quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by cgode:
I’ve always worn a leather New Yorker...25 years on the job and wouldn’t have it any other way...as has been said...it’s tradition and that is taken seriously.

That's a strange attitude to me.

You wouldn't go to war in 2019 with a helmet from 1917 would you?

I see your point, but would you carry a .45 Colt over a Beretta? Sometimes it just depends.

Traditional style fire helmets still have impact caps and suspension webbing in them which provides impact protection. Also having searched the NIOSH and IAFF LODD databases I've yet to find a line of duty death directly attributed to a strike to the head, at least not without the person being fully crushed, which the helmet wouldn't have helped with anyway.

The problem lies in that, as mentioned, turnout gear is getting stronger and stronger which causes people to be in structures longer than in the past. And structures burn hotter and faster than they ever have before due to the amount of plastic materials in homes now. The euro helmets take away the last real sense you have left in a fire, your hearing. Yes you can still hear but not as well. I see no real benefit in the switch.

Not to mention, they look stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by ryan81986:
Traditional style fire helmets still have impact caps and suspension webbing in them which provides impact protection. Also having searched the NIOSH and IAFF LODD databases I've yet to find a line of duty death directly attributed to a strike to the head, at least not without the person being fully crushed, which the helmet wouldn't have helped with anyway.

The problem lies in that, as mentioned, turnout gear is getting stronger and stronger which causes people to be in structures longer than in the past. And structures burn hotter and faster than they ever have before due to the amount of plastic materials in homes now. The euro helmets take away the last real sense you have left in a fire, your hearing. Yes you can still hear but not as well. I see no real benefit in the switch.

Not to mention, they look stupid.

I have heard fire fighters complain about having gear that is to good. As they say just because it gets you in doesn't mean it gets you out. They Have told me that they prefer the older stuff as it gives them a better feel for temps and that is a safety issue.

Bottom line in the U.S. is tradition.

Back when I was working we switched from these


To these


I'd have given anything to have been allowed to wear one of these

Otto:
To add to the answers that you have gotten, yes that is possible. You are probably referring to the super sofa store fire in Charleston it killed 9 firemen. There are numerous factors that played a role in their deaths.

I tell my rookies that they are a potato when they wear bunker gear. The longer they hang out in the flow path (exhaust) of a fire the more heat soaked they become. If a flashover happens when they are heat soaked they have dramatically reduced the amount of time they have to escape.

Another problem about our ppe is that it allows poor tactics as it protects us from heat so well. One has to be very mindful of the heat exposure as the weakest link in our ppe is the scba face piece which starts to soften around 350f.

I love a traditional helmet, I wear one and will soon be wearing a traditional leather helmet as we finally got them approved by my department.

quote:

Originally posted by hbabler:
Otto:
...You are probably referring to the super sofa store fire in Charleston it killed 9 firemen. There are numerous factors that played a role in their deaths...

Yes, that is the one. I actually read the full report on that one, and it was eerie. I'm sure I didn't get the full impact of it. When I hear smart non-aviation people talking about aviation accident reports, I sometimes cringe, so I don't overestimate my ability to put 2+2 together from other professions.

Thanks for the added info. The potato analogy draws a great parallel for comparison.