Talk:Firefighter assist and search team

message: See my comments on the Firefighter talk page. -- backburner001 17:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (Same comment I left at Talk:Firefighter) Although I think they are fine as separate articles, you have a point about the content not being very exapandible.  I guess it would be okay to merge, but see what other people think. -- Natalya 21:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

text: (Identical comment left at Talk:Firefighter) The term FAST is very specific to American-style firefighting practices. During my eight years as a firefighter, I haven't heard of the phrase "FAST" ever used during firefighting operations. The concept of creating a team to rescue other firefighters is more of a tactical concept that is used when required operationally, rather than a "hard-and-fast" operational procedure that is part of every operational deployment. Most Incident Commanders, if they ever needed to rescue a firefighter in distress (a very rare occurance in Australian firefighting), would direct other firefighters to their rescue, rather than calling in a specialised team. I support the merge of the FAST article into the Firefighter article as one facet of firefighting operations, perhaps with a note regarding it's use. -- Jpmanalo 04:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It does go by both names, hence why "Rapid Intervention Team" is also mentioned the beginning lines. -- Natalya 10:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Firefighter Assist and Search Team]] merger proposal 

message: The duties of a RIT team are more of a rescue or specialized function of a firefighter rather than the traditional fire suppression duties.  Linking the term RIT or FAST to the firefighter or technical rescue listing as a job function rather than an all-encompassing job description would be more appropriate in my opinion.
I think listing RIT or FAST gives a lay person an idea that RIT or FAST is a job a firefighter does in addition to fire suppression.  In departments that do not embrace the concept of RIT or FAST, it may shed some favorable light; or at least an informed opinion.
In regards to the brother/sister from Australia, throughout the US RIT/FAST teams ARE a hard and fast operational procedure where a first alarm assigment company with a minimum of 4 people is dedicated to that position in addition to a RIT Chief.  By "directing firefighters to perform this function" after a firefighter has transmitted a MAYDAY has been shown to be ineffective and chaotic.  I agree that a firefighter in distress may not happen often, but there have been two RIT/FAST incidents in or adjacent to my fire district in the past year. One involved 3 firefighters in the bucket of a tower-ladder sustaining a indirect static lightning strike which rendered the personnel in the bucket incapacitated, the second involved a firefighter operating on the fireground transmitting a MAYDAY after being separated from his company under heavy fire conditions. By having a fresh, properly trained and equipped dedicated company, tragedy was averted. I understand that our RIT commitment may not mirror a national standard but based on our buildings and manpower, has become the norm.
:I concur and am willing to shed some light on the situation in Germany:
Fire departments here now provide one RIT per SCBA-entry point. Usually, at least one of these teams wears a 2-bottle-SCBA (2x6.5 Litres at 300 bars) with an additional connector and a spare medium pressure line. Additionally, depending on the local FDs policy, they carry breaching tools, spare masks and means of transportation (rescue sleds, rescue "buckets" and rescue cloths), carbines and loops, as well as a firefighter's knife or rope cutters. These teams are posted just outside the entry point (outside of any smoke) and their sole responsibility is to immediatley assist fellow firefighters in distress. Additionally, any SCBA-squad not immediately involved in a rescue mission and with enough air left, will probably cease their current activity and proceed to assist the RIT (the same everywhere, I guess). The German term is "Sicherungstrupp" or "Rettungstrupp". On a personal note: When I got my SCBA-Qualifications, the RIT training was part of the course. And probably the most intense part as well, since we were doing it on a stopwatch, in a worst-case-scenario (2 squads missing, we were one of two RITs).
Regardless of what one assumes to be the fine details between the two abbreviations for this general field: I have noticed that it primarily comes down to the agencies specific designation of what an FAST, RIT, RAT, etc. is. Of course we could just use the national stance which would null and void my entire posting here.--FiftyOneWicked 21:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  As separate as night and day 

message: Any thoughts on the way this article is capitalized? Since it's not a proper noun, normally it would be lower case (Firefighter assist and search team). If it were referring to a specific team, it would be upper case (the Engine 51 Firefighter Assist and Search Team). The Manual of Style at WP:CAPSACRS says that a word should not be capitalized just because it is used in an acronym. I suspect that in the firefighting literature it is often upper case, but I don't think it should be in a general encyclopedia. It's had this capitalization since the article was started in 2005, so I thought I'd check here before changing it. Thanks, SchreiberBike talk 05:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization