http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R077_001_E756CBD5E7D0B.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R077_001_E756CBD5E7D0B.pdf)
So forever fire extinguishers and first aid kits were required in all COVs
Now extinguishers are prohibited (unless mandated by local law), and first aid kits are optional.
What's the reasoning?
Maybe who is required to maintain them? Were the unit issued the vehicle responsible for its maintenance when it was required?
If so, maybe many units refused/forgot to do so/complained loudly about it being required?
Flyer
Quote from: Eclipse on March 13, 2013, 06:34:26 PM
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R077_001_E756CBD5E7D0B.pdf (http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R077_001_E756CBD5E7D0B.pdf)
So forever fire extinguishers and first aid kits were required in all COVs
Now extinguishers are prohibited (unless mandated by local law), and first aid kits are optional.
What's the reasoning?
When was the last time we had a safety issue was reduced or stopped because we had a fire extinguisher? Also......it is not like on an aircraft where a fire extinguisher may save your life and the plane enough to get to safe landing.........van catchs on fire just pull over. Putting out the flames will not save any more money....even a small fire is going to total the vehicle.
So bump that up with all the time and maintenance and money it costs us to just keep the fire extingishers in the vehicles.......it makes sense. $30 times 500 vehicles every four years.....is $15K saved.
That wasn't the case in my wing, anyway. I know you hear anecdotally about units with assigned vehicles
being stuck with tire bills, repairs, whatever (sometimes even for the aircraft), but this is usually foun d to be the failure of
someone to understand how maintenance program works.
I know generally speaking the issue of of inspection gigs for extinguishers and FA kits was a constant problem, but
that doesn't make them less "necessary". I agree with Lord, though, the odds of needing / using the extinguisher in a
ground vehicle approach zero.
Quote from: Eclipse on March 13, 2013, 06:53:14 PM
That wasn't the case in my wing, anyway. I know you hear anecdotally about units with assigned vehicles
being stuck with tire bills, repairs, whatever (sometimes even for the aircraft), but this is usually foun d to be the failure of
someone to understand how maintenance program works.
I know generally speaking the issue of of inspection gigs for extinguishers and FA kits was a constant problem, but
that doesn't make them less "necessary".
And that the bottom line.....how necessary are they?
When was the last time CAP can show that the a vehicle caught fire? When was the last time the First Aid Kits were used to treat an injury sustained during a vehicle accident?
It is the old saw. Safety has a good idea.......but they don't worry about who pays the bill and or how much butt pain it will cause wings/qroup/squadrons......and no one questions safety......because "safety is job one!".
So like I said......you van catches fire....pull over, evacuate.....call 911. Someone is injured enough that a first aid kit is REALLY required......pull over and call 911.
Saves my wing/squadron around $100.
Strange to go from "thou shalt" to "thou shalt not" immediately.
Would have made sense to remove the "thou shalt" and let individual vehicle managers make a decision themselves if the maintenance cost was worth the investment.
Quote from: JeffDG on March 13, 2013, 07:02:24 PM
Strange to go from "thou shalt" to "thou shalt not" immediately.
Would have made sense to remove the "thou shalt" and let individual vehicle managers make a decision themselves if the maintenance cost was worth the investment.
I think that was an "editing" error. Unless there is a danger from or some sort of liabilty from simply carrying a fire extingisher....I think was they were trying to say is they are not "required" unless by law......I know that is not what they said......but like you said I think it is kind of strange that they actually mean "thou shall not".
Also note that they have passed the cost of the fire extingishers and First Aid Kits (even those required by law) onto the squadrons.
Quote from: lordmonar on March 13, 2013, 07:09:23 PMAlso note that they have passed the cost of the fire extingishers and First Aid Kits (even those required by law) onto the squadrons.
Not sure how they think that would work - my wing assigns POCs, but the vehicles remain on the Wings inventory (that changed for about a year, and is back that way again).
I know in my case I had no issue being a steward of the vehicle, but was certainly not interested in paying for maintenance.
