snopes.com  


Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Fauxtography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 13 October 2008, 07:32 AM
Zachary Fizz Zachary Fizz is offline
 
Join Date: 01 March 2002
Location: Manama, Bahrain
Posts: 4,385
Default

It's a 1971-73 Ford Mustang convertible.

ETA: Here's a link to some pics.

Last edited by Zachary Fizz; 13 October 2008 at 07:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 13 October 2008, 10:45 PM
snoozn's Avatar
snoozn snoozn is offline
 
Join Date: 09 October 2001
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 919
Default

I wish there was something similar handi-capped people could do to cars parked in handi-capped parking spots without the proper tags.

snoozn
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 14 October 2008, 03:41 AM
robbiev's Avatar
robbiev robbiev is offline
 
Join Date: 27 September 2005
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 3,119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snoozn View Post
I wish there was something similar handi-capped people could do to cars parked in handi-capped parking spots without the proper tags.

snoozn

Push it next a fireplug then call in a fire alarm?

On, second thought, that would be illegal, but a lot of fun.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 14 October 2008, 06:06 AM
Troberg Troberg is offline
 
 
Join Date: 04 November 2005
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 11,396
Default

Quote:
I wish there was something similar handi-capped people could do to cars parked in handi-capped parking spots without the proper tags.
Well, you could join a high security military organization and poop on them:

http://www.expressen.se/kronikorer/l...pa-fra-ser-dig (link in Swedish)
http://translate.google.com/translat...-8&sl=sv&tl=en (Google translated, they translated what should be "poop man" to "number two man"! I really must check what google translate does to erotic stories...)

By the way, that guy still works at the high security military organization. I have the court protocol (in Swedish), if anyone is interested.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 14 October 2008, 06:25 AM
Flyer22 Flyer22 is offline
 
 
Join Date: 08 August 2007
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Troberg View Post
Slightly off topic:

What's the US fascination with fire hydrants? In other countries I've been to, they just add a tanker truck or two loaded with water to the convoy of vehicles they send to a fire. Less infrastructure that needs to be working that way. To me, it just seems so much simpler?

The only exceptions I've seen in Sweden is on large industries, which might have extreme needs for firefighting capacity, which may not be covered with tanker trucks.
I did some research on that point. After doing the research, I wonder why countries without hydrants don't have them. They are clearly much more efficient at putting out fires.

Most tanker trucks carry anywhere from 1500-3500 gallons of water and pump at a rate of 400-2000 gallons per minute.
http://www.southernfireservice.com/tankers.htm
http://new-firetrucks.com/fire_truck...s_for_sale.htm

There are different sizes of fire hoses, but apparently 50-150 gallons per minute is typical.
http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/citizens/all...ers/facts.shtm
http://www.ehs.uci.edu/programs/fire/sprinklers.pdf

1500/400 = 3.75 minutes of water supply. 3500/400 = 8.75 minutes. A lot of fires require much longer than that to put out.

For one large fire in Washington, D.C., fire officials estimated that they needed 3500 gallons per minute to put it out.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...402561_pf.html

This picture shows a fire that obviously would require a large rate of water for a long time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:FirePhotography.jpg

For small fires, a tanker truck often works, but they are grossly inadequate for major fires.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 14 October 2008, 01:46 PM
rangerdog's Avatar
rangerdog rangerdog is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2002
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 6,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robbiev View Post
Of course, there's a difference between a broken window and say, damaging a car by moving it by force with the fire truck...
I have seen it with my own eyes. When we lived in a townhouse there was a fire at the end of our culdesac. The first fire engine arrived along with the police and there was a car parked in a fire zone blocking the engine. Without hesitation the fire engine driver pushed the car ahead, through a parking space and into a front yard then backed up and went down to the fire. Before the fire engine even stopped pushing the car, the policeman was out writing the ticket.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 18 October 2008, 06:04 AM
robbiev's Avatar
robbiev robbiev is offline
 
Join Date: 27 September 2005
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 3,119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rangerdog View Post
Before the fire engine even stopped pushing the car, the policeman was out writing the ticket.
Would you like some coffee with your just desert?

