Feds fouled it up.

                                I could careless what the rest of the country does...they want to work in sh*t shop and look like a bunch of incompetant fools on the fireground...that is their business. I don't have to account for that...and personally I don't care what the Feds do or want because I've never seen any of them on the firefloor and everything they touch turns to sh#t in a New York second. All they know, is how to completely mismanage my tax dollars and thats all I'll trust them with.

                                I haven't seen anybody (ok, maybe 1 or 2) that has said FDNY, CFD, BFD, DFD, PFD etc can't fight fire safely and aggressivly under their existing systems, what I have seen is several people from some of those departments imply that pretty much the entire west coast and much of the rest of the nation doesn't have a clue how to fight fire. The damn things keep going out, I guess we must be lucky.
                                You don't have a clue how to fight a fire here...you said it yourself that the building I described (highrise with duplex apartment) was a bit strange...that wasn't even half as strange as they get. And I've worked in other parts of the nation(not the East coast) and there are many depts that really don't have a [email protected] clue as to really extinguish a fire and conduct a search and vent properly without almost getting their own men killed.(I had some close calls with some of this nations finest iditots.) But in many cases it wasn't the mens fault...it also comes down to how promotions work in many FDs today...it isn't based on merit, experinece and fitness for the job...it is who sucks enough azz to get away from the field and sitting behind a desk because they don't like fire. When I see 33 year old CODs of proffesional depts that don't run much fire I cringe, because there really can be no leadership from a man who jumped up the ranks so fast...when City managers put value on MBAs and EFO along with looking for the man who would slit his own mothers throat to be the COD...then we have a leadership vacuum. They are the ones who fail to drill their men until they are profiecent in their skills.

                                Don't think so?...someone as usuall implied a few posts ago that persons should watch what they say on here because it might bite them in the azz during some phony promotional interview where essentally the person who sucks the best D$%# wins. As if this was a Secretarys job!

                                Just the same I doubt me or Vinnie or ChicagoFF could come there and know how to fight a forest fire. I don't ever pretend to know the first thing about it or the system you guys use to manage situation. You have a system that works well for you and your fires...and we have ours. It is as simple as that.
                                I have tried to be clear to the point and non-insulting explaining ICS, I have not said or implied (at least I didn't mean to if I did) that FDNY does not have a good workable system.

                                I have alot of respect for the East coast firefighting methods, I even like Leather helmets (unlike some of my fellow left coast FF's). But I'm done here, the books are available, the training is online for free, stick your head in the ground or adapt, improvise and overcome because NIMS is coming like it or not. I'm sorry departments that have there stuff together are having to deal with this but for every department that does, there are probably 5 that don't.
                                Don't worry I don't think you insulted anyone...but as for the 5 who don't know what they are doing...once again...that is their problem...these are the same guys who pull 1 3/4 with fog tips for a fully involved taxpayer(oops another local term) and use 1 3/4 off standpipes with fog tips and refuse to change even when depts with more experience and even their gods at the NFPA state they should change.

                                NIMS or ICS won't solve any of those BASIC problems and that is why this ICS panacea regardless of who uses it won't work.

                                We don't need to adapt...we base our operations on results and Katrina and FEMA and your NIMS had a pretty bad showing. Our IMS teams did ok with what they had...but once again that was a week long incident and other than the Chiefs who gave their daily IAPs the firemen and officers did pretty much the same thing they would do here at any fire...there was no ICS clutter to foul it up.

                                If it makes you feel any better we are getting all this training shoved down our throats too and we invented the thing.

                                Hey its FEMA, they are good at 2 things writing checks and trying to tell everybody else how to do their job (Our IMT's usually come back with grey hair after watching FEMA try and manage an incident).
                                Not really but thanks for the pick-me-up...I think I need to call FTD!

                                FTM-PTB
                                FFFRED
                                MembersZone Subscriber
                                Last edited by FFFRED; 11-14-2006, 12:47 PM.

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X