Specifically halogen is a column of gases in the periodic table, including fluorine, chlorine, bromine and iodine.
To be used in fire extinguishing system, they are first tightly bound with something else, so that they can no longer react.
Essentially it is like pre-burning them, so they can not support any additional chemical reaction.

Not that it matters, but I have seen them use all sorts of things, from simple standpipe on buildings, to automated foam jets, to explosives.
It depends on lots of things that I would not care to know about.

Wrong again.
I have said what I have observed when it showed what you said was wrong.
No matter what I know, you would still be wrong.
All you have a right to question is what I said, not who I am or what else I know.

Actually, since the environmental concern over Halon, people have been using other halogens lately, and the term halon is on the way out
Saying Halon is like saying xeroxing to refer to copying something in an HP copier. Halon is really obsolete and halogen is more accurate.

So we are even because I was wrong on the university fire technology.
But none of this effects whether the test was bad or not.
And I still see no reason to believe it was a good test.

I have provided the links to the articles where the city, competitors, and firefighters association all said the test was bad.
I quoted fire fighter's arguments about not being based on the station material or procedures.

And no, they did not get a low grade, but not in the percentage skimmed off to get the promotions.
If some people would not have done as well, then the percentage skimmed off would have gone lower.
The results were percentile based, and not a fixed cut off.
So I think they have a right to be upset when they found out they were beat out of a position they may be better qualified for, because some people spent thousands making sure they would be above them in the test results.

Then please link to the post where you provided those links.Uhuh, sure. Now, could you please link to the post where you provided it? See, right now, you're wasting much more time telling me about how you did it (supposedly), when it would be much faster and easier for you to link to the post where you supposedly provided said link. I'm waiting.Well, since your link apparently explains all of this, perhaps you could actually link to it?

You are, once again, wrong.

Code inspections are done on a daily basis across the entire nation by line officers on fire apparatus.

Again, what experience do you have? Are you so dishonest that you can make claims based on your experience, and yet refuse to explain what experience you have?

Matt

Maat, whatyou've illustrated is nothing more than you are adept at Google.

You have zero firefighting experience...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

No, it would NOT be much faster and easier for me.
One would have to search back over all these pages you guys have spammed, or go back to goggle search on the original case.
And since I already put in my time on this, it is your turn.
You should have already read all this material, if you had gone through the entire thread, as I did.

But there really should be no need, since no one should have much of a positive opinion of standardized testing.
Everyone should expect it to be flawed.
Nor would anyone expect people to spend thousands preparing.
That should annoy people, that high positions like this can be bought.

As I already said, there are inspections for things like blocked fire exists, combustibles near ignition sources, etc., but NOT of the functioning of the basic fire systems.
There is no way anyone would ever let a fire inspector fool around with their air compressor, smoke sensors, alarms, valves, etc.
It is very easy to damage a system like that, and only the installation company is certified or allowed to test it.

And NO, I have not made any claims based on my experience.
I have only a few times said what I have observed, such as airports, harbors, and refineries having their own specialized firefighting equipment.
That is not experience. Anyone can observe that.

So what if that were true?
There is nothing in this discussion that requires any fire fighthing experience in the least.
We are discussing standardized testing, that all the evidence points to as being bad.

Completely wrong.

Unlike yourself, I have personal experience in the fire service.

And I've personally done what you are ignorantly claiming "never" happens.

It's plain you are just making this shit up as you go along.

Matt

Maat - if the fire inspector wants to monkey around with it, the building owner doesnt have much of a choice. It is absolutely within his scope of authority and duty. He is obligated to ensure it works - not just read an inspection certificate from the installer.

Sorry but you're 100% wrong.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

You haven't shown any "experience".
You should know how bad these tests are.
Everyone who takes them always complains about them.