It's happened here too, or I know of at least one case, but I don't know if the car got a ticket.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 18 October 2008, 07:56 AM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Gloucester, ON
Posts: 6,919
Default

OK, I had to ask. One of the civilians working for me here was a fireman in Portland Oregon for 22 years. I had to ask him about this.

In short

- his station only once smashed the windows of a car. He, personally, has always laid the hoses over the hoods of cars. He never did it himself.
- it is, according to him, every firefighter's dream to do that.
- they don't go under cars because if the hose kinks (bending around a curb and car will apparently do that) there is nothing that can be really done. Second, there are sharp metal things under a car that will do more damage than glass in a car window.
- hoses on a hood do a lot of damage too. There is quite a bit of force exerted on the hose that will damage the hood, windscreen wipers etc throughout the course of a fire.

All in all, I will never park near a fire hydrant
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 20 October 2008, 05:14 PM
rangerdog's Avatar
rangerdog rangerdog is offline
 
Join Date: 19 July 2002
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 6,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by robbiev View Post
Would you like some coffee with your just desert? It's happened here too, or I know of at least one case, but I don't know if the car got a ticket.
It was awesome. The guy came flying out of the house (he was visiting) running at and screaming at the cop and the cop put his "talk" to the hand up and told him to STFU and sit down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UEL View Post
...hoses on a hood do a lot of damage too. There is quite a bit of force exerted on the hose that will damage the hood, windscreen wipers etc throughout the course of a fire.
I've never handled a firehose but at our Firefighter's competition every year you see a hose guy/gal get tossed around if they get on the end before their buddies do.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 28 October 2008, 12:50 AM
Carrie Moonbeam
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hey guys, I'm a new poster but not new to Snopes by any means. I've been a fan for years.

I'd just like to say, would it have been extremely difficult to just plop the hose on the ground between cars? I know the hose exerts a powerful force but I think if this is really going on the FD may be taking a little dramatic liberty. Honestly, they're there to help but that is extreme, and really a dramatic thing to do.

I almost thought those pictures were a shopped joke. It's beyond me as to how they couldn't come up with another solution than to smash in someone's windows. Well as long as the FD payed for it I guess it's fine. If not I stick by thinking that it's too drastic of a measure.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 28 October 2008, 02:50 PM
ParaDiddle's Avatar
ParaDiddle ParaDiddle is offline
 
Join Date: 13 July 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 3,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carrie Moonbeam View Post
Hey guys, I'm a new poster but not new to Snopes by any means. I've been a fan for years.

I'd just like to say, would it have been extremely difficult to just plop the hose on the ground between cars? I know the hose exerts a powerful force but I think if this is really going on the FD may be taking a little dramatic liberty. Honestly, they're there to help but that is extreme, and really a dramatic thing to do.

I almost thought those pictures were a shopped joke. It's beyond me as to how they couldn't come up with another solution than to smash in someone's windows. Well as long as the FD payed for it I guess it's fine. If not I stick by thinking that it's too drastic of a measure.
Go ahead and read the rest of the posts in the thread and you'll find that most of your concerns were addressed. Rest assured however, that the MFD did not fork out a dime with regard to this case.

- P
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 31 October 2008, 05:26 AM
Southernap
 
Posts: n/a
Default Why the window

A inch and half hose or as ,both examples seem to show, a two inch supply line assume a diameter of either 1.5 inches or 2 inches around. So that physical dimensions preculde usage under both the cars shown also right up next to the fire hydrant a two inch supply line becomes very stiff and very heavy (something on the order of about 45lbs), with water at a very high PSI running through it. So you don't want to put any kinks into a hose line on the fear that if the line parts (which can happen to a hose of any age) then you have a while hose beating the snot out of everything and everyone out there until the water is secure. So because some pin-head parks in front of a hydrant the "easiest" thing to do in preventing damage to a fire hose would be to break the windows out and just run it straight out from the hydrant.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 29 November 2008, 09:18 PM
Enchanting_eyes's Avatar
Enchanting_eyes Enchanting_eyes is offline
 
Join Date: 17 September 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL.
Posts: 5,541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snopes View Post
Does some aspect of the law protect the city and/or the firemen from damage claims arising out of such incidents?

