|
Post by kacknbollz on May 15, 2003 17:26:03 GMT -5
Why is it that at the MASSIVE fire on Vine Street on 5/14/03 in Elmwood Place, the Cincinnati Fire Department was not utilized. I was at the scene, and I saw a CFD E-One pumper, CFD Ladder 2, and a Seagrave CFD Tiller truck (spare), as well as a DC (at least a CFD Expedition). They all left, and the fire was still throught the roof. Was this a pride issue that the command on the scene did not want the Big Boys to bail em out, or was this a decision made by the CFD DC (not likely). From my vantage point, it appeared that Elmwood charged their whole bed of 5 inch on their Quint that they had raised in front of the building. Springfield Twp, Woodlawn, as well as St. Bernard were on the scene, and doing a decent job. Norwood brought a Ladder Truck, and Golf Manor brought their Quint. But why would they not use the CFD ??? Answers or comments please. Peace
|
|
|
Post by Box_2565 on May 15, 2003 17:41:44 GMT -5
CFD struck a box for a report of smoke in the area when this fire occurred. Engine (or was it Truck?) 2 reported that the fire was in Elmwood. District 3 advised all companies to continue into the scene.
I don't know what happened, but a few minutes after the DC arrived on the scene all companies were placed in service.
|
|
|
Post by district5 on May 17, 2003 10:28:26 GMT -5
Friday, May 16, 2003 The Cincinnati Enquirer Help with fire was waved away
------------------------------------------------------------------------City crew came to Elmwood
By Jane Prendergast, The Cincinnati Enquirer and David Eck, Enquirer contributor
ELMWOOD PLACE - While a wrecking crew on Thursday knocked down the burned remains of two buildings that housed girls in foster care, a controversy grew over why Cincinnati firefighters didn't help battle the fire Wednesday night.
Elmwood officials called it a simple miscommunication - they thought the two Cincinnati trucks and eight firefighters that showed up on the Vine Street scene were driving through on their way to their own run, said Chief Matt Morgan. So an assistant Elmwood chief, he said, "just waved them on."
He said there was no way Cincinnati's help - which was there before the other four departments Elmwood called - could have saved the buildings, one of which already was engulfed when the first dispatch came in.
The six girls in foster care who lived in the buildings were moved to another Kelly Youth Services facility that was vacant. The agency was in the process of buying the buildings, said agency director Bob Kelly. Damage was estimated at $230,000.
Being turned away angered some Cincinnati firefighters, who were responding on a call of smoke in the area. Engine 2 and Truck 2 sit a few blocks away in Carthage. They arrived, and two other trucks were on the way too, said Assistant Chief Mose Demasi, to whom Morgan apologized Thursday.
Joe Diebold, president of the Cincinnati firefighters union, said he was concerned that anyone would turn away "professional assistance at the scene of a fire, then call on other companies that would take longer to respond."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 18, 2003 20:05:38 GMT -5
Hmmm... comments...
Why has this been made into such a big production? Seriously, the "Big Boys" would most likely have helped make a dent in the work, but I doubt they would have 'bailed em" out. The fire had a good lead into the second building during the exchange with CFD. I honestly doubt this was an issue of pride and I remind everyone that Elmwood Place can call (through the Hamilton County Mutual Aid Pact) any department they wish to use - this goes for all departments. If they wish NOT to use a department, well that's their decision and Chief Morgan will have to live with it. And the line: "professional assistance" - a bunch of garbage. Every agency at the fire presented themselves in a professional manner and busted their tails.
I was, frankly, very surprised to hear all the whining from CFD over this fire. As a firefighter at Golf Manor, I've been to plenty of runs in Columbia Twp. where CFD companies have bullied runs from underneath our department, or where we have arrived and CFD companies have left without saying a word or to lend a hand (the Viewpoint fire is an excellent example). Hear any whining from us? Not a bit. It's par for the course for us, and over the years it's something we've just come to expect from the "big boys".
I won't even attempt to second guess or become a hindsight commander on this fire. It was Elmwood's baby and they ran with it. Bottom line: fire in Elmwood, mutual aid called, lots of work, two buildings lost, fire out.
