Do you like to read the Friday Funnies?

September 2015, #2: Calling All Firebugs!

1. Welcome to the latest edition of the Summary of Mishaps. This week’s focus word: accelerant, both suspected and verified, not involving the crime of arson.

A. An E-6 ended up with first-degree and second-degree burns on his face, neck and arms when he tried to ignite his charcoal grill.
He should “consider other safe alternates for lighting grill,” the mishap report decreed. If that doesn’t raise more questions than it answers, I don’t know what does, since whoever made the report didn’t bother to tell us what method the E-6 had attempted (and failed at). I have my suspicions.

B. Speaking of fireballs (and unanswered questions, for that matter), a lance corporal was at a friend’s house in North Carolina. During the mid-afternoon, the mishap report says, he was “trying to light a fire in the backyard.” The next thing we know is that he suffered first- and second-degree burns to his face, along with second- and third-degree burns to his abdomen, arms and upper body
What was he trying to burn? Unknown. Ignition source? Unknown. Accelerant used, and if so, what kind? Standing too close? Exact role of friend before he had to try slapping out the flames on the flaming Marine? All unknown.
I can never figure out why these reports have to be mystery stories.

C. And then there was the E-6 who was trying to clear some land by burning fallen trees. The wood was wet and refused to ignite. Did he wait for it to dry out and come back later? No. He reached for (you don’t have to guess this time) a container of gasoline and sloshed it around. He carefully put the gas can a “safe distance” from the fire. Then he returned to the downed timber and tossed on a match.
At this point, something definitely burst into flame: his hand and arm, on which he had spilled some of the gasoline.
I’m here to tell you, there’s no safe distance from an accelerant when it is on the end of your arm, I don’t care if your name is Usain Bolt.
The mishap report says this guy was an E-6 fire controlman. I know it wasn’t that kind of fire, but that’s still too good to pass up.

D. As I have just proven three paragraphs in a row, I am occasionally confused. I wonder why certain statements were made (or more often, not made) in mishaps reports. Sometimes I have a hard time visualizing reported events. And sometimes I wonder if something was even possible.
Such was the case of the E-3 hull maintenance technician, aboard an amphib in the yards. He was unplugging a 440-volt cable when a drop of water he later described as "electrically charged" dripped on his left index finger, causing a shock.
My problems understanding the nature of electricity have been well-documented in this message, generally triggering well-meaning emails stuffed with information about amps, volts, watts, hertz, sine waves and other technical whatnot that always leave me feeling dumber than when I started. In the case of the electrically charged drop of water, however, I was fairly sure that wasn’t possible, even though the cable was in standing water.
The mishap report saved me the trouble of going out on a limb, because the reporter pointed out that “electricity does not work in the way the service member describes.” The shocked E-3 was “probably just surprised by a cold drop of water unexpectedly touching him” while he was handling the cable.

2. That’s all for this episode, friends and neighbors. See you next week.
http://www.public.navy.mil/navsafecen/Pages/funnies/funnies.aspx