Lieutenant Doug Mullford from Lisle-Woodridge (IL) send in a slight modification to the DCFD RIT mask spoke about here a few weeks ago.
They took the piece of hose and placed inside the webbing of the mask. The reasoning was they felt you could get a better grip on the webbing, and better be able to verify when the mask and webbing were properly seated. Lieutenant Mullford also points out that this medication eliminates the need to do any sewing. It’s simply another rendition of the outstanding idea originally presented by our DCFD brothers.
I like this a lot, in my dept. we also use scotts and we have bee looking for a way to better our RIT air pack. the best thing i like about this are the key rings on the straps. was there a reason for not putting them on the top straps also?
Quote Kyle: “Was there a reason for not putting them on the top straps also?”
I can’t answer for these ffs or their dept but in my dept the adjustment of the top straps isn’t always necessary as proper tension on the back of the netting (tube) usually takes out this slack.
Fits
Great additions btw! Manufacturers should be making this RIT facepiece ASAP.
kyle, we did add them to the top straps on ours and they work out great. For the cost of the key rings it was nothing to buy two more and put them on as well. We have also put the key rings on all of the zipper pull tabs of our RIT bags to assist with opening them with gloved hands.
Medication, or modification?
does the hose get in the way of the helmet. We have our in the original set up
Just my opinion, but the helmet probably wouldn’t make it back on anyway in a situation where this would be needed.
great idea….be nice if we could incorporate a balaclava and facepiece together in a RIT mask. Save some exposure issues during the changeover process.
Keith121 has a good point about the helmet. 9/10 times I find the helmet causes issues with keeping the integrity of the seal of the facepiece…especially with traditional style helmets with the large lip on the rear….FitSsikS will probably know what I’m talking about here. Lip pushes against the bottle and forces the front of the helmet to come down on the top of the facepiece and usually breaks the seal…unless you are micromanaging it.
Great ideas guys. I am trying to figure how to adapt this to our ISI facepieces.
The rings on the RIT bag is excellent as well. I’m making that modification when I go back on duty tomorrow.
This site has become a daily stop on my web rounds. When I figure out the ISI facepiece mods, I’ll post them.
The keyrings work great on anything with zipper pulls, especially if you may need to operate them with gloves on… We added them to our standpipe bag and even our EMS bags. (Pardon my French; didn’t mean to speak “engine” on here).
Another idea instead of keyrings for zipper pulls are the plastic cable ties. They are cheaper and you can make them anysize you need. Even though they arent metal they still retain their shape pretty well.
Has anyone used something similar to this on their personal mask? Seems like the tubing would help get it hooked on the back of your head easier/faster. I don’t think the rings would be a good idea due to the potential for messing up your hood and exposing skin or getting warm metal against your face.
For the zipper solution, we have found that we like using the small carabineers that you find at a big box store check out counter. The ones that say “Not for climbing; working load 150lbs”. They are a little beefier making them easier to find with the gloved hand. Give it a try.
I know that Scott has done an excellent job of putting very large zippers on their RIT packs and what not. I have never found it to be a problem of not being able to find the zipper. Whatever makes work easier. Be safe god bless.
One reason for not having rings on the top straps is that you can typically tighten the top straps on Scott masks, then leave the bottom straps loose when you take it off. Flip the net back over the front of the facepiece (instead of dangling loosely on the backside of it). When you go to put the mask on, you just press the face into it, flip the net over the head, and tighten the bottom straps. Top straps, once set, need no adjustment or loosening when donning or doffing.
This does a couple of things. First, the net somewhat protects the “windshield” of the facepiece from scratches. While it might be used for RIT, and visibility through the mask isn’t as important, you can do this for your own personal mask as well. Second, if the net is flipped over the front of the facepiece, you can just about guarantee that the bottom straps are loose enough to fit anyone’s head once flipped over. You won’t accidentally try to put a mask on yourself or someone else with bottom straps too tight to even go over your head.
