searching off guidelines

[Paul]

Billy,


Guide Lines are possibly the one item on a fire appliance that no one ever hopes to use in their career.  They are used in conditions that are of the most challenging.  As you have already said the fact that tie off points are unreliable and very difficult to tie, especially with the fire gloves used, even with the modern soft leather yellow type (sorry can not remember what they are called) the task of moving through a building with a line bag clipped to your BA set in conditions that you need every sense available to you is one I would wish upon no one.


In addition to this, I think if we were all totally honest here, to be totally proficient, competent and at ease with using this kit, then it would need to be used in training on a frequent basis, and the fact of the matter is that it simply is not.  No one want to use it, no one likes using it so everyone does the bare minimum to get the tick in the box.  As I think you would all agree this simply is n’t sufficient for this type of kit.  

Again, all Stations are competent with using kit such as PPV fans, RTC kit, and in general the kit that is used on jobs every day of the week.  Guide lines do not come into this category.  Serving officers with many years service only ever use them on the drill ground once or twice a year.  And from past experience I have seen things that would make you think twice to committing this kit on the drill ground, never mind in anger.

In simple terms, human behaviour, we have all seen the effects that heat and humidity have to stress levels and logical thought.  Try to deploy a guide line under such conditions, no thank you.
Only my opinion, but I think you will see a general consensus of opinion.

Paul

[Billy]

Psmith

I just think that if you could secure guidelines properly in buildings and if you could read the indicator tabs in all conditions, they would be far better and safer to use than they are now!
Obviously some people on here disagree, although they have not said what the other problems are.

All people have said is that "I would never use them", "they are really dangerous" and they "cause families to lose loved ones"

Heaven forbid any one ends up in court for a fatal accident enquiry and guidelines have been cited- whether used or not.

We as a service are so open to claims either way!

If we use them and things go wrong the OIC is  exposed for using a piece of equipment he may believe to be "really dangerous"

If we don't use them and things go wrong, the OIC is exposed for not using a piece of equipment for the purpose it was designed for!

If people cannot see these facts then I really despair.

 It won't be long before fire fighters who are injured, sue fire authorities for bad decisions made by OIC and here is a prime example of how it could happen.

[Paul]

Billy,

I just think that in the age of GPS and such marvellous technology, to be relying upon a line that is tied to something, even if it is a purpose made tie off point, surely there must be something better than guide lines. Surely moving away from lines and working from a GPS type system would be the way forward??

 I do get where your coming from but, I really do think its time we revisited the whole process in a radical manner.  After all, this technology was not available when such antiquated and essentially dangerous equipment first came into service.

Paul

[Billy]

Paul

I totally agree with you in that we should try and find a better method of searching large buildings and if something comes up- I will be one of  the first to welcome it.

But until then, lets sort out the things we all know are wrong by coming up with systems tested and endorsed by firefighters who say that the new design is a vast improvement on the current one.

In relation to your reference to antiquated and dangerous equipment, what is so dangerous about a piece of equipment that should lead you out of a building in zero visibility?

That is how it should work and that is how we need it to work!

And we also need guys like Fireftrm and yourself to not only challenge what we do just now, but come up with solutions!


PS.

GPS would be great, but it cannot be relied upon to work within premises.

[fireftrm]

Billy, this threa had run before, I have given full and detailed reasons why GLs are dangerous, why they should never be used and what we can do without them. I am not going into the whole lists again but will use some here:

With the equipment available to the modern firefighter there should be no time when we go into a zero visiblity building large enough that a GL would have been used in the past.

Why search the zero visiblity building anyway? If it is on fire you have a hose and your string will burn through. If there were people in before the fire started (and the smoke is such to give zero visibility) then by the time you have laid the line they will be dead anyway. If there is no-one in then neither should we be. In any on eof these conditions ventilating would have solved the problem and GLS exarcerbated it.

Forget tie off points, nobody is ever going to persuade building occupiers to fit hooks all round their walls in case we want to use a GL. After all the very great majority of Ffs would tell them that we wouldn't be using such stuff anyway. Different identification of the travel drection may help the antiquated thing gain some followers, but does nothing about the time it takes, or the futility.

Remember to ask the question.........'Why are we searching the building?' When answering also accept that GLs were designed to aid Ffs finding the way out of buildings they were SENT IN TO SEARCH. Remove the reason for the 'search' and the GL loses any rationale.


As an aside and for Lee we no longer require Ffs to demonstrate competence in the practical use of GLs during their NVQ, they require the knowledge and understanding of them. We have accepted that this is a piece of equipment we would do anything and everything our arsenal of techiniques and equipment capabilities give us to avoid. For maintenance they need to get one out once a year - though Q&A would still be acceptable.

[swampy]

Hi' this is my first look at this site and I’ve read some of your comments regarding Guidelines, i am in my last 6 months of 30 years service, this last year I’ve been tasked as a BAi with running around the brigade refreshing all ops personnel on guidelines and their associated procedures,
Why?

Well we had a disastrous set of exercises in 2003 which if they had been jobs we could have lost quite a few.

