dunno where to post this so i post it here Any firemen out there

Firefighting isn't weaponry.

>>34557423
>Also why don't firemen wear full fire proof suits like picture related

They fires they are fighting involve higher temperatures.

File: IMG_5370.png (147KB, 459x306px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 459x306px

>>34557432

File: 1492876307348.jpg (102KB, 700x535px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 700x535px

Fire fighters are pretty high tier bootlickers. They get anything they want, while basically doing nothing most of the time.

Biggest bunch of spoiled whine-ass babies I've ever met. Still better than cops though.

>>34557423
>drones for firefighting
This hasn't been done presumably for a few reasons: One is because drones can't carry much weight, so forget using them to carry water. Two is that drones have been in wide use for roughly four years, and it takes a while for organizations to get over the "It's a toy" sentiment and begin to use it in a serious manner.

Like the military application, drones are valuable for their remote sensing/video ability, and their use will tend towards that.

>>34557423
Those are proximity suits, not great for structure fires. Notice no scba gear, it'll be useful for like 30 seconds and then you inhale a fuckload of carbon monoxide. Turnout gear is used for structure fires, and they're made of nomex. You also cannot wear a helmet with proximity gear.

>>34557423
>full fire proof suits like picture

That's not a fire proof suit. It's a proximity suit that allows you to get close to intense heat without turning into jerky. It'll stand up to about 10 seconds of direct flame contact before becoming something very much like those sleeves that you microwave Hot Pockets in.

Prox suits aren't as durable as regular turn out gear. That aluminized outer coating flakes off, the whole thing becomes useless. They also suck especially hard in cold weather.

>>34558545
I think quite a few fire districts have been confiding drones, but it's more of a cost and logistic issues.

It'd be most useful to an incident commander, but I think most people in that position would be too tech illiterate to be the ones operating and bringing it to the scene. Most regular apparatus wouldn't have space to spare. So you'd either keep it in a utility truck have to waste a man to drive it to the scene, or maybe put it on a support unit like a rescue or a dedicate rehab unit. You would actually probably would want the drone to be there first though for size up, and those units usually aren't the first to arrive.

>>34557423
the biggest problem will always be the weight of water. Water weighs a lot. and depending on the fire you need a loit of water. Figuring out the logistics of storing, transporting and using water is the big thang

drones as they are now cannot carry anything comparable to what a Sikorsky or any other water dropping aircraft can carry.

MAYBE, in the future you might get a drone that can lift several hundreds pounds, let it tow a line with a simple harness on it and use it to lift people instead of using helicopters. But thats just purely for fun.

>>34560613
Chicago fire has incident commanders in a Ford Police Interceptor SUV, they could put the equipment in there with an operator