I wouldn't say that every vehicle fire is a total loss. Hell, I've knocked down minor fires and had the vehicle driven away after minor roadside repairs.
Easy to do if an extinguisher is handy. Not so much otherwise.
Quote from: EMT-83 on March 13, 2013, 07:27:40 PM
I wouldn't say that every vehicle fire is a total loss. Hell, I've knocked down minor fires and had the vehicle driven away after minor roadside repairs.
Easy to do if an extinguisher is handy. Not so much otherwise.
Drivable VS "a total loss" I mean from the "how much is this going to cost to fix" stand point.
Lets take it as a win that someone put a little bit of thought and common sense when considering a safety issue for a change. How often do we see the "safety first" crowd lose one?
QuoteWhat's the reasoning?
From the November 2012 CSAG minutes:
Remove first aid kits
-- Use of first aid kits is rarely required
-- During inspections first aid kits were often found to contain expired items
-- First aid kits are usually carried and maintained by ground teams or activity staff, therefore first aid supplies may already be on hand
-- CAP is not a medical service provider so having a small first aid kit would not normally be beneficial at the scene of an accident where medical personnel should be notified and utilitzed
-- Estimated cost savings: $9,720
Remove fire extinguishers
-- Fire extinguishers in ground vehicles are rarely, if ever, utilized
-- Installation of fire extinguishers tends to promote undesired acts of intervention of CAP members on fires where advanced professional firefighters should be utilized
-- Estimated cost savings: $11,664 to $19,440
Mike
Quote
Remove first aid kits - Estimated cost savings: $9,720
Remove fire extinguishers - Estimated cost savings: $11,664 to $19,440
Good call IMO
This was actually a change back in the Dec 2012 re-write of 77-1. Change 1 that just came out only affected page 3 and maybe page 4.
This has also caused a disambiguation between CAPR 77-1 and CAP-USAFI 10-2701. The latter requires it per the vehicle inspection checklist. Not too big of an issue, to me, because if an inspector issues a finding, it's an easy reply for the wing CC. However, it is still a pain.
10-2701 is an AFI not CAP-USAFI...
Quote from: abdsp51 on March 19, 2013, 08:51:13 PM
10-2701 is an AFI not CAP-USAFI...
There is also a CAP-USAFI 10-2701 which is dated in 2007.
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/CAP_USAFI_10_2701.pdf (http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/CAP_USAFI_10_2701.pdf)
This is the standard at which we are inspected. In the AF side, I've seen this kind of issue take a UCI down paths of heavy drinking by command section members.
I posed the question in the CAP Knowledgebase, and they were awesome to reply within a couple of hours. The checklists are attachments, so they don't see a conflict. CAPR 77-1 changes should be well briefed to the inspectors, so it shouldn't be an issue.
Quote from: sardak on March 13, 2013, 11:39:31 PM
Remove fire extinguishers
-- Fire extinguishers in ground vehicles are rarely, if ever, utilized
-- Installation of fire extinguishers tends to promote undesired acts of intervention of CAP members on fires where advanced professional firefighters should be utilized
-- Estimated cost savings: $11,664 to $19,440
So removing fire extinguishers were determined to not impact safety? I can kind of buy that, you can pull a car over pretty quickly and get out.
The wording of the regulation is going to be misinterpted one day to say that you can not even transport fire extinguishers in a COV, say for replacing one in an aircraft or moving one from point to point.
I thought it was a smart move. Reasoning from my perspective:
- The cost to replace a vehicle (not insured) is arguably much less than treatment of serious injuries from inhalation and/or burns.
- Fire extinguishers are probably useless against a fuel-immersed combustion situation. Just get away from it.
- The cost to purchase and maintain the equipment adds up over hundreds of vehicles.
- Hours expended by members inspecting, installing/re-installing, maintaining also adds up.
First aid kits? Yeah, we should probably keep those, but maybe relegate them down to generic ones you can buy and throw away.