Guide line maximum length...

[Peter]

I think you forget why guidelines were introduced in the 1st instance - having seen the room where a Ff died because he couldn't locate the door makes me hesitate to say we should ditch the 'bit of string' which could have led him to safety.

[Billy]

PETER

I totally agree with you and believe that we should keep it as simple as possible when using BA.

What is wrong with following a "piece of string" back to your exact door of entry instead of counting doors, marking walls, memorising certain objects and the like to find your way out, especially when you may be exhausted.

What is wrong with keeping it so simple that you cannot get lost?

[fireftrm]

I am absolutley stunned that so few other people have grasped the basic flaw in the 'keep guidelines' argument. There should never  be a need to use one.
They are pieces of string, string burns therefore they can't be used where there is still a fire burning (or shouldn't!).
We have ways of getting rid of smoke.
We have tools to see through smoke if the building is still on fire and we are afraid of letting the smoke out.
No one should ever be lost in a building without a guideline, BA training is to search without one - except for all those large areas, with the fire out but smokelogged, where we used to train for GLs - but where we should now use PPV etc.

Is there no-on eese who sees the pointlessness and danger of these pieces of string. To Peter above - firefighters dying because they couldn't find their way out, now when did that last happen? Oh, yes - of course it was when they were following a guideline, in an area where its use was really inappropriate.

[Gyp]

I find it difficult to believe that UK Fire Service personnel are contemplating the use of GLs !

I have used GLs,( Mines Rescue, Offshore Firefighting, PetroChem and LAFRS)I have trained people to use them, and after 25 years of firefighting would not advocate their use at any incident be it building, structure or vessel. Risk assess it ! can you justify it's use!

Alternatives :- PPV, Tact Vent, Passive Firefighting

[Billy]

FIREFTRM


This is at least the second time on this topic that you mention string burns and therefore you cannot use it when there is still a fire burning.

Well in case you didn't know,  BA teams can burn as well and that is why we are taught not to pass fire in the first place, so that part of your argument is discounted.

You mention that we have ways of seeing through smoke (TIC's), but would you carry out a search of a building with a TIC?

Hopefully not, as if you have used one at an incident or even in training, you will realise that they are really good at showing up differences in heat, but if the room or area is the same temperature, it all just looks grey!

You mention that the last time people died in BA they were using guidelines but you seem to overlook the fact that the crews misread the cord tabs AT LEAST THREE TIMES during this incident in question and the new design is intended to solve this problem.

I agree that PPV is a greater method of control, but what is wrong with something that will lead you back to your point of entry, even with zero visibility!


GYP

What is the problem with guidelines, and if the marking system was easy to read with your gloves on, and the guideline was properly secured, would this make it worth considering?

[fireftrm]

Billy:

You say Well in case you didn't know, BA teams can burn as well and that is why we are taught not to pass fire in the first place, so that part of your argument is discounted. Strange I have always been taught to put fires out, not walk past them. Leaving them alone tends to cause more problems - like the building burning down/collapsing/killing more people etc.

BA teams can burn yes - that is why we are taught ot put the fire out! We laso make sure that they are in PPE, designed to withstand heat and restrict the time they spend in such conditions. String, however cannot be taught (unless pulled tightly!) and cannot put the fire out. Therefore we are taught to use guidelines only in heavily smokelogged areas - not near the fire. POINTLESS - LET THE SMOKE OUT INSTEAD - PROBLEM SOLVED.

TICs see heat differneces - yes good point. All contents and spaces the same temperature therefore appear the same colour - also true. HOWEVER the only likelyhood of finding this in any enclosed space is DURING a flashover or backdraught. We are taught to spot the signs of these without TICs and should never be in a situation where this occurs. It is theoretically possible for the total thermal radiation of an area to be the same if left for a very long time - again theoretical I am unsure if it ever occurs, try the TIC in a standard room with all contents left untouched for a few hours. Walk in and (using the all will be at the same temperature rule) look around with the TIC, I would be amazed if you saw only grey. Same applies in an compartment on fire, there are thermal differences.

PPV is much the best as you correctly say.

The Ffs who died did so as a result of confusion over the line, again correct.

Your design will overcome most of the problems associated with the existing guidleine, bar one - the pointlessness of them at all. Whilst I fully appreciate the work you have done in designing this replacement it does not change my view that guidelines should be consigned to museums.

I have no doubt that designs for new battleships were on the cards before Pearl Harbor and there were proponents for building them, but Aircraft Carriers were clearly the correct move. Lets not be drawn into creating new designs for fire service equipment, just because we have always had the old one, lets look for the new equipment instead and adopt new practices to boot.

[Billy]

FIREFTRM

The point I am making is that we all know what the problems are with the current guidelines, and even you, who is extremely sceptical about Guidelines has admitted that the new design will solve all the problems with the current Guideline.

If we cannot replace equipment that we know cannot be read with gloves on-what chance do we have of Brigades paying out thousands of pounds more for PPV and TICs.
Heaven help us if we have another Incident where Crews are lost, or even injured due to removing their gloves to read the tabs on guidelines.

I do agree that PPV and TICs would be great, but until then equipment that works would be nice!

[Acco]

FIRETRM

I am an Australian Firefighter and we use a General Perpose Guide Line to neesesitate a primary serach only, that is is a quick search and rescue of rooms.

It has been a common technique to do so, since I become a part of the countries largest urban brigade. We use a pocket guide of no more than 2 to 3 metres (9 to 28 feet) and had little to no problems with it.

[messy]

Interesting stuff.

Changing the debate a little whther we should/shouldn't use them, what about HOW we use them?

One of my (many) concerns with GLs is the idea of tying them off at shoulder level. All very well if it's cold on the way in and on the way out, but what happens if things warm up a bit, perhaps even forcing a withdrawal ?

We all know that it's sometimes not possible to stand in these circumstances so the idea of attempting to reach a shoulder high tie off point is ridiculous.

Maybe (until something better is supplied) we should tie off at low level. OK some clumsy git might trip over, but at least the GL will be available if it's needed in a hurry

[justso]

is it smoke or flammable gases nowadays ?  no ff should enter such a risk without the minimum of a hosereel so that if needed they can protect themselves therefore they can follow the guideline in/out and have the added protection of the hosereel which if required can be followed out if problems occur with the guideline.

[Acco]

Following back a charge hoseline is the best technique for recovering your steps to an exit.

But your searching say a kitchen that is completely dark on the other side of the house with little to no flammable gasses and your conducting a primary search for victims it can become extremley hard to drap a charged hoseline around the furniture.

A guide line may be the best option.

Or you a conducting a primary search of a nursing home with 100s of rooms the power has been cut trying to drag a charged hoseline around 12ft by 12ft rooms can be extremely hard too.

[Billy]

Just a quick point in relation to training with Guidelines within Brigades- I have visited a number of BA training complexes throughout the country and most of them have tie-off handles fitted in corners to allow crews to deploy the lines properly!
I also was present at a guideline exercise within a derelict building which had nothing in the corners to secure the line onto.
This resulted in the line being pulled tight, cutting the corner and going right over an open vehicle pit!
The exercise was stopped before anyone got injured, but the point I am making is that we know what the problems are in securing guidelines, even in a controlled environment, so we fit handles.

Why don't we use health and safety legislation to protect fire crews and when we are carrying out our operational information gathering of premises, we identify premises where we may use guidelines, and if we cannot secure them- we inform the owners of the premises.
They can either fit securing hooks at strategic points or we don't use guidelines within their premises!

The Fire Authority has then carried out a proper risk assessment in relation to the risk to crews in case of a fire within the premises and it takes the pressure off the initial OIC in deciding whether or not to use guidelines.

There is also a guideline securing hook available now that requires no tying of the line and is simply an inobtrusive, spring  steel device that locks the guideline in place, quickly and securely.

Even in a large building, the fitting costs would be minimal to the owners, and would only serve to increase the safety of fire crews if there was a fire within the premises.