The hairnet flipped over the front side of the lens is a common trick that dates back to the days of the rubber spider straps, and is still a common practice for the excellent reasons that Footrat listed, but…
If you use the older-style Scott mask that has the round black plastic nuts that thread onto a small metal post that sticks through the mask use caution! I’ve seen numerous occasions over the past 8-10 years where repeatedly folding the hairnet forward works those plastic nuts loose, to the point that they will eventually fall off, disconnecting the hairnet from the mask and causing the mask to fall off your face. I strongly encourage my guys to check those nuts at shift change to make sure each of them is at least finger-tight, and they are often found to be loose.
Be safe Brothers.
Chris
Another thing that makes the mask change out easier is to remove the nose cone. Now once the chin is in the chin cup it is straight up and back with the webbing.
Just decided to look back on this one after a while. I have to disagree with the idea of leaving the top straps tightened on the mask so only the bottom straps need to be pulled tight.
This may work fine for your own personal mask beause you know your head size and don’t have to change your mask to fit each time. We won’t necessarily be the same head size as our victim in a rit situation. The looser the straps, the easier it is going to be to get the mask on over the victims head, especially when we are pressed for time. What happens if it doesn’t fit? now it’s an extra step to loosen the straps to make it fit. We don’t leave the shoulder straps set on our s.c.b.a. and just tighten the bottom straps when we put them on, Just a thought.
How do you get around the members who think it is against the law to modify the facemask ?
Ask them to show you “the law”. If they can’t, then it’s just hearsay. I don’t know of any dictating how we set our equipment up (at least that’s what my brother’s roomate’s cousin’s friend told me). If your supervisors approve (hopefully they’re promoting safety/increased efficiency), then do it and let everyone else just complain. After all, they may be the ones benefitting from it someday (God forbid).
Good luck and stay safe.
We are implementing this idea at my department. My only concern is the key rings getting hot on the vitcim’s skin. Would large zip ties as stated above for zippers be better for the rings as well? It probably wouldn’t be an issue for most situations but you never know.
To Skintback… Using the same concept, I have sewn a leather “strip” folded over to the back netting of my mask. It’s out of the way; it form fits to the back of my head; and it doesn’t interfere with my hood or helmet at all. Before I sewed it on, I had to use an ungloved hand that took too much time… Now it actually works so good that I get my mask on with only one hand perfectly every time! I don’t know what I did without it before…
Scott specifically says that no modifications can be done to the scba masks.
I think this modification is great….I actually did the modification. Then it got un done and I got this email…….The SCBA mask in the RIC pack was un-modified as per FC Joh***ons instruction for the following reasons:
#1: Modifications to equipment need to be channeled through the correct chains; in the case of the RIC pack mask it needs to go to BC B***ning then to FF H***hins
#2: In the “Cautions and Limitations†section of the Scott users manual it states that… “Never substitute, modify, add or omit parts. Use only exact replacement parts in the configuration specified by the manufacturer.â€
#3: OSHA Title 29 CFR Part 1910, NIOSH Title 42 CFR Part 84 § H, and NFPA 1981 regulate modifications, repairs, and design of SCBA components
Please advise.
Tell FC Joh***ons to do a facepiece changeover using the standard facepiece then do one with the modified facepiece….with his facepiece blacked out and gloves on….tell him you’ll skip the heat and smoke cause you love him just that much.
I can understand “proper channels” and respect that but #2 and #3 comments…come on….sometimes we have to use our heads and some common sense.
Sounds like FC Joh***ons just needs his ego stroked abit….play by his rules, seek his approval and I’m thinking #2 and #3 may become none issues.
Wow Rob.
That’s awesome.
Firefighter safety first. If it makes our job easier then why not do it?
It’s easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission.
I think a demonstration to the FC would fix the problem, maybe for the whole department. An old sales trick is to make them think it’s their idea too.
Brotherhood above all.
Be safe.
Couple things on this come to mind right off. First, it is correct as mentioned that there are to be NO modifications done to any piece of PPE without it first being within manufacturer guidelines. Not only does it void any warranty but puts your department and the person that did the ‘improvement’ into the position of accepting full responsibility and liability in the event of failure or damage. I think that not only will your deparment’s attorney not be willing to accept that liability, nor will OSHA/NFPA or any other be willing to accept your ‘expert’ level of testing and authority to make modifications or look favorably on it during an investigation post incident.
