Some shared views
John J. O`Brien
Rescue #1
Boston (MA) Fire Department
U. Here are a few ideas that have been on my back burner.
Firefighting has become a dinosaur of late. We are now all technical providers in a variety of fields U. Departments expect a few members to be expertly trained in collapse, rope, confined space, haz mat, trench, water, and incident command. One important ingredient is missing: how to properly extinguish a fire in a building without writing a new SOP for each endeavor.
If the fire service wants sophisticated rescue companies–and I agree we need them–let`s train them in separate disciplines for each eventuality. This costs money for personnel, apparatus, and the required training. Let`s do it on a more comprehensive scale. Train those who wish to be trained, and in the specialties needed. Unions will have to cooperate because a commitment will be required–by this I mean a length of service in the desired discipline. Therefore, seniority, pay, and transfers will have to be discussed among union and city as well as union and brotherhood.
Training is one thing; knowledge is another. Throwing ladders and running lines up and into a burning building look great on TV after we have had basic training in these areas. Fire acts differently than it does in textbooks. Most of us know this by now. Throw a ladder, run a line, and do all we were instructed, but we`d better–and I emphasize this–know how fire reacts. Educate the prospective firefighter in the chemistry of fire. I do not mean attain a Ph.D., but learn what a fire can and will do in varying circumstances so there will be an even chance to win the battle and maybe, just maybe, save the firefighter`s life.
Incident command is an educational must, many are saying. This noble structure has been around for many years U. Incident command has become the cure-all for every incident emergency personnel face today. It is time to start trimming–to borrow a phrase, How many boxes and arrows does it take to accomplish the task at hand? The term IC properly implies that a commander is in charge. Can he apply his ideas to the problem with self-assured and infinite wisdom if said problem arose from our current quandary of overtechnicality? If such were to occur on my tour, I hope the person in charge, if not completely educated in the incident challenging him, would defer to one who is. Is it better to know a lot about a little or a little about a lot? I will let my dilemma sink in for a moment.
The fire service is now confronted with difficult choices, specializations that definitely will expand some unneeded aspects to the detriment of others. There will always be a need for such specialties, but let us not forget our basic and fundamental responsibilities–fighting fires and saving lives.
Many learned colleagues have maintained the back-to-basics approach, which has my total endorsement. Teach fire behavior, and train to counteract its unpredictability. Educate chief officers in certain disciplines as we do our technically advanced brothers. Above all, keep it simple.
