Firefighters Flooded Rig, Caused Oil Spill, Suit Says

Originally posted by rebeldog
why do so many fawn over the debutantes/firefighters? they coulda used halon..i guess that woulda required thought.. not something required of a tard who just has to spray water on a fire!!! a 3 year old can figure that out

get off the firefighter jock america!!!!

Halon has been banned since 1994
Banned from new production, except for military use, as of January 1, 1994 as its properties contribute to ozone depletion and long atmospheric lifetime, usually 400 years.

Plus it only works in closed spaces.
This was a open drilling deck fire.

Bit off topic, but still relates to this topic.. i.e fighting rig fires with water..

I find co-incidental in a bizaare way that the previous rig on this well head, known in the UK as Tharos (Now Transocean Marianas) used it's fire fighting equipement and water cannons to try to put out the Piper Alpha rig fire in the North Sea that cost 167 lives.

So using water to fight a fire on one of these rigs appears not to be uncommon.

Link to Wiki on Tharos
en.wikipedia.org...

Common good said:

Why didnt BP close it off before the firefighters did their thing? Or am I missing something here?

Because they were fleeing for their lives maybe?

Only slightly greedy of them, but hey that's kinda how things work I suppose. I doubt they will win the suit though but I guess we'll see.

[edit on 16-7-2010 by ghaleon12]

I believe the trip here is to divide up the responsibility for the sinking and help to obfuscate the real causes of this unholy disaster. (BPs intense greed and negligence.
The company went against the advice of its hired experts as well as cheaped out on the safety equipment and proceedures to save time and money.
Its BP all the way wrong in this case and any subsequent actions by responders is negligable.
This suit goes nowhere but it will allow BP to have others to point the finger at, thus relieving a bit of the stigma they have heaped upon themselves.

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45


This documentary deals specifically with the initial fire-fighting effort .

Oil Disaster : The Rig That Blew Up



45 minutes long. Worth a watch IMHO.

reply to post by ANNED


reply to post by ANNED


reply to post by ANNED


Thank you ANNED. This type of contribution to ATS threads is what I look for. I learned much about a topic I know little about. I hope a mod or two comes in here and gives you an applause even though I know you probably don’t care about them… Thanks again.

so everyone knows on land you use foam to smoother a fire fueled by oil ,grease, gasoline etc. so my question is would it have been more practical to use foam instead of just water on the horizon fire?

and 2nd question if it is more practical to use foam in a situation like this why was foam not used?

3rd question. if it is more practical to use foam and the fire boats are not required to use foam now should it become required that they carry foam and start using it on oil rig fires?

as for this lawsuit, the judge should toss it out, th fire fighters were just doing their jobs trying to put out the fire and save as many lives as they could.

reply to post by LadySkadi


COULDN'T pass the test?? I am a disabled vet of both the marine corps and the coast guard (where we are trained as firefighters).actually, I have been involved in fighting a delta class shipboard fire. not to mention the C.F.R (crash/fire.rescue) cert ified training my unit received..

yeah, any idiot can put out a fire with 1 week of training.. how about that, I was a firefighter on top of my regular duties..

I saved more lives than 10 of the avg firefighters in this country.. they are over glamouried debutantes!

I'm just sick of people fawning over them... for every firefighter in this country, there are 10,000 more who could easily do the same job.. sound like something special? sound like a unique talent? psychologically upwards of 70% of the us population have the intestinal fortitude to be a hero, given the opportunity..

Yeah blame it on the firefighters so the government / tax payers have to pay for all this, and not BP... now I'm mad!

Everyone points fingers like freaking children when money is involved. This world makes me sick!




[edit on 16-7-2010 by NineEleven11]

reply to post by mrwiffler


lol. I knew I was missing something. Thanks for not being too rough.

Originally posted by buddha
I can not belive the water sank it.
are they not ment to stay up in heavy storms?

if they had let it burn.
would it not have colapst from the intence heat?

the sad thing is.
I bet they let they get away with this

I was thinking the same thing. This is crazy. Where will the maddness end? They had better stop this or the next rig will be left to burn.

Noone has mentioned this yet, but if there were to be a rigged lawsuit that pinned the blame on the Fire responders (part of government) Then BP is off the hook for the bill.

