LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Fitter firefighters
I read your “Editor’s Opinion” (“Another Friend Died Today”) in the October 1989 issue of Fire Engineering with both interest and sympathy. It is not easy to lose someone who is close, and the firefighting procession lends itself to a dangerous as well as stressful way of life.
Having just returned from attending the fire chiefs’ show in Indianapolis, I wish you had made a real “plug” for ongoing physical fitness standards and programs for firefighters. A statistic such as “50 percent of on-the-job deaths of firefighters are due to heart attacks” is not very pleasant or acceptable. It is especially not acceptable when there is such a wealth of information available that indicates exercise can combat many of these occurrences and other stress-related problems.
Your magazine does a great job in so many areas of coverage and, as you say, “Firefighter protection is not only turnouts and helmets.” A physically and mentally fit firefighter has and would seem to have many advantages. Keep up the good work and let’s work together for fitter firefighter professionals.
Dr. A. William Fleming
Director, Government Marketing and Sales Life Fitness Inc. Irvine, California
Firehouse construction
I wish to compliment you on your October 1989 article “From the Ground Up: Constructing or Reconstructing a Modern Firehouse” by Paul J. DeSilva.
In the 20 years that I have been teaching architecture, I have had many fine experiences using fire stations as teaching tools. They have ranged from small independent rural houses to medum-size cities (Muncie, IN) and large departments (Charlotte, NC). Sometimes I have initiated the contract because I knew the department was looking ahead and at other times the departments have contacted me. Students, perhaps because of childhood books about firefighters, have always responded enthusiastically.
Fire departments contemplating a new or revised facility may wish to contact an architecture education program for a “public service” academic project. While the students under the guidance of their professors cannot be the “architects” of the facility, they can produce a number of design alternatives and make the department’s building committee a more informed client when a design professional is brought into the picture.
We have had one case where the department was so pleased with the results of a student’s projects that it worked out an agreement whereby the responsible professional acquired the rights to the design concept. Of course design is just one phase of the project. As De Silva points out, there is still much to be done to get the project completed.
I would, however, like to take two exceptions to De Silva’s article. He states on page 79, “(The building committee) should keep in mind the functional capacities of the building, not its aesthetic value….” I do not separate function from aesthetics. The department’s public relations efforts are both substance and image. A fire station should be a “display case” for public contact. It makes no sense to me to house a million dollars worth of fire apparatus in a way that does not acknowledge the public’s fascination with our equipment and what we do. Furthermore, we owe it to our community to erect notable public service buildings. These buildings, in which citizens can take pride, are the very basis for a sense of community. They represent the collective common good.
A second exception point is on page 80, “…the architect should have experience in the design of firematic facilities.” The building committee should be more concerned with the thoroughness with which the designer approaches any project. The best designers treat each project as if it were their first experience—period. The committee should insist that they and their designer visit other facilities, both old and new, together and that the designer do “case studies.” The design journals are currently the only good sources for these.
Over the years I have visited more than 50 fire stations in 30 jurisdictions. Some were outstanding. They all should be.
D.L. Collins
Professor of Architecture Lieutenant, Clemson University Fire Department Clemson, South Carolina
The October 1989 issue of Fire Engineering is filled with articles that should, be very useful to the fire service community and I believe a hearty thanks is due.
In particular, the article on fire stations is excellent, but I am disturbed by the absence of an item on the contract document summary and the related lack of emphasis. Conspicuous by its omission is any mention of the fire protection design for the fire station. This should include a fire detection and. alarm system, a fixed extinguishing system for the kitchen cooking area, and surely a complete automatic fire sprinkler system throughout the structure.
Can we sincerely preach the concept of built-in fire protection and life safety without embracing it for ourselves? Of course there are other considerations to the fire protection and life safety design such as means of egress, control of spills, control of hazardous vapors and fumes, and more.
Let’s put our money where our mouth is and practice what we preach. Fire departments should instruct their architects to include fire protection design even if it is not a code requirement. In fact, each fire department should insist that the architect include a competent fire protection engineer as an integral part of the design team. The fire protection engineer should be able to design all of the necessary fire protection systems for inclusion in the contract documents and should provide the necessary oversight of the fire protection and life safety design of the entire project. (To locate possible fire protection engineers for a design team, contact the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, 60 Batterymarch Street, Boston, MA 02110.)
Fire department personnel and visitors deserve quality fire protection and life safety, and the advertising for our mission isn’t bad either.
William H. Everard, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer Alexandria, Virginia
Advantages of composites
I read with great interest Carl Kietzke’s article “Writing Pumper Specifications That Get Results” in your October 1989 issue. It was a well-written document that helped simplify what is for many a relatively difficult and very time-consuming process.
I must, however, comment on an area that was not thoroughly discussed. In talking about body construction materials, fiberglass-reinforced plastics or “composites” were mentioned as having certain limitations or drawbacks as to their use in fire apparatus construction. Compared with other commonly used construction materials, the advantages of composites are significantly greater.
Composite technology produces some of the strongest materials known to man. These materials are noncorrosive, easy to repair, and lightweight, which make them ideal for fire apparatus body construction. The strengths and acceptance of these materials is obvious throughout other parts of the fire service. Composite technology is found in air cylinders, axe handles, pike poles, and one of our more relied-on pieces of equipment—our helmets.
The misconception that composite apparatus construction may also readily burn is not entirely correct. Some composites, if not properly engineered, will melt when exposed to high temperatures. Other composites, like those used in Vision cookware, can withstand heat that will turn most metals to liquid.
