Turn it off man....turn it off
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Looking over your shoulder
Age: 50
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turn it off man....turn it off
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Not Telling!
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mallorca
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a cock-up! While being very funny on the face of things, is it not the case that the foam was generated using carbon dioxide? (expert, please!) If that were to be the case then the people trapped in the hangar, who had foam up to their chins at the very least, were in dire mortal danger surely. Indeed I hope that no poor sod WAS actually killed as a consequence of just following his orders to be there. So much for the prior risk assessment!
Well General, it was like this.....remember the change in the Hangar Fire SOP we issued last week....welllllllll.....errrrr....there was a slight typographical ommission in the checklist....and welllllll....errrrrr....you see in the end we decided that failing to the "Safe" side was preferred to not getting enough fire suppression agent applied to the fire.....and in reality no real harm was done. What we did not take into account was the response from Base Road Engineering as who would have guessed they would have dispatched the Snow Plows in the middle of August. Have we amended the SOP yet......errr...welllll...errrr....No Sir! We have instituted a study group to seek alternative courses of action with a view towards seeing if Snow Plows might be used in the removal of Foam from Hangar Spaces and in time we will be performing another test to confirm our theory that would be a time efficient measure.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Force "too busy" to take joke
The following explains what actually went on here, and also demonstrates that the United States Air Force has absoluetly no sense of humour whatsoever.
JT
by 28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs and
Air Combat Command Public Affairs
4/14/2006 - ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, S.D. -- Mark Twain once said, "A
lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes." In today's e-mail society, that is literally true, as Airmen
here have discovered.
Photos of a B-1 hangar here filled with more bubbles than a
dinosaur-sized hot tub, complete with people standing on top of rafters
in the building as foam rises, have been circulating around e-mail
inboxes with a subject line of "Building Fire Alarm Foaming Gone
WRONG!!!"
However, the truth may seem stranger than fiction. The hangar was filled
with foam on purpose.
The misleading e-mail has caused considerable work in correcting wrong
information, said 1st Lt. Carrie Kessler, 28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs
deputy chief.
A modern high-expansion foam system was placed in the hangar to replace
an aging fire suppression system, said Lt. Col. Navnit Singh, 28th Civil
Engineer Squadron commander. The contractor responsible for installing
the system submitted a plan for a test procedure prior to installation,
which was approved, he added.
The test of the new foam system was conducted Aug. 23. The required
coverage occurred within one minute of the system being activated. The
test was so successful the foam reached the observation platform where
officials were documenting the procedure.
The Air Force required a minimum of one meter of foam to be achieved in
four minutes or less. For testing purposes, the foam was allowed to
disperse for the full four minutes.
The observers were surprised at how quickly the system generated the
fire suppressing foam, said Colonel Singh.
The system worked so well, the exterior door of the hangar was opened
before the test was fully completed. This resulted in the photos of the
amount of foam inside and outside of the hangar.
The fire suppression system would be responsible for helping protect
vital mission-essential assets and helping safeguard Airmen's lives.
It exceeded Air Force standards, Colonel Singh said.
The misrepresentation of this test has raised the level of awareness
about the far-reaching effects of e-mail and technology.
Master Sgt. Dana Rogers, 28th Communications Squadron superintendent of
network security, said e-mails such as the one depicting the foam test
"misrepresent our capabilities" and can even damage computer networks.
"You think it's so funny, so you send it to 10 people. Then, they send
it to 10 more. This takes up an extremely large amount of e-mail space
and can lead to the loss of a resource," he said.
Another aspect of e-mails that miscommunicate facts is the amount of
time someone may have to take in order to set the record straight. An
e-mail that took two seconds to send caused a large number of man-hours
to fix.
There is definitely the potential for a loss in duty hours for people in
leadership positions, Sergeant Rogers said.
Mr. Mark Wheeler, 28th CES deputy commander agreed.
