MVA With A Motorcycle - California

Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
MMDad said:
Gawd, you're being quite the drama queen. You make an ignorant statement, then try to make it all about the state of the nation.

I see about 15 responders in that scene. Makes sense to me. I don't know where you get 30. With your counting mad skills, is it safe to assume you are a dispatcher? :lol: :evil: I got 20 just in the pictures.

When the call is dispatched, they have no idea exactly what they're facing. There was a recent incident with a car on top of a bicyclist. If they had responded with just the 3 or 4 people that a bike crash would trigger, they would have been waiting another 10 minutes after arriving for the equipment and manpower to get the car off of the person. That can mean life and death.

Sometimes the response seems like overkill, but it's better to respond with too much equipment than not enough. It takes time for volunteers to get away from work, get to the station, then get through traffic to the scene. Better to start them early than to wait until it's too late.

Also realize that the FD vehicles are being used to block traffic in order to make the scene safe. They can't just leave the vehicle there while the responders walk back to the station.
Click to expand...

You know, you, and everyone else, can take offense all you like. That's how we got to where we are; you can't even question ANYONE on ANYTHING anymore without some one(s) getting bent out of shape.

:buddies:
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
You know, you, and everyone else, can take offense all you like. That's how we got to where we are; you can't even question ANYONE on ANYTHING anymore without some one(s) getting bent out of shape.

:buddies:
Click to expand...

Did you count the cops, bystanders, witnesses, and the other driver in the 20?

You're right, I can't question your whining without you getting bent out of shape. What has this world become? In the good old days, people would just bask in the wisdom of Larry without questioning his superior intellect. But now the world has declined so far that when Larry sees 20 people in a picture then bytches about 30 people being there somebody actually dared to disagree with him. Such heresy!!!
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
MMDad said:
Did you count the cops, bystanders, witnesses, and the other driver in the 20?

You're right, I can't question your whining without you getting bent out of shape. What has this world become? In the good old days, people would just bask in the wisdom of Larry without questioning his superior intellect. But now the world has declined so far that when Larry sees 20 people in a picture then bytches about 30 people being there somebody actually dared to disagree with him. Such heresy!!!
Click to expand...

I'm willing to let it slide. This time. Now, go about your business and just see to it that it doesn't happen again.

:drama:
 
SoMDGirl42

SoMDGirl42

Well-Known Member
Chasey_Lane said:
The more calls they go on, the more funding they get. :biggrin:
Click to expand...

I'd like to see a link for this statement. :popcorn:

I was with the rescue squad for 18 years. Never did we get funding for how many calls we went on. Hell, we didn't even get a percentage of the fire tax, that goes to the fire departments. It was up to us to make the $$ to purchase our own equipment.

Learn something new everyday.
 
SoMDGirl42

SoMDGirl42

Well-Known Member
Larry Gude said:
Is it fair to say that that is, clearly, over kill for an MVA, bike down? I mean, what, 30 some odd people, at least an hour each out and back?
Click to expand...

so basically you are stating on any accident..............

motorcycle (could be just a bike down, right?)
car (could be just a fender bender, right?)
bus accident (might not have kids on it, right?)

How many people should be disbatched to find out how many additional personnel will be required? 1? 2? You do realize that adding additonal people will now delay care for another what, 5, 10, 15, 20 minutes depending on location? And you are perfectly willing to wait?

Hope you never find yourself laying in the road waiting for "additional personnel" to come save your ass.

If it's me or my family, I hope they send them all! I'd rather have too many than too few to help.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
SoMDGirl42 said:
so basically you are stating on any accident..............

motorcycle (could be just a bike down, right?)
car (could be just a fender bender, right?)
bus accident (might not have kids on it, right?)

How many people should be disbatched to find out how many additional personnel will be required? 1? 2? You do realize that adding additonal people will now delay care for another what, 5, 10, 15, 20 minutes depending on location? And you are perfectly willing to wait?

Hope you never find yourself laying in the road waiting for "additional personnel" to come save your ass.

If it's me or my family, I hope they send them all! I'd rather have too many than too few to help.
Click to expand...

And you don't see the glaring inconsistency in what you are saying?
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
MMDad said:
What we have got heah is failure to cummuncate.

She's saying that if you don't send enough, then have to send more, it delays care.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and while everyone is at wreck A, what of wreck B and C?

I fail to see why it is uncomfortable to say, yeah, 30 people at a down bike might not necessarily be the best practice. I mean, all I am getting is that that was the LEAST that should have happened.

:shrug:
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
Yeah, and while everyone is at wreck A, what of wreck B and C?

I fail to see why it is uncomfortable to say, yeah, 30 people at a down bike might not necessarily be the best practice. I mean, all I am getting is that that was the LEAST that should have happened.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Easy. They go to wreck A. Wreck B is called. If they have extra people at wreck A they leave and go to wreck B. If not, they have to get someone else to cover wreck B. It's not like the people who don't go to wreck A are sitting in the station waiting for the next call. This aint the big city, dee by gaw cap'n. It would probably be quicker to respond from wreck A than for them to go to the station then respond.

30 people bike would seem like overkill if it were that easy, but it's not. They had a motorcycle vs. car collision. The average person calling 911 pretty much sucks at giving useful information. They don't know until they get there how many injuries, is anyone trapped, is something going to burn, did the guy get thrown into the woods or down a hill, do they need to prepare an LZ, and many more things.

I have no idea if this is the case here, but there could also have been trainees there. You can sit in a classroom all day, but the only way to become proficient is to go along and work with the more experienced people.

I would like to see just how many people were on this call, but I doubt it was 30. As I said, I counted 15, but I did not count people who were not wearing fire or EMS gear. It looked like there were witnesses and bystanders in the pictures, which gives the impression there were more responders there than there really were.
 
G1G4

G1G4

Find em Hot, Leave em Wet
Larry Gude said:
Yeah, and while everyone is at wreck A, what of wreck B and C?

I fail to see why it is uncomfortable to say, yeah, 30 people at a down bike might not necessarily be the best practice. I mean, all I am getting is that that was the LEAST that should have happened.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

Who says they'll be committed on wreck A? Our dispatch assignments really aren't bad, nor are they designed to pull an extraordinary amount of apparatus out. In some areas (not real far from here either), they send two engine companies, a squad, a BLS and ALS ambulance, plus an ALS chase vehicle and chief officers to an accident. And those are PAID departments..

You're still stuck in the old days when five people showed up at an accident. I see a lot of EMS people in those pictures, who are providing care for the injured. I see four or five firefighters who came on one piece of apparatus. What happens if they single pull (one BLS ambo with a driver and EMT, one firetruck with three people on it), and they get there and wind up with a trauma code patient? Ok, dispatch a medic unit. But wait, two of those four people need to do CPR and bag the patient. So, that'll probably be two of the firefighters. Half your manpower is gone there. Then, you'll have to lift the patient on the backboard. Ok, well, you have one firefighter and a driver of the ambulance left since the EMT is doing work on the patient. Gonna be hard to lift the patient since AHA guidelines say compressions have to be continued irregardless of what's going on. So, you've got a firefighter pushing down on a patient while you have two people (one of whom might not be physically fit) try to lift a backboard while putting them on the stretcher.

Don't be afraid to think outside the box. :coffee:
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
MMDad said:
I would like to see just how many people were on this call, but I doubt it was 30. As I said, I counted 15, but I did not count people who were not wearing fire or EMS gear. It looked like there were witnesses and bystanders in the pictures, which gives the impression there were more responders there than there really were.
Click to expand...

There's 20 people IN the one pic either geared up or obviously wearing their affiliation sweatshirts. That means, what, at least four more, two up and two down stream directing traffic. Some folks in vehicles checking gear, comms, what have you. With your math skills, you should work for OMB.

And it's just as likely that everyone being on St. Andrews Church Rd. is further away from the next problem than it is closer.


God bless you all for the work you do. However, let's not polish this into a training exercise so that newbie's can learn how to not get in the way on scene. Why is it a big deal to say 'yeah, this isn't best practice..."?
 
mAlice

mAlice

professional daydreamer
:burning:
G1G4 said:
Who says they'll be committed on wreck A? Our dispatch assignments really aren't bad, nor are they designed to pull an extraordinary amount of apparatus out. In some areas (not real far from here either), they send two engine companies, a squad, a BLS and ALS ambulance, plus an ALS chase vehicle and chief officers to an accident. And those are PAID departments..

You're still stuck in the old days when five people showed up at an accident. I see a lot of EMS people in those pictures, who are providing care for the injured. I see four or five firefighters who came on one piece of apparatus. What happens if they single pull (one BLS ambo with a driver and EMT, one firetruck with three people on it), and they get there and wind up with a trauma code patient? Ok, dispatch a medic unit. But wait, two of those four people need to do CPR and bag the patient. So, that'll probably be two of the firefighters. Half your manpower is gone there. Then, you'll have to lift the patient on the backboard. Ok, well, you have one firefighter and a driver of the ambulance left since the EMT is doing work on the patient. Gonna be hard to lift the patient since AHA guidelines say compressions have to be continued irregardless of what's going on. So, you've got a firefighter pushing down on a patient while you have two people (one of whom might not be physically fit) try to lift a backboard while putting them on the stretcher.

Don't be afraid to think outside the box. :coffee:
Click to expand...
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
Larry Gude said:
Why is it a big deal to say 'yeah, this isn't best practice..."?
Click to expand...

Because I don't see anything wrong with this practice. It is always better to have too many responders than too few. I don't see the response in this case as excessive.

Why is it such a big deal that I don't agree with you? You threw out your opinion, others disagree, yet you keep on saying we're wrong because we don't agree.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
MMDad said:
Because I don't see anything wrong with this practice. It is always better to have too many responders than too few. I don't see the response in this case as excessive.

.
Click to expand...

This isn't black and white; either too many OR too few. Better to have the right number than too few and better to have the right number than too many. There is such a thing as too many, yes? Can we just agree on that? Too few people can always do more, especially a good crew, people used to working together. Too many, people get in one anothers way.

I guess it's the difference between private and public sector. Too many is not a virtue in small business. Neither is too few but, come on, that is a FAR cry from too few. There is over 20 people in the one shot, most just watching and that is what caught my eye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top