The use of composite technology in fire apparatus construction is long overdue. The utilization of this technology is lmited only by our desire for improvement in fire apparatus construction.
Jonathan W. Schrumm
Northeastern Fire Associates, Inc. Cheshire, Connecticut
Letters on letters
After reading “Letters to the Editor” in the October 1989 issue, I felt compelled to comment on two of them. There is some correlation between the two.
In the first, David E. Gwyn believes steam burns to firefighters are a myth. It’s obvious he has never been in a structure where someone upset the thermal balance with a fog stream. A big problem here is the penetrating effect of moist heat. Although I don’t have the test figures at hand, I know there is a considerable difference in tissue damage between moist and dry heat at given temperatures.
In the next letter, George B. Tierney insinuates we should leave an ear out to be used as a temperature indicator. In the fires common today, by the time discomfort is sensed it may be too late. These fires develop rapidly and reach much higher temperatures than previously due to the composition of the contents. Thermal inversions can be instantaneous. Body parts are not reliable indicators of dangerous temperatures, and they certainly cannot predict rapid development of problems.
Training and experience are more important than ever. Because most departments are running less fire calls, the judicious use of live fire training is a must. Officers need to have a working knowledge of fire dynamics, building construction, and tactics to be able to make the judgmental calls that minimize risks to firefighters. I seldom say “always” or “never,” but here are two: The use of full protective gear must be SOP and strictly enforced always, and the life of a crew member should never be placed in jeopardy to save a structure.
Allen B. Clark, Jr.
Fire Service Consultant Salina, Pennsylvania
Improving our image
Among your readers there are a few of us who read the editorial. (There was a time when I didn’t, but that was before I had to write one and learned to appreciate their content.) I want you to know that I think the one in your November 1989 issue (“To Market, To Market…”) is outstanding.
Hopefully, some will get the message. The fire service could do much to improve its own well being and its image. Having something to be proud of and sharing that pride will let the public know that firefighters do care.
Clinton H. Smoke, Jr.
Head, Fire Science Programs Northern Virginia Community College Annandale, Virginia
Learning from photos
I find it hard to believe that all the letters written to editors over the years about unsafe practices by firefighters still have not been addressed.
In your October 1989 issue, page 42 shows a firefighter with no face and lung protection on and boots rolled down, climbing a possibly unsafe fire escape ladder. Many indicators point to a serious problem at this incident. The article tells us a child is in the building and there is black carbon-laden smoke exiting out the window that the firefighter is at. The neighborhood doesn’t appear to be the best—graffiti on the walls and dogs that want to make a meal out of you. With all the above against you, why isn’t the SCBA on properly and the boots rolled down?
If a flashover occurred or an arson device caused an explosion, the photo that you printed on page 42 would not have been published. I hope that anyone who sees this photo learns something—don’t do it!
John W. Prestosz
Lieutenant Salem (NH) Fire Department
“Fire Loss Management” series
I enjoyed and have been educated by Francis L. Brannigan’s Building Construction for the Fire Service book, and currently I find his series “Fire Loss Management” to be most thought-provoking and a real catalyst for action. Thank you very much for the many hours of enjoyable reading.
Kurt Van Dahm
Director, Fire Prevention Bureau Downers Grove (IL) Fire Department
In his article “Unfriendly Causes of Fire, Continued” in the September 1989 issue, Francis L. Brannigan says to “use nonsparking tools where flammable vapors are present.”
There is a concern that this may lead to a false sense of security, and your readers may wish to refer to Spark Ignition Properties of Hand Tools (PSD 2214) published by the American Petroleum Institute in October 1980. This paper concludes, “The Institute’s position is that the use of special nonferrous hand tools, sometimes referred to as nonsparking tools, is not warranted as a fire prevention measure applicable to oil and gas operations.”
Brannigan continues, “These tools are made of copper hardened with a beryllium alloy so that no sparks occur when the tool slips.” It is often found that small pieces of dirt or grit become embedded in the metal after some use, and this can destroy the nonsparking property. It should be pointed out that the book Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials (5th edition) by N. Irving Sax states, “Beryllium-Copper Alloy. A metallic alloy. Bex Cuy. THR = Cases of berylliosis have been reported from exposure to so-called low beryllium, alloys. See beryllium compounds.”
M.A. McCowan
Reed Stenhouse Limited Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Setting up a water rescue team
The Lakeside Fire District is in search of information and recommendations from fire departments that have water rescue teams. We are attempting to form a team for the expressed purpose of rescue/recovery and not body retrieval.
We are interested in providing a quick and efficient service for those who might have suffered trauma in boating accidents, for rescuing people from overturned pleasure boats, and for those who may have suffered neck, back, and head injuries from falls from boats.
We have several small lakes in our district, which have limited use for fishing and swimming—no water skiing, etc. We have been experiencing some incidents of fishermen falling over their boats and suffering spinal injuries, as well as some children who have tipped over canoes or other small boats and clung to the side.
If there are any departments that have experience in these areas and would provide us with information on equipment, training, and other essential advice, please write:
Chief Paul E. Albinger Jr. Lakeside Fire District P.O. Box 1678 Lakeside, AZ 85929 (602) 368-6112
In advance, I thank you for your help and cooperation.
Paul E. Albinger Jr.
Fire Chief Lakeside (AZ) Fire District
