RIT为什么在游戏中这么晚受到关注？

回答这一讨论

PermalinkReply by克里斯·皮恩堡（Chris Piepenburg）在October 22, 2008 at 3:05pm

当听别人说话时，我认为很多人不了解RIT概念。首先，RIT应该是您回复的补充，而不是从最初的运行任务中撤出的机组人员。您应该将其设置在您进行初始任务的位置（我的部门有4个引擎，1个梯子，2个医疗单位和一个卑诗单独的公司进行快速干预。

其次，许多人认为，RIT应该站在IC旁边，以便在需要时做出回应。正如Wes上面所述，RIT还有很多其他事情。当FF掉落时，他们的工作不仅是他们的工作，而且它们也是使火场成为更安全的地方不可或缺的一部分，因此减少了对FFS的伤害和死亡。

已经发现，在倒塌的FF附近工作的机组人员发现并救出了所有FF的80％。
With the proper work of a proactive RIT the crews rescuing that downed ff will have an easier time removing that ff which will increase his survivability.

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byFrank Ricci在October 22, 2008 at 10:10pm

Well put Wes, I really enjoyed your comments. I know I did not make my points well, I am not ever advocating just hit it from the outside. My point was if you cannot satisfy 2 in/2 out and establish RIT what are you to do? Let the fire burn uncontrollably until the resources arrive. Claim you have IRIC in place with a BC and an Engineer and then abandon IC and the pump panel if things go to s*** and Mayday is called? I deserve some of the opposition because of the way I communicated my thoughts. However, I still believe in my "extreme" tactics when necessary. If you look at my Bio and new me on personnel level, you know I do care about my customers and I do teach and have taught RIT at the Fire Academy for 10 years. It is not a concept I do not believe in, I just have voiced my concerns since 1998 when OSHA crammed this down our throat and RIT became the buzzword in the fire service. I really enjoyed Vincent Dunn’s article and I have for years thought about the idea that we have oversold the RIT concept. We did the training in the department I came from and are results were no different than Phoenix, we just did not broadcast on the level Phoenix did. People will read my post and think what an idiot! However, I am willing to take my lumps for something I believe in, which is my crew before the public, just as our Military. Ray had every right to call me out to a degree, my opinions are my own and do not reflect those of my City or Fire Departmentand. I do not impose them on my people nor do they cross over to how I operate on the fire ground. We are an aggressive and excellent fire department that does interior attacks frequently. Thanks, Wes, be safe brother!

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byFrank Ricci在October 22, 2008 at 10:19pm

篇不错的克里斯,我很欣赏你的思想,对my own sake I just want to know, how many do you commit to RIT? I operated in another department and they automatically dispatched a RIT crew to working fires and they were not an immediate response crew and the staffing for the RIT was recommended at no less than three. So, they were not on the scene in immediate fashion and they were sending three to five people to establish the RIT, so what do you do as I believe the original question was posed, why does RIT receive attention so late in the game? When after significant research and "real world" simulations by some of the biggest departments in the country who have established you need a minimum of 12 to rescue one and it will take inordinate amount of time. So, I also ask how do we accomplish this and ask the questions have we oversold RIT? Were we all not trained in the academy to do rescues and self-rescues, so essentially anyone at any given time can be a RIT. In Illinois where I hailed from we also did not allow the RIT to sit around, they were required to do a 360, throw ladders, removes bars, force doors, etc. I do not know the answers, but it makes think all the time if you do use an immediate resource on scene what fire ground priority are willing to sacrifice? Thanks Brother, stay safe!

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byWesley Stephens在October 22, 2008 at 10:41pm

这就是这些论坛的事情，一切都在书写上，因此可以将所有内容分开。我们感谢您在将信息放在那里时所吸引的大块。这些团块会引起人们的质疑，这些问题产生了挽救生命的答案。

我认为没有人试图根据一个评论来确定您的知识或奉献精神。我认为您的角色反映在您为您的家伙展示的护理中，您显然仍在寻求知识，因此您的奉献精神很明显。

Keep up the good work.

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byMarty Mayes在October 27, 2008 at 5:20pm

Well, a very interesting and spirited discussion so far. I am sorry I am posting so late on this one but I just joined yesterday. Anyway, these are my thoughts. I see the issue with RIT being similar to every issue we have in fire fighting from fireground tactics to who sits where at awards dinners. We, and I include myself, tend to create issues where none really exsist. We work in a dynamic enviroment (fire) that is unforgiving at best. What worked well for me at my last fire will not consistenly prove useful for me at the next. Why? because fire itself does not change but the enviroment that I will be in next will. The humans who live, work or occupy that next structure will have a huge influence on how I can use my resources to combat the fire. So a one dimensional approach will never work. So when an exterior attack works well for one department and not for another, we banter back and forth on who is right. We see it as a one demensional problem, that be default has one answer. I am a volunteer of 21 years and have been under staffed and over staffed. I have won fires and I have lost a few. I have also lived through the loss of three brothers at one fire. At the end of it all I have made a commitment to never loose another brother in a fire. So I choose to embrace any tactic that fits best with the fire I am presented with. We do not have a magic answer for RIT, we only have each day to become better at this craft.

从我的肥皂盒中够了。这是我的实践想法。在房间和目录的火灾中，训练有素的软管团队应在RIT甚至可以将工具放入前院之前达到上风。那个快速的敲门使周围的火灾更安全。在一场大火中，参与其中，RIT具有非常涉及的角色。他们正在努力在需要时扔梯子，进行360秒以确定室内团队的位置，提出可以改善内部团队条件的建议。因此，对我来说，RIT与大火相匹配。大火，RIT是场景中非常重要的部分。在一个小房间和内容物上，RIT并不是我的第一个想法，而不仅仅是训练有素且决定性的软管团队。平民的营救将在火场上进行先验性，而不是所有其他任务的泛滥。 A rescue, although riddled with emotion, is another assignment that must fit into my overall tactical plan, when it does not fit, I re-write the plan. Again, fire , is dynamic so my tactics must be fluid but consistent. A consistent evaluation of fireground priorities makes for better decisions.

谢谢，
Marty

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byWesley Stephens在October 28, 2008 at 12:33am

至理名言

• ▶Reply

PermalinkReply byLisa Fairfield在October 28, 2008 at 5:25pm

I am getting in this discussion a little late in the game also. I agree with most of what eveybody is saying. As I see it, the first issue is that the majority of the fire service does not make the RIT a priority. Our main focus is on the fire and putting it out. Assigning a crew as the RIT is secondary. And by secondary, I mean the assignment isn't important. As Kelby stated, giving the assignment is an afterthought. It is something that must be done eventually, but isn't made a priority. We put alot of effort into placing our engines, assigning attack crews, ventilation crews, pulling the right line, using good strategy and tactics, etc. How much thought is really put into the RIT?

The second issue is that the crew assigned as the RIT does not take it as a serious assignment. It may be viewed as a "do nothing, crap job". It means that you won't get to do anything fun. Stage tools? Soften the structure? Place ladders? That isn't what we came to do. They are forgetting the importance of the assignment. Most firefighters in my department don't take the RIT assignment seriously. Some of the older guys who want to coast along ask for the assignment so they can "rest". Others stage a few tools and don't pay attention to the structure, what the fire is doing, where the interior crew is, etc.

My guess is that almost everyone who is a member of the Fire Engineering Community takes a RIT assignment seriously and knows the consequences if they don't. It is up to us to remind our fellow firefighters (including chief officers) about the importance of RIT and provide needed training.

• ▶Reply

▶Reply to Discussion

• < 以前的
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page