Letters to the Editor
DEPARTMENTS
Lack of prevention was the real tragedy in Brooklyn’s explosion and building collapse
I just read, in your December 1987 issue, the story of another tragedy, entitled “Order to Disorder.” Of course it’s too bad that we only publicize our failures. However, it’s even worse when we only publicize a part of our failures. It seems that all progress in the American fire service is based upon failures. But if we don’t profit from them, we’re destined to relive our history.
This article was well written as far as describing after-the-fact fire suppression. I’m certain that all was done that could be done after the explosion. The question is, Why wasn’t something done earlier?
Why was the plumbing supply company permitted to store propane and acetylene cylinders in the cellar of an occupied building? Whose responsibility was it to see that such storage was not permitted? I know of no fire code that permits storage of compressed, flammable gases beneath or within an occupied space-—much less one where part of the building is being used as a residential occupancy.
Is this another case of “that’s not my job,” so fire suppression forces don’t inspect buildings in which they might fight a fire? Is this a case where the fire prevention bureau attempts to inspect once a year, or even less?
There is even a more pressing problem. If the fire suppression forces had inspected the building, would they have recognized the hazard? Even if firefighters had been trained to the objectives of NFPA 1001 Level III, they wouldn’t have been required to have knowledge of flammable liquids or compressed gases. Would the firefighters only have looked for a method of preplanning the fire when it did happen, or do they have a knowledge of prevention?
Yes, we publicize our tragedies, but let’s tell the whole story. The real failure of the Brooklyn incident started not at the explosion, but with not preventing it.
Howard Boyd
Fire Protection Consultant Nashville, Tenn.
The battalion chief: In or out?
First, let me say that I have been reading Fire Engineering for more than 50 years and believe it to be the finest publication for the fire service. As its current editor, you have been doing a splendid job in obtaining articles that discuss the most serious problems facing the fire service today.
Your editorials add a penetrating analysis to some of these problems. “Where’s the Fire, Lady?,” in the September issue, was excellent! In light of that editorial’s message on size-up procedure, here’s something for your readers to think about:
Upon arriving at the scene of a reported high-rise fire, should the battalion chief send his adjutant inside with a portable radio to determine and report the location and extent of the fire, so he can call for additional help and direct arriving companies? Or should the battalion chief leave his adjutant in the car to listen for his report while he inspects the fire himself?
Charles W. Bahme
Retired Deputy Chief
Los Angeles Fire Department
Unifying the fire service one word at a time
1 read with extreme interest your November 1987 editorial, “Ayes in Seattle,” which was based on your experience at the second annual Women in Fire Suppression conference in Seattle.
Someday, you wrote, the fire service will mature to the point where we won’t stumble over the use of personpower to replace manpower. One problem people create in an honest attempt to develop such gender-neutral language is artificially created words. There is an appropriate replacement for manpower: personnel. For example, “We have insufficient personnel to staff the engine company.”
The English language has a rich enough vocabulary to provide many good words that are of long-standing usage to replace words that are now considered to be a slur to a particular race, sex, or other group. It’s easy (given that one may have to spend some time with a good dictionary) to adjust one’s vocabulary to a neutral style of speaking and writing. People do not have to resort to artificially created words that are tongue twisters to achieve the same goal.
It’s possible, with very little effort, to create a situation in which all the fire service joins together not in the brotherhood or in the sisterhood, not in the fellowship, but as firefighters dedicated to the preservation of life and property. The fire service is, and always has been in this country, a leader rather than a follower of public opinion.
Timothy R.S. Campbell
Director of Emergency Services
Chester County, Pa.
A welcome “outsider’s” perspective on women
I’m writing to thank you for the supportive editorial you wrote in the November 1987 issue. I’m sure the description of your transition from distrust and negative anticipation to enjoyment and positive communication was an eye-opener to many.
From my perspective, it’s often easy to forget, or not to realize at all, that these feelings of negativism are common to people who haven’t been involved with our organization, Women in Fire Suppression. I’ve been immersed in WFS work for the past five years and more, and your “outsider’s” perspective was a good jolt back towards reality for me.
Terese M. Floren Coordinator, Women in Fire
Suppression Dayton, Ohio