[edit on 16-7-2010 by LadySkadi]

Originally posted by Mercenary2007
so everyone knows on land you use foam to smoother a fire fueled by oil ,grease, gasoline etc. so my question is would it have been more practical to use foam instead of just water on the horizon fire?

and 2nd question if it is more practical to use foam in a situation like this why was foam not used?

3rd question. if it is more practical to use foam and the fire boats are not required to use foam now should it become required that they carry foam and start using it on oil rig fires?

as for this lawsuit, the judge should toss it out, th fire fighters were just doing their jobs trying to put out the fire and save as many lives as they could.

Foam does not have the range of a water stream. and in this fire it was to hot to get close to the rig.
Foam only blocks the burning of oil it hits.
If you have new oil feeding the fire you have to keep adding a lot of foam.
AFFF is the best but is toxic to fish and only used when it has to be.
In most cases this is inside a vessel and if the vessel does not sink the foam is not pumped out till the vessel is dockside and the water can be treated.
All fire boat have some foam but this fire lasted for 36 hours and most ships have only about one to two hours worth.
Plus these ships were not fire boats but Rig Tenders(primary function) that have good firefighting capabilities as a secondary function. These rig tenders can also be used as tugs in a emergency.
www.tdw.com...

Many larger tenders, tugs, and fishing vessels carry firefighting equipment they do not need for there own use as Marine salvage laws make it rewarding to the owners, captains and crews to help vessels in distress.
en.wikipedia.org...

I know of one fishing boat captain and crew that under a Pure Salvage claim made a lot of money going aboard a burning and abandoned small cargo vessel and putting out a fire and then putting the vessel under tow. By the way the captain of this fishing boat was a ex US Navy Chief Damage Control petty officer
usmilitary.about.com...
Him and his crew(also ex navy)made more on salvage that year then fishing.

[edit on 17-7-2010 by ANNED]

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45


While I understand that fishermen etc, are the plaintiffs, I would love to know who organized this lawsuit. Its such a perfect way to set the stage for BP not paying for the damages. And if you can get a sympathetic set of victims to do your dirty work for you, you dont even have to look like an evil oil company trying to get away with environmental destruction. You can just sit quietly and let this all play out in court, and much, much later, use this judgment to build a case for none of this being your fault so that you dont have to pay out big time yourself.

Not saying they ARE behind the organizing of this lawsuit, only saying that this sure is convenient for them.

reply to post by ANNED


Thanks for the explanation.

i wondered why they didn't use foam, now i know. i have to admit i know very little about firefighting especially on an oil rig. just seemed a little more practical to use foam on the rig fire to knock down the flames if they could. since it is lighter than water and would have less of a chance of sinking the rig.

maybe one day they will invent a non-toxic foam and a better delivery system for it in a maritime environment

edit: star for you as well


[edit on 7/17/2010 by Mercenary2007]

Originally posted by rebeldog
reply to post by LadySkadi

 

COULDN'T pass the test?? I am a disabled vet of both the marine corps and the coast guard (where we are trained as firefighters).actually, I have been involved in fighting a delta class shipboard fire. not to mention the C.F.R (crash/fire.rescue) cert ified training my unit received..

What test????? I have been on three fire departments since i left the navy and acted as a fire department trainer on all them.
I am also disabled vet. US Navy and have been through the navy's advanced firefighting school.

There is no test for volunteer fire fighters. and with my navy training no volunteer fire in the right mind would turn me down as most are short of volunteers.

Even if i can not fight fires because of my disabilities i can still train others.
Its only unionized professional fire departments that test there fire fighters.

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45


holy jesus, mary mother, joseph, moses, adam, eve, mohommed, budha, and kermit the frog!!!

who's the P.R. marketting geniuses that came up with this? my tax dollars paying for this circus?

someone pass me a size 14 bozo shoe so i can plant it knee deep in someone's ...


is someone wanting to pick a fight with firefighters or does is just seem like they have been having a rough time since september of 2001???



does someone want to see the last straw?

who in their right mind picks a fight with firefighters???
who huh what ??

there was once a line, these bastards are a few steps past it, me thinks.

ah...

forget bozo's shoe, get me my old firefighter boots, ... ya ... now let's superglue some razor blades to one of them...

Operation B.P., (British Proctology) roughly translated into firefighter jargon.



[edit on 17-7-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]

reply to post by ANNED


Water freely available as well , however it was how the water was laid on in what quantities which is in question ,eg technique..