By John Kenneweg

As today’s threat landscape continues to evolve and become more complex, the need for new, innovative technologies has only increased. First responders rely heavily on their toolkits to identify threats in the field with speed and confidence, making them a critical component of every mission.

In the early 2000s, the first handheld analytical tools for chemical identification were introduced. These tools not only changed the way in which chemicals were analyzed in the field; they also redefined the capabilities of the nontechnical user.

Capability gaps still exist, however, as some techniques have been slower to join the handheld revolution. For example, until recently, mass spec, a powerful chemical analysis technique, had yet to transition into a true handheld tool. Person-portable instruments that can operate downrange have been introduced, enabling some mass spec analysis in the field. However, because of size, weight, and complexity, along with ownership costs, widespread adoption was still limited.

Despite recent breakthroughs in mass spec, first responders have remained weary of its application, holding fast to the belief that it is both highly complicated and requires extensive “care and feeding.” While this idea is not entirely off base, the recent introduction of a new form of mass spec, high-pressure mass spectrometryTM (HPMS), has shattered these myths, allowing first responders to leverage the powerful capabilities of mass spec at the push of a button.

Let’s take a look at four major myths that exist in the industry to further understand how and why the aforementioned HPMS is debunking these notions as they relate to size, ease of use, cost, and toolkit capabilities.

Myth #1: Mass spectrometers are so big that we are going to need a mobile lab. It is true that traditional mass spectrometers are large, cumbersome instruments. The introduction of the portable mass spec systems was an undeniable step forward; however, today’s “luggable” instruments remain large, complex, and fragile, resulting in limited field deployment.

HPMS breaks all myths associated with the size of mass spectrometers, as it allows for several key components of the instrument to be miniaturized. It also removes the need for large, bulky vacuum pumps that limit conventional mass spec approaches. As a result, current HPMS tools weigh less than 2 kg (4.4 pounds) and are battery-powered for continuous operation in the field. Compared with conventional mass spectrometers, HPMS tools are 70 times lighter and consume about 100 times less power. For first responders, this means immediate answers in the field at the push of a button. Gone are the days of sending samples back to the centralized lab for testing.

Myth #2: Mass spec can only be performed by scientists and Ph.Ds. Traditional mass spectrometers are mostly confined to central laboratories. As such, first responders have held only one particular vision about who can operate the instruments: Ph.D.s in white lab coats. Again, this assumption is not entirely unfounded. Conventional mass spectrometers, those found in the centralized lab and their field-deployed “luggable” counterparts, are extremely complex and require extensive training to operate. Within a centralized lab setting, there is usually one individual with a Ph.D. who has been trained to run, interpret, and maintain the instrument-that’s how complex they are to operate.

Unlike conventional mass spec instruments, HPMS tools are simple to use. The tools require minimal training, meaning that responders can begin field use after just a f

By John Kenneweg

As today’s threat landscape continues to evolve and become more complex, the need for new, innovative technologies has only increased. First responders rely heavily on their toolkits to identify threats in the field with speed and confidence, making them a critical component of every mission.

In the early 2000s, the first handheld analytical tools for chemical identification were introduced. These tools not only changed the way in which chemicals were analyzed in the field; they also redefined the capabilities of the nontechnical user.

Capability gaps still exist, however, as some techniques have been slower to join the handheld revolution. For example, until recently, mass spec, a powerful chemical analysis technique, had yet to transition into a true handheld tool. Person-portable instruments that can operate downrange have been introduced, enabling some mass spec analysis in the field. However, because of size, weight, and complexity, along with ownership costs, widespread adoption was still limited.

Despite recent breakthroughs in mass spec, first responders have remained weary of its application, holding fast to the belief that it is both highly complicated and requires extensive “care and feeding.” While this idea is not entirely off base, the recent introduction of a new form of mass spec, high-pressure mass spectrometryTM (HPMS), has shattered these myths, allowing first responders to leverage the powerful capabilities of mass spec at the push of a button.

Let’s take a look at four major myths that exist in the industry to further understand how and why the aforementioned HPMS is debunking these notions as they relate to size, ease of use, cost, and toolkit capabilities.

Myth #1: Mass spectrometers are so big that we are going to need a mobile lab. It is true that traditional mass spectrometers are large, cumbersome instruments. The introduction of the portable mass spec systems was an undeniable step forward; however, today’s “luggable” instruments remain large, complex, and fragile, resulting in limited field deployment.

HPMS breaks all myths associated with the size of mass spectrometers, as it allows for several key components of the instrument to be miniaturized. It also removes the need for large, bulky vacuum pumps that limit conventional mass spec approaches. As a result, current HPMS tools weigh less than 2 kg (4.4 pounds) and are battery-powered for continuous operation in the field. Compared with conventional mass spectrometers, HPMS tools are 70 times lighter and consume about 100 times less power. For first responders, this means immediate answers in the field at the push of a button. Gone are the days of sending samples back to the centralized lab for testing.

Myth #2: Mass spec can only be performed by scientists and Ph.Ds. Traditional mass spectrometers are mostly confined to central laboratories. As such, first responders have held only one particular vision about who can operate the instruments: Ph.D.s in white lab coats. Again, this assumption is not entirely unfounded. Conventional mass spectrometers, those found in the centralized lab and their field-deployed “luggable” counterparts, are extremely complex and require extensive training to operate. Within a centralized lab setting, there is usually one individual with a Ph.D. who has been trained to run, interpret, and maintain the instrument-that’s how complex they are to operate.

