Hi Stuart; the first question I would ask judging from your post is, are you providing an opportunity for the LA crews to train on their own or are they working alongside your RFFS? The point being that the multi-agency exercise we planned was to represent something the external agencies would likely attend at the airport.
I stated during the planning phase that based on the brigade's first responders (both RDS stations) not anticipating 'in attendance' quicker than eight minutes from time of call, in reality at our category if the RFFS hadn't suppressed the fire by that stage there would be little left for them to do but help damp down, and if the RFFS had extinguished the fire there would be no fire for them to tackle anyway.
Hence our plan involved no fire but plenty of practical hazards that external crews may encounter at an incident site that didn't involve fire; this was supported by data drawn from AAIB reports of incidents involving aircraft at the category we operate that suggested that in the area of incidents on or close to aerodromes fire only occurred at 4% of incidents (of which there were 100% fatalities!), yet 32% involved fuel spills as a hazard and 27% involved extrication of casualties entrapped by the wreckage. This heavily influenced the decision for a 'no fire', 'significant fuel spill', 'hazard rich', 'entrapped casualty' focussed scenario as this was more likely than fire and far more likely to represent complex system/structural hazards rather than the rather more obvious hazard that is fire, and statistically the place where the RFFS and external agencies are more likely to save a life.
This ethos is embedded in our RFFS operations where it is now cultural to regard firefighting as a means of enabling safety during life saving operations, with the actual life saving being as important in the crew training as fire protection. This change of focus I believe is realistic because we all know that burning flammable liquids yield a greater heat than aircraft materials can withstand in thirty to forty seconds, so with the best effort at making the two minute response time will we really get to a small aircraft incident quick enough to save a life from a fire? Sadly I think it unlikely. Some time ago a group of aerodrome operators looking to argue against the case for providing RFFS at lower category aerodromes made a statement in the aviation press that no single life has ever been saved from fire by a low cat fire crew. Whether or not this is factually correct I do not know, but in twelve years working and training with many firefighters at many aerodromes of differing category I have never heard of a single life being saved from fire at cat's 1 to 3.
This shouldn't detract from the importance of the RFFS however. What it doesn't and can't quantify is how many fires have been prevented by foam blanketing, system isolation or the collection of other actions that can mitigate hazards and prevent fire. And this is where we focus an increased proportion of our training capacity; because this is where we may save a life, without the person endangered even appreciating that we have done it.
I appreciate that traditionally that goes against the grain, we all love the challenge of fighting fire and the possibility of doing this to save a life is enormously rewarding and I am lucky enough to say that I have achieved this previously as a local authority firefighter at structural fire incidents, but the physics supported by the data indicate that at light aircraft fires this isn't going to happen as long as we are on a two minute response time.
If someone does know of a life saved by a cat 1,2 or 3 crew please tell us, I'd love to be educated on how it worked and what happened?
Without being specific I also train an RFFS at a Cat 1 aerodrome. Last August they attended an incident (2 man crew) involving an aircraft just inside their 1000 metres. The aircraft was on its back, occupied and fully involved in fire by the time they arrived, there was a suggestion that life existed at the point they arrived but this is just guesswork from bystanders. The two man crew did a brilliant job but used every drop of their TACR's 900 litres plus Dry Powder to extinguish the fire (rather more than the Cat 1 minimum primary media of 230 litres stated in CAP168). At the point of suppression there was no life to save if indeed there had been at all; they estimated that the first LA appliance arrived about ten minutes later! In summary they were as quick as they could have been, they extinguished the fire as quick as they could have done, the LA appliances turned out as quick as they could have done, but the result was a tragic loss of life regardless of all these best endeavours.
On the other hand if there had been no fire, they would have used the foam to make the situation safe to approach the aircraft, then get in amongst the aircraft and make the aircraft safe whilst prioritising casualties and taking immediate life saving actions. That to me is the role of the low cat RFFS and this is where efforts for working alongside local brigade's and paramedics should be concentrated because here we are 'more likely' to integrate our skills and save life.
Well I've waffled on a bit but that's because I feel strongly about how we balance our training, almost to the point where the title 'firefighter' seems inadequate and perhaps even old fashioned, and that's coming from an old fart that admits to being rather old school at times. But I remain pragmatic about what we do and what we can do.
In a nutshell Stuart I would have a word with your local authority friend and identify clearly what he wants to achieve from the training; does he want to learn how to work alongside your guys at a realistic incident scenario or does he just want his crews to have a bit of fun using your rig to do something they don't get the chance to do in their normal training routines. And when he's told you what his expectations are, then it's time to be prepared with what you and your RFFS need to get out of it, after all its your facility they are asking to use.
My advice to you is keep it realistic to the category you are working at for it to have any value for your staff.
