|
|
Post by Aussie on Nov 9, 2018 16:01:10 GMT -5
Pyro mate
|
|
|
|
Post by pyrot on Nov 9, 2018 23:55:37 GMT -5
I don't recognize that firing system. What is it they are using? Its a Pyromate system. At 1:08 in the video you get a good clear view of one of the modules, and you can read it. |
|
|
|
Post by pyrot on Nov 9, 2018 23:58:38 GMT -5
And not to be a critic, but I find it rather amusing that at the point they are talking and stressing safety, they are showing a tech putting his hand right in a loaded mortar ! !!
|
|
|
|
Post by markhampyro on Nov 10, 2018 17:56:36 GMT -5
Anyone have an idea what the best vantage point is?
|
|
|
|
Post by felix on Nov 11, 2018 16:17:20 GMT -5
On Saturday November 10th at 4pm, a licensed supervisor with 10 years experience, was removing leftover shells from the night before at the International Control Dam. An incident occurred and he was severely hurt. He was transported by helicopter to a hospital in Hamilton with major trauma to his face. There are many rumours on what happened, but regardless he is very hurt.
At this point they have postponed tonight's display, and tomorrow the Winter Festival of Lights will be making an announcement. When you look a their website, all the dates have been taken down. This may be the end of the competition after only one show.
I hope the Technician (Kenny) is doing well and makes a speedy recovery.
Play safe boys and girls.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aussie on Nov 11, 2018 23:17:55 GMT -5
We wish him a speedy recovery, nobody should go through that
|
|
|
|
Post by pyrot on Nov 12, 2018 1:13:22 GMT -5
Yikes !!!! Sad to hear that . Hope they are OK. This touches, and hurts all of us, but also serves as a good reminder/refresher of what we are "playing" with
|
|
rosafi
Junior Pyro Member
Posts: 82 
|
Post by rosafi on Nov 27, 2018 11:09:54 GMT -5
Was a Champion ever declared or with the large changes to scope and limited capabilities, was this turned into a festival instead of competition?
|
|
|
|
Post by londonfan on Nov 28, 2018 6:15:11 GMT -5
I was just wondering yesterday if anyone has heard any more on the recovery of the Technician?
|
|
|
|
Post by Grisom on Nov 28, 2018 8:01:54 GMT -5
Finland came in first, Brazil came in second and China was third . It was still a competition .
|
|
|
|
Post by felix on Nov 28, 2018 8:55:24 GMT -5
I watched the China and Brazil display live (not video), and from a competition point of view, they were both not good. Choreography was not existent, the product was repetitive, product was missing (due to the inadequate firing system). Definitely not a world class competition, it was more of a nice festival display.
I spoke with one of the designers of one of the displays. He indicated the nightmare of product changes, in accurate descriptions and unreliable firing system (half the finale did not happen).
The last I heard was the technician was in an induced coma, with major injuries to his face. The technician's name was Kenny, and we will probably never see or hear again.
|
|
Peter
New Pyro Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by Peter on Nov 28, 2018 21:44:53 GMT -5
Sorry to hear about the injury but I’m glad to hear that I’m not the only one who was not impressed by the China show. I might be biased since I am a Supervisor at a company in Southern Ontario, but when I was watching the show I kept thinking that we have done better.
|
|
|
|
Post by markhampyro on Nov 30, 2018 20:21:24 GMT -5
Horrible news about Kenny. You never want to hear anything like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigtop on Dec 11, 2018 13:25:47 GMT -5
I am posting here because it is my most sincere hope that the kind of accident that injured the tech at the competition can be prevented. I have no way of knowing the actual cause of the ignition that caused the accident but I saw 3 things in the videos about the competition that could have been done more safely. 1 - at 2:20 of the video (link below) a tech is installing an Ematch with the safety shroud removed from the Ematch contrary to ERD Safety Alert SA 18-02 Hazards of Electric Matches. There are also other points in the videos about the competition where it appears techs are installing unshrouded Ematches. However at 2:20 in the video the shroud is clearly visible lower down on the Ematch wire obviously having been removed from the head of the Ematch. www.wgrz.com/video/entertainment/television/programs/daybreak/previewing-cascades-of-fire/71-83082542 - Many times in the videos about this competition the techs put the Ematch into the mortar after connecting it to the Quickmatch. It is safer to leave the Ematch outside the mortar so that it is not necessary to put your hand in the mortar to remove it if for some reason the Ematch does not fire during the show. 3 - Some of techs do not seem to pay any attention to not putting body parts in front of the muzzles of the loaded mortars in the videos about this competition. Once the mortar is loaded with a shell it should be considered a loaded gun. Effort should be made to minimize body parts over the loaded mortar muzzles. Standing there with your face over the muzzle should be avoided. Ematches are by far the most frequent cause of accidental ignition of display fireworks. It is the nature of accidents like this that they are very rare and there are lots of old guys who have done the 3 things above all their life and never had an accident. They often make it more dangerous by saying I have done that for a long time and nothing has happened. The point is accidental ignitions can happen so we need to operate like they will happen. There have been 2 techs shot in the head with a fireworks shell recently in Canada (this incident and Bracebridge Ontario in 2016). We need to follow safe work practices and stop these tragic accidents from happening. When an accident with fireworks happens the consequences can be severe. We need to learn from accidents. Once the cause is understood we need to modify our work practices so that either the event does not cause injury or does not happen at all. |
|
|
|
Post by markhampyro on Dec 12, 2018 11:51:33 GMT -5
I agree to this. That said, the accident occurred the day after the competition when they were removing mortars not shot the night before. I’d be curious what the Ministry of Labour finds after their investigations.