Unlike conventional mass spec instruments, HPMS tools are simple to use. The tools require minimal training, meaning that responders can begin field use after just a f

By John Kenneweg

As today’s threat landscape continues to evolve and become more complex, the need for new, innovative technologies has only increased. First responders rely heavily on their toolkits to identify threats in the field with speed and confidence, making them a critical component of every mission.

In the early 2000s, the first handheld analytical tools for chemical identification were introduced. These tools not only changed the way in which chemicals were analyzed in the field; they also redefined the capabilities of the nontechnical user.

Capability gaps still exist, however, as some techniques have been slower to join the handheld revolution. For example, until recently, mass spec, a powerful chemical analysis technique, had yet to transition into a true handheld tool. Person-portable instruments that can operate downrange have been introduced, enabling some mass spec analysis in the field. However, because of size, weight, and complexity, along with ownership costs, widespread adoption was still limited.

Despite recent breakthroughs in mass spec, first responders have remained weary of its application, holding fast to the belief that it is both highly complicated and requires extensive “care and feeding.” While this idea is not entirely off base, the recent introduction of a new form of mass spec, high-pressure mass spectrometryTM (HPMS), has shattered these myths, allowing first responders to leverage the powerful capabilities of mass spec at the push of a button.

Let’s take a look at four major myths that exist in the industry to further understand how and why the aforementioned HPMS is debunking these notions as they relate to size, ease of use, cost, and toolkit capabilities.

Myth #1: Mass spectrometers are so big that we are going to need a mobile lab. It is true that traditional mass spectrometers are large, cumbersome instruments. The introduction of the portable mass spec systems was an undeniable step forward; however, today’s “luggable” instruments remain large, complex, and fragile, resulting in limited field deployment.

HPMS breaks all myths associated with the size of mass spectrometers, as it allows for several key components of the instrument to be miniaturized. It also removes the need for large, bulky vacuum pumps that limit conventional mass spec approaches. As a result, current HPMS tools weigh less than 2 kg (4.4 pounds) and are battery-powered for continuous operation in the field. Compared with conventional mass spectrometers, HPMS tools are 70 times lighter and consume about 100 times less power. For first responders, this means immediate answers in the field at the push of a button. Gone are the days of sending samples back to the centralized lab for testing.

Myth #2: Mass spec can only be performed by scientists and Ph.Ds. Traditional mass spectrometers are mostly confined to central laboratories. As such, first responders have held only one particular vision about who can operate the instruments: Ph.D.s in white lab coats. Again, this assumption is not entirely unfounded. Conventional mass spectrometers, those found in the centralized lab and their field-deployed “luggable” counterparts, are extremely complex and require extensive training to operate. Within a centralized lab setting, there is usually one individual with a Ph.D. who has been trained to run, interpret, and maintain the instrument-that’s how complex they are to operate.

Unlike conventional mass spec instruments, HPMS tools are simple to use. The tools require minimal training, meaning that responders can begin field use after just a f

By Chris Mc Loone

There are times when organizations analyze where they are and their current status and realize that change is necessary. Dwelling on how the entity arrived at its current location is less important than making the necessary changes and moving forward. A similar situation is playing out now at the Boston (MA) Fire Department (BFD) regarding its fire apparatus fleet.

BFD Lieutenant Jim O’Brien has been tasked with turning around not only the fleet but also the department’s fleet operations. The two go hand in hand. To meet the fire department’s operational needs, the apparatus must be mission-capable. But, to ensure each rig is mission-capable means having a fleet maintenance operation that can meet the needs of the apparatus. The combination of an aging fleet and a fleet maintenance division in need of standardization created a situation that required swift action to correct.

State of the Fleet

According to O’Brien, the BFD’s fleet is in transition. “The fleet has been degraded by age,” he says. “The average age is 17 years on a fire truck right now, excluding a group of apparatus that have been very problematic that we are removing from the fleet as we get replacements. So, the age of the fleet is a challenge. The state of the fleet is barely adequate, but we’re making major progress. These things take time.”

O’Brien adds that Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and BFD Commissioner Joseph Finn have made the department’s fleet a priority and are moving very quickly to increase the fleet’s capability. “That means buying new fire trucks and fixing the fleet maintenance operations,” says O’Brien. “We’re really going at full speed. But, it takes time to get money, to get contracts, and to build these systems in the shop. So, the state of the fleet is improving.”

Fleet Maintenance Overview

O’Brien has been in charge of the department’s fleet for nine months. Finn had identified a need to reassess the department’s total fleet operations. “This was the result of an internal assessment of fleet conditions and then an independent consultant’s assessment of fleet maintenance operations,” states O’Brien. One of the reasons O’Brien is involved now is because of his work on driver training. “One of the reasons I was involved is because after the Kevin Kelly incident of January 9, 2009, there was a very clear need for improved training in our environment,” he says. “The department needed to do a better job training the drivers. I volunteered to develop a driver training program. We developed it to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1002, Standard for Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator Professional Qualifications. We were very successful. We had the implementation plan, and we started rolling along and we were executing. We were achieving our goals and getting great feedback.”

1 For the Boston Fire Department’s new ladder trucks, it was critical that personnel could get down streets, set the aerials up in a timely manner, and get to the roof and windows of buildings of a certain type that are representative of Boston. (Photos by Bill Noonan.)

O’Brien states that it is very important to Finn and Walsh that the department have an organization that is run by professional mechanics and fleet managers. “So, that is ou