Posted By TBC
Please take a few moments to think of these very brave young lads who went in to a burning warehouse to check that nobody was trapped or injured.

Regards
TBC (ex Firefighter)

Posted By Crim
Being an ex firefighter myself it is difficult to think of what best to say at a time like this. My heart goes out to the families of those lost in the fire, especially the children who now grow up without a father/mother (we do not yet have all the information therefore either sex could be involved). They will of course be looked after by the fire services national benevolent fund to a certain extent but being part time retained they may not receive as much by way of pension and other benefits that full time firefighters receive.

I now ask the question why are not all firefighters full time? Part time firefighters receive a small percentage of the training necessary for a firefighter to gain the knowledge and experience needed for such a job.

Posted By Crim
I now see the senior officers of the brigade are pointing toward the first officer in charge who was in initial commend of the fire, and who would have directed the first crews to arrive at the scene.

An early scapegoat when in reality any blame should be directed somewhere else once the bigger picture materialises?

Posted By Crim
Rob,

I agree with you that there does not have to be someone to blame, it just looks to me as if there is already someone being blamed. The senior brigade officers should not have said what they did say. Just imagine how that first officer in charge may be feeling right now, he/she does not need to be put in the spotlight at all.

Nobody has more sympathy for the families concerned than myself.

Posted By TBC
It is thought that the scene commander (the father of one of the missing firefighters) may have given the order to enter the building. This decision would not have been taken lightly and only in belief that others may have been trapped i.e. low paid foreign workers may have been 'sleeping' on the premises etc. He was not to 'blame' for this tragedy that lies with others and I could list them. Lessons may be learnt from this.

Posted By Phillip
Deepest sympathy to all involved

Posted By Tabs
Crim wrote "I now ask the question why are not all firefighters full time?"

I agree, Crim, we should look at other places to save money, not the emergency services. They deserve thorough training and full support at all times. In my town, our station is a training station - yet still it is not a full time manned station.

The Prime Minister should find savings in the absurd bureaucracy and rituals of Britain to pay for a properly resourced fire and rescue service.

My deepest sympathy to those left behind and gratitude to those who paid such a terrible price.

Posted By Pete48
Leaving aside all the speculation in this thread, may I offer a few thoughts.
To suggest that retained firefighters are somehow second class or less able to cope with emergencies is, I think, incorrect. They deal successfully with thousands of emergencies every year and many, many people owe their lives and property to their dedicated service.
I prefer to start from the point that the officer making the decision and those brave firefighters who entered the building did so in the full knowledge of the risks involved and deserve our unconditional and whole-hearted support.
The senior officers were only stating facts, the incident commander is the one who makes decisions about entry to premises. I am sure they would be horrified to think that anyone would take their comments any other way.

Posted By TBC
I don't think it's speculation that the firefighters went in to search for people. I for one don't think they went in just to fight the fire otherwise we would know where they were - i.e. at the end of the line (Hose) unless things changed (as they did) to alter that inside and they couldn't retreat the way they went in. It will all become clear after the investigation.

Posted By Stupendous Man
Well said Pete and David

Retained firefighters are an important part of the fire service - they bring with them a remarkable passion for the job and a real sense of community spirit.

My experience is that retained crews will, wherever possible, ride the maximum number for the appliance (often 6) in order to maintain competence and to make sure that everyone who makes themselves available for duty gets a chance to participate.

Although they may receive less days training than wholetime crews, they certainly pack in a great deal of activity when they do attend course and take part in drills. To suggest that they are in any way less competent than their wholetime colleagues is wrong.

Obviously attention will focus on the decision of officer in charge to commit these men to the building. But this attention does not imply wrong-doing.

Media reports have made much of the fact that the building did not have a sprinkler system, but this is not entirely relevent - these types of building often offer a quick means of escape for large number of personnel. We cannot escape the fact here that all employees at the warehouse were eventually accounted for. As the activities carried out in the building can often be done elsewhere fairly easily, management can be content to let the building burn down.

My main issue lies elsewhere - if the incident is confirmed as arson, then this is where our attention and remedial efforts should lie. Not with the OIC and not with company management for not having sprinklers. It is the fire-setters who have done wrong.

We now, sadly, have to wait for the retrieval of three more bodies before the fire investigation can provide us with the facts for this tragic event.

Posted By MT
Agree with David Denholm, as the daughter of a retired retained firefighter with 20 years service.

I've seen him come in at 7 in the morning from an all-night fire, get a quick wash and change and have to go to his day job. I've seen the look in his eyes when he returned from an RTA involving teenagers, especially when I was that age.

It's unfair to say that retained firefighters are less well trained and capable of assessing the risks.

However, I do think that some serious error in judgement could have been made in this particular instance which led to the 4 deaths. There are times when it is far too dangerous to enter a building, regardless of whether it's thought that there's someone inside.

Posted By Crim
We now see both sides to the full time/part time discussion and it clear that those who are part time retained will argue in their favour while those full time will put the other side.