|
|
|
|
Post by pyro on Dec 13, 2018 8:14:09 GMT -5
Agree as well. That's first thing I watch for after the incident. I could of happen when the match was pulled out of the quick match especially with an exposed head. But again, we can speculate all we want so I am sure or will hope this info is mention for future safety.
|
|
|
|
Post by pyrotechsupply on Dec 28, 2018 9:11:12 GMT -5
I don't want to sound like I am against fireworks competitions. If a competition is companies honestly competing to show their ability and skill to build their reputation that to me is a competition. That requires significant input on the part of the competing company making their best effort to win. I think we have fireworks competitions in Canada that foster that kind of participation. But is it really a competition if the organizing company buys all the fireworks, hires 2 guys from each foreign company to supervise the show setup and the organizing company competes every time a competition is held? It seems that is what is possible under the current Canadian regulation of international fireworks competitions. I 100% agree with you. This is not truly an international fireworks competition. This is a profit generating venture for the organizing company and a way from them to import lower cost products for them to use on a daily basis. A competition where the host country picks a couple (min) or a few participating country members and call that a multi country competition??? Sounds to me like stacking the deck, kind of like when you pay the media 500 m or allow non Canadians to vote. For these "competitions" to be true competitions ERD / other should step in and say all team members must be of said company and country with up to 2 Max Canadian =s as only guidance or assistance for rules or regulations nothing more. The resale of fireworks brought in should not even be allowed. Use it or lose it, as in if you don't use it in show it goes for destruction to ERD or local authority / police. That would level the playing field / be fair. |
|
|
|
Post by pyrotechsupply on Dec 28, 2018 9:13:56 GMT -5
On Saturday November 10th at 4pm, a licensed supervisor with 10 years experience, was removing leftover shells from the night before at the International Control Dam. An incident occurred and he was severely hurt. He was transported by helicopter to a hospital in Hamilton with major trauma to his face. There are many rumours on what happened, but regardless he is very hurt. At this point they have postponed tonight's display, and tomorrow the Winter Festival of Lights will be making an announcement. When you look a their website, all the dates have been taken down. This may be the end of the competition after only one show. I hope the Technician (Kenny) is doing well and makes a speedy recovery. Play safe boys and girls. Safe and speedy recovery to him. Sad to hear about these things happening. |
|
rosafi
Junior Pyro Member
Posts: 82
|
Post by rosafi on Dec 29, 2018 10:17:20 GMT -5
The resale of fireworks brought in should not even be allowed. Use it or lose it, as in if you don't use it in show it goes for destruction to ERD or local authority / police. The resale of any fireworks not homologated for use in Canada is already not allowed. Some of the teams bring their own products - they and the comp get an import permit for the items and the use of this would be governed by the permit. Where and when they use is already determined. The items are not permitted to be sold on the Canadian re-sale market. If the items are already on the approved explosives list, have already been tested and meet Canadian standards and requirements, then of course they are allowed. Many competitions in Canada use some products that are approved to fill out a show. Look at Dragons show in Montreal this year for example. They have stuff from GFA and a bunch of Vulcan 1.3G - all approved for use in Canada. The videos for Timmins clearly show they are using some Mystical products.
Are there people or companies taking advantage of this? That I can't tell you. But if so, it's already not allowed by ERD regs.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigtop on Jan 4, 2019 12:25:51 GMT -5
Yes the original intent of the regulations was to allow companies to "bring their own product" so that they can produce a fireworks show unique to their company for the competition.
Sometimes the foreign competing company does not "bring their own products". The Products not on the Authorized list are imported by and in the possession of the Canadian company organizing the competition. This is where the Canadian company can make a profit by selling the competition to the sponsor or sponsors of the competition. By doing this the Canadian company can make a profit from products not on the Authorized List.