- snopes
Mr. VFF says: That firemen are covered because the person broke the law. He doesn't know the law but it is something about obstructing the duties of the fire department.

he has a similar story involving a Mercedes that parked in front of a hydrant. The man parked in front of one and well they needed the hydrant he parked in front of. They broke the front windows in order to use the hydrant, the man tried to sue the department but the judge threw it out because he park illegally in front of the fire hydrant.

Oh and about the hose going under the car depending on the clearing underneath a vehicle the fire hose is not going to fit underneath the vehicle. They do try to lessen the damage, however if your an asshat that parks in front of a fire hydrant you sort of got it coming if there is a working fire.


Mr.VFF is sitting right here so the info is coming from him. He also says that the average engine holds 750 gallons that pumps 175 gallons a minute, only averaging about 3 minutes of water. So if your house is on fire, they are not really not going to wait on the owner or tow truck , they are going to use whatever means necessary to access the hydrant.

E*E
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 30 November 2008, 03:26 AM
Eddylizard's Avatar
Eddylizard Eddylizard is offline
 
Join Date: 15 June 2006
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK
Posts: 17,859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enchanting_eyes View Post
Mr.VFF is sitting right here so the info is coming from him. He also says that the average engine holds 750 gallons that pumps 175 gallons a minute, only averaging about 3 minutes of water. So if your house is on fire, they are not really not going to wait on the owner or tow truck , they are going to use whatever means necessary to access the hydrant.

E*E
Sounds about right. One place I worked at they had skimped on everything when they built it.

So when it was set on fire one night, I as standing in the assembly area, listening to the radio chatter. Short synopsis:

"The fire officer wants to know where the hydrant is."
"We don't have one."

So the fire brigade were reduced to running a constant shuttle of tankers to a pond about a mile up the road to refill. It was of course inadequite.

The brigade made a valient effort, for want of a hydrant on site, a six millin cubic metre warehouse was reduced to rubble in the space of about 45 minutes.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 30 November 2008, 05:41 PM
Fanatic Fanatic is offline
 
Join Date: 02 April 2007
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 35
Default

From this page, another picture of the BMW incident:



And yet another, from here:


Large diameter supply lines need lots of room. Going under the car may result in a broken hose. The fire department is more concerned with getting the line hooked up and water flowing as quickly as possible; they aren't going to want to take time to survey the situation, pull extra hose, etc. to make a connection that accommodates some doofus who parks on a red curb.

Danny Barlogio's pictures have probably prevented a lot of blocked hydrants over the years!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 30 November 2008, 06:46 PM
Atlanta Jake's Avatar
Atlanta Jake Atlanta Jake is offline
 
Join Date: 12 September 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,535
Flame

Having discussed this before on this board, and noting the differences between where Paradiddle and I work, I'd like to chime in. In Atlanta, neither the Fire Department nor the city government would ever tolerate this. Intentionally damaging property (especially to make a point) would result in disciplinary action against the firefighter/s responsible.

Faced with the same basic situation, I have on more than one occasion thrown the hoses under the car, trapping it there for the duration of our operation.

In Georgia, running over a Fire Hose is a felony. I have never seen it enforced, though - mainly because we prevent it from happening by blocking off the entire road during such operations. The Police department has our backs on this... they usually send a few officers to direct traffic and handle anyone who gives us grief.

Even so, I have personally seen a car drive down a road that was completely blocked by 5" supply line, not paying attention (actually, he was gawking at the building on fire instead of watching the road), hit the hose at a coupling destroying the coupling and disabling the vehicle. The driver got out of the car, cursed out the Chief and demanded to know who was going to fix his car!

I do not know what the outcome was, but I do know that before he left the scene, the Chief gave him a "claim for damages form" to file a claim against the city! If I was the Chief, I would have had him arrested for damaging City property, hindering emergency operations and endangering firefighter's lives (it interrupted water supply to the operating Engine, causing the operation to be halted and all personnel withdrawn).