I find it strange that i can agree and disagree with the comments that you all make. For instance, guidelines by definition must be a reasonable safe system of work,  
Why?
Well, I’m connected to a line that is tied off out side the risk; I have a defined route out that must be safer than no guideline,

I think the key thing to remember is that it’s an old system of work, devised in the days of the Covent garden & Smithfield Market incidents, Proto sets with one hour duration, lack of command and control of BA wearers etc etc.

I believe that the main cause in the loss of confidence in this piece of equipment is the lack of a coherent written policy! 1/97 and deployment strategies by brigades for the use of guidelines and its associated procedures, further to that the lack of a robust training regime in brigades at all levels ff to CFO adds to an air of indecision and confusion when using guidelines.


 A Risk Based Approach
We are now and have been for some time using a risk-based approach in all aspects of our work environment and as such must continually review and update our so-called safe systems of work.

I believe that we the fire service as a whole have failed to do this regarding guidelines.    

Why must we wait for national guidance, when we are sure in our own mind what needs to be done, we have already carried out a review of our procedures and found them lacking we can make the guideline procedure much safer with (in some cases) minor alterations, to certain pieces of equipment and procedures (a safer system of work)

I believe that there is not a court in the land that would prosecute a brigade for making a system of work safer?  

Offensive Fire Fighting using Hosereels
Following the incident in Hertfordshire, which resulted in the tragic loss of life of two fire fighters, we have realised that there is a need to review the safe system of work for the committing of BA crews into a fire risk environment (Offensive Fire-fighting) and have developed and implemented a training program to reflect this, the major implication being that a BA team should not enter a risk area without the minimum of a fire fighting hosereel.
This is a sound principle but can be difficult to implement and it needs more work

This procedure will have a direct effect on guideline use, as the maximum effective penetration depth of a BA team will be other than the contents of your cylinder, will be the length of one-hosereel drum, this being effectively 60 metres.

We should now be considering set duration and hosereel length as the defining factors as apposed to guideline length?








Along with the improvements in technology, I think we are now moving towards the possibility of making guidelines redundant?


The Future
With the current development in technology, Thermal Image Head up displays, GPS, Night Vision, Telemetry, PPV, and a robust system of communications, I now believe that we are moving towards the possibility of making Guidelines redundant,

I believe that with the following 3 key points are in place as a safe system of work.
I think we could re-evaluate guidelines as a safe system of work
 
1.   A robust system of communications.  
2.   On reaching stage 3 PPV offensive, and
3.   Effective Thermal Image.             

Lee999 your question is there an alternative to G/L? Well how about this.

We all use the ICS system of sectors

Teams of five to enter 1 & 2 on the branch pulsing, guided by 3 who has the thermal image camera
He could lead the team to the casualty or seat of the fire, with number 4 and 5 as the rescue team.
It must be quicker than using guidelines and it may still be salvable life    

Defining factors
Cylinder contents
Hosereel length 1 possibly 2 drum lengths
Physical effects on the team
Resources in manpower and equipment  
 
 This is only a small part of my recomendations all the above are my thoughts and not the thoughts of my brigade
cheers people, keep talking we need to communicat to solve these issues.

[Billy]

Swampy

Far too much sense in your comments as obviously you have looked at this in great detail.

I totally agree with your comment,
QUOTE- "Along with the improvements in technology, I think we are now moving towards the possibility of making guidelines redundant?"

My point was, and always has been sorting the problems we all know there are with guidelines  just now until something better comes up.

We don't have TIC's on all appliances though, but I think your suggestions are the best I personally have heard so far.

[fireftrm]

TICS have been ordered for all front line appliances by the ODPM in England, or enough to make up that many allowing for FRS existing equipment, where this is not the case (no idea about Wales and Scotland) then the correct way forward is to campaign for them, not a new GL design.

[Billy]

Fireftrm

I think it is the case in Scotland that we are getting discounted TICs, but in my Service, we have no where near a TIC on all appliances!

[rips]

"MORE FIRE CREWS HAVE BEEN KILLED BY IMPROPER USE OF P.P.V. THAN THEY HAVE BY IMPROPER USE OF GUIDELINES!"

Billy, with regards to the above statement, what information do you have to back it up?

[Billy]

rips
I can only think of 2 deaths using guidelines in the whole of the UK ever!
Look at instances where US fire crews have been killed using PPV improperly. Even people on this site have made mention of the dangers of PPV if not used correctly and to learn from their experiences!

Iwill no doubt be able to check the web and get you details if you require so let me know.

[fireftrm]

Billy wasn't Fleur using a GL?

[Billy]

Fireftrm

I didn't hear that her death was due to improper use of Guidelines, and thought it was a rapid collapse of a sandwich panel building, although I may be wrong!

[fireftrm]

Nope it was a standard construction supermarket (like you would find in many small towns - converted/extended from a standard shop in a row of same) - apparent confusions over the use of the GL as well as HR made the incident worse.

The LISP building was in H&R and was a cold store.

[Billy]

Fireftrm

Confusion of the GL, you  say- Could they not read the tabs or had they nowhere to secure it onto?