A Canadian Company is competing in every competition they organize. The same foreign companies are competing in competitions organized by that company. The appearance of this is that the regulations intended to allow foreign companies to bring their own product is being abused to provide profit to the Canadian company free from the expense of Authorizing products for an indefinite period (on the Authorized List).
Aside from this issue there needs to be stringent tracking of the products not on the Authorized list brought in for competitions to ensure that they are not sold if not used in the competition. Yes it is already not allowed by the regulations but there is a profit motive so it has to be controlled.
|
|
rosafi
Junior Pyro Member
Posts: 82
|
Post by rosafi on Jan 4, 2019 13:26:22 GMT -5
A Canadian Company is competing in every competition they organize. While I don't disagree with lots of what you say, be careful to not paint every competition with the same brush. I will say it does appear that in the case of the Niagara Falls comp your statement holds true, but I know there are other competitions that do not have a Canadian team - in 2018 Vancouver did not (South Africa, South Korea, & Sweden)and Gatineau did not (US, Germany, Spain, China) - jus tto provide two comps organized by 2 different companies. |
|
|
|
Post by bigtop on Jan 4, 2019 14:32:41 GMT -5
I agree with you that there are fireworks competitions being held in Canada that are operating in the true spirit of competition within the original intention of the regulations. That is all good and let's have more of that.
A real governing organization truly independent of a Canadian fireworks company for a competition is a good 1st step to keep the operation of competitions within the intent of the regulations. This is in place for several of the competitions in Canada.
I realize that a Canadian fireworks company is usually involved in the production of fireworks competitions. There is a need for a Canadian Fireworks Supervisor, equipment, regulatory knowledge and personnel. If this is provided on a reasonable fee for service basis that seems like the right way to run a competition.
My only objection is when a Canadian fireworks company essentially uses the regulations for fireworks competitions to buy, import and sell fireworks that are not on the Authorized List of Explosives.
Companies that Authorize fireworks for an indefinite period (On the Authorized List of Explosives) spend a lot of time and money getting the Authorization. It is not fair or a level playing field if a company uses the regulations for competitions to buy, import and sell fireworks not on the Authorized List.
Some degree of forensic accounting by the ERD is probably required to ensure that the competition regulations are not used to buy, import and sell fireworks that are not on the Authorized List
|
|
rosafi
Junior Pyro Member
Posts: 82
|
Post by rosafi on Sept 30, 2019 15:40:47 GMT -5
Was thinking about Niagara's "competition" and logged in today to see if there was anything about a future return; which got me back in to this thread.
Does anything stop any company from authorizing any 'one time' imports and using at whatever shows they determine - think of rock concerts... Justin Bieber travels with pyro and they use items not on the approved list. They get a permit authorizing their items for import and use at specific shows/locations/dates.
What stops a company from paying for this license and doing the same for any items not on the approved list? Of course there is the cost to that, but Company XYZ could list all their July 1 dates and import special cakes for this.
I was thinking your problem may not be with importation for competitions, but with the importation process itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigtop on Oct 1, 2019 11:23:34 GMT -5
Yes that is the problem. The way the regulations are currently written there does not seem to be any control on companies importing fireworks or pyrotechnics for a "specified period" as is done for international fireworks competitions. The regulations mention a "special event" and there does not seem to be any circumstances excluded in the regulations about authorization for a "specified period" except that the place and date or dates of use must be defined. A Canada day fireworks show or any fireworks show would seem to fit in the definition of a special event.
So any reasonable control of this way of importing fireworks without having to bear the expense and risk of having fireworks tested is in the control of the explosives inspectors. They are given the power to deny an authorization on the basis of safety.
The original intent of the Authorization for a specified period was to allow competent foreign companies to use the products that they usually use when they travel to Canada. Authorization for a specified period was never intended to be a workaround for avoiding the testing required to Authorize a product for an indefinite period (on the Authorized list).
So if a competent company from another country has a need to work with the products that they normally use in their work the ERD should be able to look at the situation and be able to make a reasonable judgement as to the safety of allowing the authorization for a "specified period".
I would think that if someone did as you suggested and tried to authorize products for a "specified period" just to supply their domestic business that would be seen as an avoidance of the process of testing to determine if the products are safe and are being manufactured with quality control measures in place.
In answer to your question as to whether my problem is with the competitions or the importation process itself my problem is with Authorization for a specified period being used as a way import product for for reasons other than allowing foreign companies to work with the products that they usually work with. That was the original reason for the authorization for a "specified period". It was never intended as a workaround for Canadian companies to import fireworks without going through the testing process.
The process for Authorization for an indefinite period (on the Authorized list) is expensive, risky and requires competence and quality control. It is not a level playing field to allow Canadian companies Authorization for a specified period when it is being used domestically for profit.
|
|
??