It is generally accepted by firefighters here that Fire Departments and Firefighters in the north (particularly the northeast) are more appreciated by and supported by their local governments than we are. Our citizens love us... but that is not translated into support from above.

Atlanta Jake
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 30 November 2008, 06:55 PM
Atlanta Jake's Avatar
Atlanta Jake Atlanta Jake is offline
 
Join Date: 12 September 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southernap View Post
A inch and half hose or as ,both examples seem to show, a two inch supply line assume a diameter of either 1.5 inches or 2 inches around. So that physical dimensions preculde usage under both the cars shown also right up next to the fire hydrant a two inch supply line becomes very stiff and very heavy (something on the order of about 45lbs), with water at a very high PSI running through it. So you don't want to put any kinks into a hose line on the fear that if the line parts (which can happen to a hose of any age) then you have a while hose beating the snot out of everything and everyone out there until the water is secure. So because some pin-head parks in front of a hydrant the "easiest" thing to do in preventing damage to a fire hose would be to break the windows out and just run it straight out from the hydrant.
Southernap... those hoses are way more than 2"! Those are LDH (Large Diameter Hoses). I am not the best at sizeing them up, but they are 4.5" to 5" hoses.

In an addition to my previous post: when I joined the Department, we used 3" supply lines (2) to hook up to the hydrant (hence the "run the lines under the cars" comment). Now we carry both 3" and 5" supply lines. 5" is preferred for supplying a structure fire, but if faced with the situation in the OP, we would resort to the "old school" method of 2 3" lines, under or around the offending vehicle. As stated - the "through the window' method would not go over well here.

Jake
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 30 November 2008, 07:00 PM
Eddylizard's Avatar
Eddylizard Eddylizard is offline
 
Join Date: 15 June 2006
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK
Posts: 17,859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Jake View Post
In Atlanta, neither the Fire Department nor the city government would ever tolerate this. Intentionally damaging property (especially to make a point) would result in disciplinary action against the firefighter/s responsible.
Out of interest though, and leaving aside "just to make a point" would it be justifiable to cause damage to property to save property of greater value - or even lives?

If you had to smash in the windows of a car causing say $2,000 worth of damage, would it not be excusable if that was necessary and demonstrably provable as in the case of a blocked hydrant, to prevent a $200,000 house burning to the ground, and possibly necessary to rescue the occupants?

ETA I have no realistic idea of how much it costs to replace a cars side windows, or how much the average home costs in the US.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 30 November 2008, 07:08 PM
Atlanta Jake's Avatar
Atlanta Jake Atlanta Jake is offline
 
Join Date: 12 September 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddylizard View Post
Out of interest though, and leaving aside "just to make a point" would it be justifiable to cause damage to property to save property of greater value - or even lives?

If you had to smash in the windows of a car causing say $2,000 worth of damage, would it not be excusable if that was necessary and demonstrably provable as in the case of a blocked hydrant, to prevent a $200,000 house burning to the ground, and possibly necessary to rescue the occupants?
Certainly, anything is acceptable in an honest effort to save a life!

But with years of proof to the contrary, I cannot think that I could justify this particular operation.

Jake

P.S. Don't get me wrong! If I thought it would make a major improvement in the outcome of the operation, I'd do it in a heartbeat!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 30 November 2008, 07:23 PM
Eddylizard's Avatar
Eddylizard Eddylizard is offline
 
Join Date: 15 June 2006
Location: Tonbridge, Kent, UK
Posts: 17,859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Jake View Post
Certainly, anything is acceptable in an honest effort to save a life!

But with years of proof to the contrary, I cannot think that I could justify this particular operation.

Jake

P.S. Don't get me wrong! If I thought it would make a major improvement in the outcome of the operation, I'd do it in a heartbeat!
Thanks. Re-reading my post it may have come across as a bit snarky, but it certainly wasn't intended to be. I'm was just wondering how much the firefighters would value the law over a necessary part of their job - if that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.