"A CES commander's schedule is very demanding," said Mr. Wheeler. "Any
time spent responding to an incident like this is a drain on a very
precious resource: time."
Mr. Wheeler said Colonel Singh spent more than 20 hours investigating
this incident, and there were many more hours of investigation done by
other members of the squadron who were attempting to re-trace steps and
gather facts that would lead to the truth of the matter surrounding the
pictures of the foam test.
Instead of focusing on this circulating e-mail, Mr. Wheeler said Colonel
Singh's time could have been better spent.
"Lt. Col. Singh and the entire squadron have spent too much time on this
issue," he explained.
The lesson from this issue is Airmen should think about what they are
sending out before hitting the "send" button.
"Before you create an e-mail based upon some pictures you have or
partial information you have come across, you should ask yourself if you
are really in a position to explain what is happening and why,"
Lieutenant Kessler said. "The Air Force of today is extremely busy, and
dealing with an issue like this takes us away from focusing on the
mission and taking care of our Airmen."
JT
by 28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs and
Air Combat Command Public Affairs
4/14/2006 - ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, S.D. -- Mark Twain once said, "A
lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes." In today's e-mail society, that is literally true, as Airmen
here have discovered.
Photos of a B-1 hangar here filled with more bubbles than a
dinosaur-sized hot tub, complete with people standing on top of rafters
in the building as foam rises, have been circulating around e-mail
inboxes with a subject line of "Building Fire Alarm Foaming Gone
WRONG!!!"
However, the truth may seem stranger than fiction. The hangar was filled
with foam on purpose.
The misleading e-mail has caused considerable work in correcting wrong
information, said 1st Lt. Carrie Kessler, 28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs
deputy chief.
A modern high-expansion foam system was placed in the hangar to replace
an aging fire suppression system, said Lt. Col. Navnit Singh, 28th Civil
Engineer Squadron commander. The contractor responsible for installing
the system submitted a plan for a test procedure prior to installation,
which was approved, he added.
The test of the new foam system was conducted Aug. 23. The required
coverage occurred within one minute of the system being activated. The
test was so successful the foam reached the observation platform where
officials were documenting the procedure.
The Air Force required a minimum of one meter of foam to be achieved in
four minutes or less. For testing purposes, the foam was allowed to
disperse for the full four minutes.
The observers were surprised at how quickly the system generated the
fire suppressing foam, said Colonel Singh.
The system worked so well, the exterior door of the hangar was opened
before the test was fully completed. This resulted in the photos of the
amount of foam inside and outside of the hangar.
The fire suppression system would be responsible for helping protect
vital mission-essential assets and helping safeguard Airmen's lives.
It exceeded Air Force standards, Colonel Singh said.
The misrepresentation of this test has raised the level of awareness
about the far-reaching effects of e-mail and technology.
Master Sgt. Dana Rogers, 28th Communications Squadron superintendent of
network security, said e-mails such as the one depicting the foam test
"misrepresent our capabilities" and can even damage computer networks.
"You think it's so funny, so you send it to 10 people. Then, they send
it to 10 more. This takes up an extremely large amount of e-mail space
and can lead to the loss of a resource," he said.
Another aspect of e-mails that miscommunicate facts is the amount of
time someone may have to take in order to set the record straight. An
e-mail that took two seconds to send caused a large number of man-hours
to fix.
There is definitely the potential for a loss in duty hours for people in
leadership positions, Sergeant Rogers said.
Mr. Mark Wheeler, 28th CES deputy commander agreed.
"A CES commander's schedule is very demanding," said Mr. Wheeler. "Any
time spent responding to an incident like this is a drain on a very
precious resource: time."
Mr. Wheeler said Colonel Singh spent more than 20 hours investigating
this incident, and there were many more hours of investigation done by
other members of the squadron who were attempting to re-trace steps and
gather facts that would lead to the truth of the matter surrounding the
pictures of the foam test.
Instead of focusing on this circulating e-mail, Mr. Wheeler said Colonel
Singh's time could have been better spent.