Stay safe! Mark Milliron GMFD
|
|
|
Post by PMThor on May 19, 2003 1:39:36 GMT -5
From what I have heard concerning this fire is the 2s house was waved away. Sure this looks terrible. The problem that I have with this is the mutual aid agreements that some county communities have in relation to the CFD. The 2s were waved away! even before the third alarm was sent out. What is that? Are some communities afraid that the CFD with its massive amount of resources will dominate a scene? Are their mutual aid agreements meant to get some outlying county departments in on a fire before they consider CFD help? Talk to some of the older guys on the CFD about the mutual aid for the BASF incident in Norwood and you hear nothing but good things about working together. I can't talk about some other scenes that I have no knowledge about, but I find it hard to believe that if the roles were reversed the CFD would respond in the same manner, and that is what needs to be addressed.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 19, 2003 5:06:21 GMT -5
PMThor,
From my perspective, I think the county departments may prefer working with one another instead of working with the CFD for a couple of reasons. And that got me to thinking, "why would this be?". I have a couple of personal conclusions.
1) Historically, county departments have had to rely upon one another. Interoperability with the CFD was and is a problem - radios/SOP's/equipment/response. Accountability was a problem for a while. And that whole "JV" attitude. I think the attitude is changing, but it's a problem that has a lot of room for improvement!
2) Many county departments work and train together EVERYDAY! When you work and train together, you know what to expect from one another. I don't know what to expect from the CFD. Will a CFD roughneck follow the orders of a county Lieutenant or Captain? How about vice versa? And training... the only times I can recall a joint CFD/County training is the recent RAT training or the big mass casualty drill at CVG. Why can't Golf Manor drill with Engine 8 or Truck 2? Is this some kind of taboo? I'm certain we have a lot to learn from one another.
Believe it because it happens all the time, and you're right, it needs to be addressed. How often does CFD use mutual aid from the county? Honestly, how often does that happen? I know for fact, it's a rare occurence. It happens more often on EMS runs, or the occasional fire in Saylor Park. I can't really blame the CFD for not calling county mutual aid, because it goes right back to the comments in paragraph #2 - they don't know what to expect. So on the other hand, I can't really blame the county departments for not requesting CFD.
And, earlier I mentioned "response" as an interoperability issue. In the county, when we request an engine mutual aid - that's one engine - we receive one engine. When one engine is requested from CFD, you get two engines, two trucks and a DC. Why? That's not what was requested and that's tends to cause problems.
So, I think one of the big bottom lines is EXPECTATIONS. If we were to solve a lot of the problems, we need to know exactly what to expect from one another. I think that would clear up a lot of issues, but I'm sorry to say that I just don't see that happening anytime soon.
Best regards! Mark Milliron GMFD
|
|
|
Post by ohiovolffemtp on May 22, 2003 13:57:12 GMT -5
I think Mark hit the nail right on the head. There are a few issues preventing frequent mutual aid involving CFD. From what I saw when I ran in Hamilton Co, the biggest issue is "we've never done it". This goes for CFD being used as mutual aid and especially for CFD receiving mutual aid.
This is something that all departments in the area should do: train together and respond together. Comments in other threads on this forum indicated a willingness by CFD members to provide mutual aid, but a concern that it would take too many units out of the city. There was very little willingness to receive mutual aid. (Actually, I wonder if there might be an issue that too many M/A EMS units might get pulled into the city) BASF did work well, but it's the exception.
This isn't the best approach for anyone. There are many areas of the city: Saylor Park, California, College Hill, essentially all of the outlying areas where surrounding departments could be there faster than many 2nd & 3rd due CFD companies & EMS units. For example, I've seen R-14 responding from quarters north on I-75 in rush hour to a non-breather on Grey road by Spring Grove Cemetary when Springfield Twp would be much closer responding from their Brentwood station.
Like Mark said, all residents: city and suburbs, would be better served if CFD and other county departments regularly trained and responded together. However, it will take a culture change (plus some better radio communications) for that to happen. Let's face it, we all carry the same medic and firefighter cards and the public would be better served. That's why we're here.
|
|
|
Post by fireboy30 on Jul 3, 2003 17:00:58 GMT -5
Glad to see everyones done beating the dead horse. Didnt hear quite so much turmoil over the second Vine Street Fire that CFD wasnt invited to.
|
|
|
Post by cfdpiper on Jul 7, 2003 22:36:37 GMT -5
To continue beating a dead horse........ For those of you who may remember, after Steidel left, a certain "acting chief" began to set up some automatic responses in some of the outlying areas ( one example was Q-47 on the box for Hilton Davis). This was " feeling the waters" so to say. If these few mutual aid responses seemed like they were working out, then it could have expaned into other remote parts of town. This was something that the CFD was not going to jump into full force right out of the chute (we tend to resist drastic change). Unfortunately, this acting chief was not selected as "The Chief", and the chief that was selected dissovled the automatic responses (for no real good reason).
Automatic mutual aid could benefit the outer lying areas of the city (Sayler Park, Mt. Washington, etc.) and probably could be explored in the future (just not under the current regime). One thing folks have to remember is that in most parts of the city (even in some parts that might seem remote), a "one alarm" will get 16 -20 firefighters on scene within 5-7 minutes. No other county department that borders us can put that kind of manpower on the scene of a working fire in that short amount of time. It still takes firefighters to put out fires, and more you can put on scene early in the incident allows you to "multi-task" fireground operations sooner in a fire to effect a positive outcome (either a rescue or confinement of the fire to room of orgin).
Contrary to popular belief, the members of the CFD are willing to assist any department that would be in need of our assistance (I made a working fire with E-51 in Springfield Twp. a few years ago and it went quite well). Just don't get upset if we don't call on you to help us. We have the resources and the manpower to handle 99% of what is thrown at us. Think about when your department calls for mutual aid, it is either for manpower or when you run out of your resources. We just have a bigger pot to pull from.
|
|
|
Post by 39box on Jul 10, 2003 7:33:46 GMT -5
OK, hopefully this will put this issue to bed for good.
Here is a play-by-play of the first 10 minutes of the fire at 5818 and 5820 Vine Street. At 19:55 dispatched for a possible structure fire. (This is a dual-dispatch with Springfield Twp.) At 19:57 an Elmwood officer reports heavy smoke coming from the rear of the structure. At 19:58 County is advised to dispatch second alarm. So far there are 2 ladder trucks and 3 engines responding. 19:59 Elmwood A/C goes on-scene with a working structure fire through the roof and an exposure involved. At 19:59 Elmwood Ladder in front of structure. Master stream set up in front of structure and exposure 3 protected. 20:00 2nd due engine held by a train. 1st due engine told to go to rear of structure for master stream ops. 20:02 2nd due engine goes on scene. 20:04 Elmwood recall requested. 20:05 City one alarm compliment and D/C arrive.
OK now my comments on the whole deal. First off I have read all the post's here and agree with most of them about working together and some well I won’t comment on. First you have the media involved making a big deal out of this whole issue because of the size of the city fire dept. If the situation was reversed and Elmwood was the dept. turned away then you would not have heard a word about it. I know this for a fact because it has happened in the past and not a word was said. I have also worked several fires with the City (in Elmwood Place) in the past with minor problems, but the over all goal was reached and the problems were addressed by the proper people, not the media and union reps etc.
Comment #2, according to the city fire tower the 2's were dispatched for smoke in the area around the same time Elmwood was dispatched for the fire. When the 2’s reached their border, they should have advised the fire was in Elmwood Place and not in the city and either returned to their station or sent a representative to contact the OIC and offer assistance, which engine or truck 2 did. The D/C advised to keep his units coming. Why bring all your trucks and make a cluster of the fire ground that's not in your district. Was this a city procedure or not? It’s not ours. My only comment is now there are 4-5 more pieces of equipment that the initial requested units have to maneuver around.
Comment #3, now comes the procedure issues. Elmwood procedure was followed. The chief arrived after the city had been disregarded and had not known of their presence on the fire ground until after the incident was under control. All Elmwood Place extra-alarm assignments were followed. Had this fire reached a 4th alarm, the city would have been dispatched. Every dept. has procedures that they follow in regards to day to day ops, additional alarms, response policies, and so on. Would anybody else go outside their procedures in this situation? I hope not.