Not that this isn’t a bad idea, something would be nice to help pull the net on. But there are proper ways to get things changed, have them tested to withstand what we do without us being the test dummies during an actual event and have it recognized and accepted by the manufaturers and regulatory agencies. Not to mention your department’s SOP’s.
Maybe we should look at having a bulier section of material in the base of the netting to help in being able to grab this with gloves on.
Realize that you are putting a piece of garden hose/plastic, that will burn or melt at a few degrees above boiling water, under your helmet and inside the neck of your coat. Not a good idea.
Also the large rings aren’t good either. I can relate to having them so you can grab them quicker and get a better time in turnout drills. Been there, done (Do!) that but again, think about it, you have a piece of metal absorbing heat laying up next to your neck, just where your hood has a habit of missing or pulling clear of! Granted, there are other pieces of metal loops on the mask, but we do not know what type of metal these are and what heat dissapating properties they have.
Maybe we should look at getting a larger piece of material sewn onto the ends of the straps.
So let’s see if we can get these ideas pushed through the NFPA SCBA committee as something to be looked at and addressed. Soon.
Also, that practice of folding the net/spider straps over the front of the mask is not good. I am just as guilty of doing it in the past. It is a habit I broke myself of and I stress to all the new ecruits that I teach. It puts stress and a memory onto the seal piece and it will not allow a good seal later on. Also, the newest ones will actually fail at that point due to the screws that attach the net at that spot pull through. My SCBA techs have reminded us of this many times over the years. I have had them look at this and again they shake their heads as they walk off mumbling.
Great ideas, but let’s get them to the right persons through the correct process and into the system in a good way and not through an after action report that describes how a modufucation with good intentions turned into something bad. Take care, Lee-YFD
Capt. Lee,
While I agree that everything should go through the proper chain of command, and that this creative idea should indeed be submitted to NFPA and the like, I must respectfully disagree with you on several counts.
Firstly, the voided warranty doesn’t concern me very much when I’m in the dark and can’t get a mask on a downed FF. I can also see the liability working both ways. What will the deceased’s family think when they’re told that there was a potentially lifesaving modification made, but it would have voided the warranty and was undone? People will sue for anything these days. As far as OSHA/NFPA/etc., most of their standards started out as ideas like this.
From the looks of these modifications, I believe they were made with the intent of not damaging the mask (the hose and rings go through openings already in the straps and webbing. Although you bring up a good point on the possibility of the hose melting, the FF is most likely on the floor, where temps. will be relatively low. As this is meant to get him air and get him out, I’d be willing to risk it (bottom of mask…probably protected by coat neck). As for the metal rings, come on…thin metal that would probably be dangling away from his neck after tightening the straps doesn’t seem to possess the potential for severe burns.
As for folding the netting over the front of the mask, I think that’s one of those different strokes for different folks discussions. We used to use Scott, and although I don’t know how their new masks look, the old ones (similar to the pics) have the straps connected to rigid parts of the masks, having no effect on the seal piece of the mask (look at DC’s pics on the post). That being said, you are correct regarding the rivets pulling through the material. We currently use MSA, which incorporates the straps connecting to the seal portion of the mask. As long as the straps are kept loose, I don’t see the problem here. I have had mine set up this way four the last 5 years with no problems with the seal. Either way, go with what works for you.
Thanks for the good discussion and and creative ideas from all, stay safe, and remember that the situation had already gone south. This good intentions may one day save one of us…
OBFD L-93 OOS/RIP
I have to agree with Nate on this one. The disclaimer for voiding warranties is posted on EVERYTHING. So that would suggest that just about every single modification, invention, or method to ease our fire ground efforts posted here on this site should be removed from service and passed on to the N.F.P.A.
As the pics show, the mask has not been altered from it’s original design, just added to.