"Lt. Col. Singh and the entire squadron have spent too much time on this
issue," he explained.
The lesson from this issue is Airmen should think about what they are
sending out before hitting the "send" button.
"Before you create an e-mail based upon some pictures you have or
partial information you have come across, you should ask yourself if you
are really in a position to explain what is happening and why,"
Lieutenant Kessler said. "The Air Force of today is extremely busy, and
dealing with an issue like this takes us away from focusing on the
mission and taking care of our Airmen."
Perhaps the fecking Neddies should take this advice!
The lesson from this issue is Airmen should think about what they are
sending out before hitting the "send" button.
sending out before hitting the "send" button.
Perhaps that should work from the Top down?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mallorca
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that information Main Gear Touchdown. If the foam is mixed only with air then what acts to inhibit combustion? I had imagined, with no background in the subject whatsoever, that the foam's main purpose was to hold the carbon dioxide (in the bubbles) on the fire to give it a chance to suppress the flames. If that had been the case then it would have suppressed those poor guys' respiration too!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: england
Age: 47
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that information Main Gear Touchdown. If the foam is mixed only with air then what acts to inhibit combustion? I had imagined, with no background in the subject whatsoever, that the foam's main purpose was to hold the carbon dioxide (in the bubbles) on the fire to give it a chance to suppress the flames. If that had been the case then it would have suppressed those poor guys' respiration too!
I have experiance only with AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) fire extinguishers. But the main aim of AFFF is to smother the fire, therefor taking away the oxygen needed, and starving the fire. It is used primarily on Class A and B fires which includes Papers,fabrics,flammable liquids.
The only real problem with AFFF is that it's cooling properties are not great, and on some occaisions if the AFFF layer is broken, then sufficient heat is there to re-ignite the fire.
The only time Carbon dioxcide would be needed is to pressurise the container, therefor providing a propellent to get the stuff out of the hose on fire extinguishers and portable trolleys.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Looking over your shoulder
Age: 50
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it was a test and they meant to fill the hangar with foam? Good well done.
Who was the Cletus who left the truck window down then?
Who was the Cletus who left the truck window down then?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London
Age: 69
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst the bit about not blocking e-mail systems with funny stuff is somewhat valid, shouldn't the idiot also think that sending out self-serving rubbish that would be copied to be laughed at should also be avoided ?
Quote :-
"......... have been circulating around e-mail
inboxes with a subject line of "Building Fire Alarm Foaming Gone
WRONG!!!"
......... However, the truth may seem stranger than fiction. The hangar was filled with foam on purpose.
..............The required coverage occurred within one minute of the system being activated. The test was so successful the foam reached the observation platform where officials were documenting the procedure.
The Air Force required a minimum of one meter of foam to be achieved in
four minutes or less. For testing purposes, the foam was allowed to
disperse for the full four minutes. ........
....... The system worked so well, the exterior door of the hangar was opened before the test was fully completed. This resulted in the photos of the amount of foam inside and outside of the hangar. ........"
It's great that mistakes can be ascribed to success.
(It is also depressing that the USAF still can't spell "metre" properly).
Quote :-
"......... have been circulating around e-mail
inboxes with a subject line of "Building Fire Alarm Foaming Gone
WRONG!!!"
......... However, the truth may seem stranger than fiction. The hangar was filled with foam on purpose.
..............The required coverage occurred within one minute of the system being activated. The test was so successful the foam reached the observation platform where officials were documenting the procedure.
The Air Force required a minimum of one meter of foam to be achieved in
four minutes or less. For testing purposes, the foam was allowed to
disperse for the full four minutes. ........
....... The system worked so well, the exterior door of the hangar was opened before the test was fully completed. This resulted in the photos of the amount of foam inside and outside of the hangar. ........"
It's great that mistakes can be ascribed to success.
(It is also depressing that the USAF still can't spell "metre" properly).