My experience comes from 24 years in a busy city brigade and attending outside the area to incidents in a county area with part time firefighters.

I have to say that on one occasion a part time firefighter carried out a rescue of one of my full time crew members and he was well appreciated for that.

I will not say more than that as this is neither the time or the place.

I now think we should allow the incident to progress without further comment as there is a heck of a lot still to do, funerals to plan etc. Let's just stick together and give them all our best wishes for the future.

Posted By TBC
People's personal experiences will always surface in this forum it's human nature. I sure that behind this there is deep repect for our fallen firefighters will always be in our minds.
A firefighter poem

HE STARES IN THE FACE OF DEATH
WITHOUT A SECOND THOUGHT
TO SAVE THAT ONE SPECIAL LIFE
THAT HE SO BRAVELY SOUGHT
HE HAS WALKED AS CLOSE TO
"HELL ON EARTH"
AS ANY MAN COULD DO
AND HE'S SO PROUD OF THE JOB HE DID
FOR PEOPLE HE NEVER KNEW
HE PUTS HIS LIFE ON THE LINE
EVERYTIME DUTY CALLS
ALWAYS DOING WHAT NEEDS TO DONE
WITHOUT EVEN A PAUSE
HE IS A FIREMAN
WITH OVERWHELMING PRIDE
NEVER AFRAID TO TAKE A CHANCE
WHEN SAVING SOMEONES LIFE
OFTEN HE SAYS
"IT'S MY JOB"
BUT WE REALLY KNOW
THAT HE IS VERY SPECIAL
AND ALWAYS READY TO GO
SO WHEN YOU HEAR THE SIRENS WAIL
OR SEE THE FLASHING LIGHTS
STAND ASIDE AND LOOK WITH PRIDE
HE'S GOING TO SAVE A LIFE.

Posted By GT
David,

I think you are correct we should leave this dicussion for another thread.

GT

Posted By TBC
Bob - 'It has been said that they entered the building because some illegal immigrants were living there'

I don't think anyone mentioned this. I only mentioned that some low paid workers may have been sleeping there because it was known that some did this rather than travel back and forth between long shifts.

Yes they would have entered regardless of who was in there - that was not questioned.
Regards
TBC

Posted By Ken Jones
Firstly my sympathy for all those concerned both family and colleagues. Firefighters of whatever gender are heroes all they are the only ones who will willingly run into a burning building whilst everyone else is running out!!!!!




ken

Posted By Garry Adams
Firstly . May I offer my sincere condolences to the Families and colleges of the four Firefighters.

I have read with interest the comments posted on this thread, the majority of which praise the bravery of Brigade members and the ultimate sacrifice given by four of their Brothers.

I cannot help but feel sympathy for the Senior Officer... I wonder, did the Officer have all the information regarding the STEEL Structure ?...was the Officer aware that the fire may have Grade D connotations, raising the risk of catastrophic or partial collapse of Steel work. Was the Officer aware of the Structures lack of protection against heat conduction.

I do not wish to pre-empt the forthcoming enquire, the powers will come to their findings in due course, I mearly wish to raise the above questions out of concern for the Officer in charge I am sure that he would not have ordered deployment had he known that there was a risk of collapse

Regards, Garry...

Posted By Garry Adams
Geoff

I quite agree that caution should be exercised and reservations made as to the causation's which instigated this tragic sequence of events which lead to the tragic loss of four Firefighters.

However, one of the prime movers which contributed to the fatalities was the catastrophic collapse of steel work.

It is my understanding that the structure was originally used as a hanger, the structure was converted to a warehouse, I cannot help but wonder if the change of use and the design considerations were fully exhausted at the change of use planning permission stage. Was the structural design of the hanger enhanced to deal with the extra loads applied ?. As you pointed out the steel work may have been protected, however it may have been prudent to consider a Sprinkler System at the Planning stage, this provision may have gone some way to subdue heat from the fire and cool the steel work.

As you have intimated the 'Facts' have yet to come to light and I have no doubt that there will be a culmination of contributory factors.

It is the duty of all and sundry to explore every avenue...to ask questions and learn from the sacrifice made by the brave Firefighters.

Regards, Garry...

Posted By Garry Adams
Bob

I read your posting with interest and agree with your speculative comments regarding contributory factors.

One must speculate to accumulate would you agree?.

This forum is use for joint consultation and in the spirit of collaboration within the H+S Community and indeed all concerned with H+S matters.

It is not the site of a fresh kill where Vultures circle overhead waiting to gorge them self's, Sir, I took exception to your closing sentence. Please contain yourself to matters in hand.

Kind regards, Garry...

Posted By Garry Adams
Bob

No harm done Bob...I may have been rather abrasive with my reaction, my posting on this thread was an attempt to deflect and dilute any perceived blame directed to any individual and in particular the Officer in command. By introducing mechanical errors rather than human errors I had hoped to open the discussion.

Regards, Garry...