As far as the melting and and heating up of the hose and rings goes, the hose is inside the fire resistant (N.F.P.A. compliant) netting. It would have to be subjected to some pretty extreme heat to begin to melt or burn, especially if it is also somewhat protected by the collar of the coat, the hood, or the ear flaps of the helmet. One of these things (maybe not all, because time is not on our side during firefighter rescue) should be returned to it’s proper position during a R.I.T. operation which in turn would provided some additional protection to the hose. I do agree that the rings can become heated because in the rush to get our R.I.T. mask back on they may not be covered in some way and could come in contact with our victims face but these rings would need to be subjected to some high heat for some duration to reach these temperatures. Our R.I.T. mask is kept in a typical R.I.T. bag until it needs to be pulled out and placed on our victim so it is somewhat protected. Besides, we should not be attempting a mask change out in conditions with temps that high. Move our operations to a safer spot such as out into a hallway or an adjacent room or we all risk becoming victims of burns, etc.
The placement of the head netting over the lens is discouraged by Scott but it does boil down to personal preferance. My experience with doing this is that yes, it does cause wear and tear and eventual failure of the connection points.
If the concern is with the fact that we might use a mask that isn’t compliant with some regulations, remember, each time we put an innertube, wooden door chock and a flashlight on a helmet it voids the warranty, or removing the reflective stickers to put numbers or other stickers on it voids its warranty. Niether makes the helmet unsafe for use. It doesn’t change its protective qualities from fire and impacts but we all do it. Not wearing waist belts on the S.C.B.A., no chin straps, wrong style gloves, the list goes on and on in every ones fire house. If this additon will make our operation easier and therefore quicker for saving the life of another firefighter, I’ll use it over and over.
warranties..warranties …warranties. I’m no lawyer but our concern for voiding the warranty is caused because we are modifying a portion of the harness? What would fail as a result of the modification? If the regulator fails do you think they would be pointing at the fact that the harness was modified?
A warranty voided on a single mask which is only going to be used in a life/death situation would be the least of my worries if I was worrying about anything coming out of using it during a firefighter down incident.
why are you worried about putting this on a downed ff with your gloves on? If we have time to place a RIT pack and mask on a ff then we have time to TAKE OUR GLOVES OFF! If it’s too hot to take them off, then it’s probably too hot (and too late) to take the time to put the RIT on. Yea the SOP’s say you will wear your gloves, but the 99/1% rules say you do what you gotta do when conditions warrant it. Take’em off and it will ease your operation; put them under your belt strap or wherever and put them back on when you need to go.
Our department just approved this modification and started changing all RIT masks yesterday. Going thru proper channels worked (this time) and it takes the worried liability off an individual.
Sorry JJ I have to disagree with you on the gloves. We all should be able to perform this task and any other task in a hazard zone without taking off our fire gloves. Training more often than you think you need it will eliminate some possibilities of being a victim with burnt hands.
JJ….
A better option- train, train, train!!
You’re not hearing me. No amount of training is going to replace the dexterity needed to perform some RIC ops. I want to meet the ff who is able to perform these ops in conditions where hands (and the rest of the body) will be burned. We ALL wear fire-resistant turnouts, not proximity suits, not fire-proof suits. We can’t operate(for more than a few seconds) or stand around in a ball of fire. Again, take the gloves off, change the bottle, put on the mask, whatever, put the gloves back on. Your RIC ops are built around no-vis, smokey conditions, not extreme heat, Hades-type fire all around you. Ain’t gonna happen. Think about it.
I think you will probably not perform a RIT operation in extreme heat but, there is always that chance, and thats still no excuse to take the gloves off. I believe we should be able to do everything with our gloves on… If your having problems with your structure gloves (and im no salesman) try out the Titan Pro-Tech 8 Gloves. Never done me wrong with dexterity ever. Anyways we are getting off topic. I agree with captain lee above in asking the manufacturer to make the change instead of us. I dont need or want the liability. Everything we use is tested to work and funtion with us (having gloves on) for the most part. its a good idea but i know that im profficint in dawning and doffing an SCBA mask on myself and down firefighters. Train till its time for the next training!