Comment #4 when the City D/C asked the Elmwood OIC if he needed any help, he was told politely thank you but I think we have it with the units that were on the scene and also asked to hang tight for a few just to be sure all was ok. My feelings on this were there was no sense taking a complete one alarm compliment out of service for a surround and drown anyway. Two minutes later there is a city tiller trying to position itself in front of Elmwood's quint. This was not a request of the OIC. The D/C asked again if help was needed and was told again thank you but we should be ok. At that time the D/C put all his units back in service.
My final comments procedures were followed and if this is a big issue to some then maybe the CHIEF'S from both departments involved need to address them, NOT station houses or union representatives. As far as the union is concerned, if you look at the additional units that did respond you will find that 5 of them were union depts. And as far as the comment about they did not want the professionals there, everyone that was there is a professional. Anybody who gets the training and does the job is a professional not just the ones that are at a firehouse for 24 hrs at a time. We all know the city is willing to help and I think if you stop and look all the county departments are willing to help the city. The city has the resources and that is known, but at the same time so do most of the county departments.
Instead of worrying about not being called to a fire, there should be more concerns over not being able to talk to each other when working together. As an Incident Commander, I am responsible for everyone on that fire ground. If I can’t communicate with everyone, then firefighters become lost, trapped, injured, or they pay the ultimate sacrifice. Just my views on the whole deal
Stay Safe
|
|
|
Post by whistleblower on Jul 10, 2003 10:47:56 GMT -5
Sorry 39box, I can't help but comment on this subject. I do agree with you that the pettiness (my department's better than your department, etc...) needs to be put to bed. As a City FF I have worked with the Township FD that we share a border with. They have offered assistance numerous times & I was grateful to have it. My rule of thumb is, if the run is out of the city, offer our services to the FD that has jurisdiction. If they accept, then I put myself under their command. If not we leave the scene.
Other than bad manners & big egos, the core problem in this case was, as you alluded to, the lack of communication between departments. How long has this problem been talked about. I know it was brought up years ago. When I was on a downtown Company, we even went to a rally at the Court House to support a levy on the ballot. Of course it was defeated. Then, when Governor Ridge was at the 18's House in February 2002, the need was restated with the possibility of multi-juristictional operations due to terrorism. My question is Where are we with this? Anybody know? Are we just waiting for the Federal Govt. to pay for all of it?
Another topic of conversation/controversy I'd like to bring up is a County/City FD or just a County FD. Boy, talk about egos getting in the way! But just think, we'd all have the same training, staffing, pay scale & communication. I think the citizens would bennefit also. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jul 11, 2003 23:32:01 GMT -5
Whistleblower,
Well progress is being made as it relates to multi-jurisdictional operations, at least in the area of communications. Hamilton County just transitioned ALL county dispatched fire agencies to the new 800 MHz system. And, as I have been made to understand, Cincinnati is building an 800 MHz system that will operate seamlessly with the county system - actually it will be the system we rallied for back in the 90's downtown. It's estimated to be online in about 2 years (+ or -). The county's system is 15 sites with 25 frequencies. Cincinnati's will add another 10 sites using the same 25 frequencies. When it's all said and done, we will ALL be able to communicate with one another - ALL fire, police, public works, etc...
Next week, all other county agencies will migrate to the new system including the Valley agencies.
It's been a long time coming, but I'm glad to see and use this new system. I'm sure there will be some bumps along the way, but everything will get ironed out ... just like the roll-out of all previous radio systems.
Keep it safe! Mark Milliron
|
|
|
Post by firefighter3919 on Nov 1, 2003 3:21:22 GMT -5
I just have a Qestion on this fire and the fires this year in elmwood place why is it that when a small department has a fire the city dont get called they start a hopla in the media over it but i guess i my main question is really WHY?
|
|
|
Post by cfdpiper on Nov 2, 2003 20:03:24 GMT -5
Exqueeze me??? Who started the "hoop la" in the press (Better go back and read some Enquirer articles and archived news footage)
|
|
|
Post by firefighter3919 on Nov 14, 2003 1:53:31 GMT -5
but mr piper if you would go back to the enquirer and read its is started by city not elmwood place, elmwood was giving there word to a reporter and they went too cfd cheifs and broke it all out
|
|