How quickly do you think you could deploy a guideline if you never had to  tie it off, but simply clip it into the securing hooks which are fitted where we would need them!

Your comments on this suggestion would be gratefully received.

[messy]

Simple solution - I reckon we shouldn't tie them off at all!

This follows the point I made earlier in the thread about using inappropriately high tie off points.

Of course a completely new operational and training strategy would need to be developed. However, even using today's procedures, GLs have only ever indicated the way out. They do not indicate a safe route and never have done.

The use of securing hooks in training centres is a new one on me and totally bloody ridiculous. If Brigades want to use tie off points in specific areas of the BA centre, then false pipework, conduit or other building fittings should be designed in to the centre to attempt to create realistic scenarios. Maybe some corners should be left intentionally 'plain'. That's what is out in there in the real world.

As for the provision of dedicated tie off points within buildings (as a FS/H&S measure): I can think of a thousand buildings which may need guidelines in the event of a fire where is would be unrealistic and perhaps impossible to install these ugly & expensive 'handles' for the rare event that GLs may be used.

With the modern trend of spineless officers (sorry managers using defensive FF strategies) GLs will be used less and less. (in 27 years I have used them in anger twice)

Upgraded AFD, Sprinklers, and smoke extraction are perhaps a better way in such buildings which protect occupants the building and firefighters.

[fireftrm]

Messy

I think we should have more spine. Send more Ffs in to positions where we have no idea whether they are safe.

The building is on fire and there  is no one in!
...well let's change that. Send in a couple of Ffs, that should sort it out.

The building is smokelogged with toxic smoke, there are people in there. They have been in the smoke for at least 10  minutes already and are probably dead!
.....well never mind that. Let's send in some Ffs with some string and ensure we search everywhere off it. Never mind venbtilation, or such techie stuff as TICs, we are macho and brave..........

Look, look, a single storey warehose with that sandwich stuff, all floppy in the heat and loads of smoke off the foam bits!
.....come on lads, get to it, get in there with that hose! Go on, never mind the intense heat, or the collapsing walls, get in. No spine? Well get off my fireground! Get me a hairy moustached fireman with shoulders the size of a bulls and get him in there to fight that damned flame!

Help, help, someone fell in the lake 10 minutes ago and disappeared!
.....no worries we are macho firemen, one of us will jump straight in and we can swim through anything, see through anything and can survive underwater (without SCUBA) for hours. Not a problem. What do you mean Ff? You have no safe way of going underwater to look for the missing person? Get off my incident ground! Send me another hero.


Spineless officers or sensible, risk assessed ones?

I will leave you to judge.

PS anyone think that there may be the deaths of any firefighters in any of the offensive decisions made above? Takes some guts to make a decision not to go in for the sake of the safety of your staff.

[Billy]

The point I was trying to make is that if we cannot secure the guidelines inside the building- we shouldn't use them at all.
And if we do a proper operational risk assessment of buildings within our area and think we may have to use guidelines- we tell the owners.

If they fit hooks, we use guidelines- if not , we don't!

This is what professional fire crews should be doing when we do risk assessments.
 Remember we are doing these assessments for the safety and protection of fire crews and the buildings already will have been fitted with systems to protect the occupants.

Messy

You mention that securing hooks are 'bloody ridiculous' but  in the same sentence you say that you should  fit false pipework instead !

If there is pipework in the building that can be used to secure the guideline then you will not need securing hooks!

as for the 'ugly and expensive handles'  -
How much do they cost?
What do they look like?

How many buildings are fitted with sprinkler systems and how many have actually  went off?

The hook I saw was about 3cm by 1cm and to fully fit a large building would only cost a few hundred pounds!

What price would you ask owners to pay to ensure that fire crews can use the equipment on the appliance safely and efficiently to protect THEIR PREMISES IN CASE OF FIRE?



Again, this suggestion is for the protection of fire crews only, when we are trying to protect someone elses property, and I make no apologies for such.