JFLYNN

Oops, I hit post prematurely...anyway, the brother who private messaged me got me to thinking that I should not have referred to Manlius in my post about crawling...for all I know, the two brothers WERE crawling. It was pure speculation on my part and I shouldn't have done that. I apologize for that and hope it didn't cause any heartache for anyone. To be clear, no one from Manlius contacted me to complain about this but in case any of those guys were bothered by my post, I want to make a heartfelt apology with no excuses at all...I just screwed up!

Thanks for the observation Bill. I realize I was being a bit of a wise a**, but the point I was making in my last couple posts is that you really can't compare Firefighting tactics from Europe (or even Phoenix or Delmar, NJ) to Firefighting tactics employed in older cities and towns in the U.S. There are so many differences- some obvious and some not so obvious regarding the typical building construction which will be encountered, and I just didn't want to get into a debate about this...it could really go on forever and I'm mjust not into it. I just thought I would pass along what I feel is a valuable tip- you guys can consider the source and either use it or not. Be safe and qtip.

Europe? Phoenix? (one of their busiest companies too!!); Delmar??? Like I said, whatdoiknow???

you are right about the problem of tunnel vision but I don't agree with your ideas on how to avoid it. I don't know much about Europe but in my experience in actual Firefighting as well as in training as both student and instructor, modified crouch is ok for nozzleman as well as maybe his Officer and backupman once water is flowing and they are operating the nozzle (I guess I should have mentioned that) but crawling is more practical for everyone else...less physically taxing, faster, lower profile, more balanced, more body surface on the floor (distance from each elbow to wrists and distance from each knee to toes vs. bottoms of two feet- therefore greater likelihood of feeling fire victims, obstructions, etc.). As, I said, "regardless of heat conditions, if you can't see your feet, crawl", so I am not advocating crawling only when "conditions are such that you are driven that low"...certainly if it is too hot to stand without getting burned, then we should consider carefully whether to remain where we are, advance or retreat based on a number of factors, chiefly among them possible life hazards, but we certainly can not always wait "until conditions improve" "before going deeper into the structure" But whatdoIknow?

Thanks but actually the only way to go down stairs is backward as if descending a ladder...this way your profile is much lower than sliding down on your butt or walking down in a crouch...if you trip or fall, you fall into the stairs, not the basement or floor below, your head is protected, and if you need to make a fast retreat up the stairs, you are already pointed in the right direction and alot less likely to get tangled up on debris, tools, or other firefighters.

QTIP, I'm not...you just asked a question, no problem at all.

Thanks for posting those. I really liked those pics. Like Tom Wanstall, this photographer had a knack for capturing firefighters facial expressions in the midst of the action, which really seems to tell a story and make the pictures artistic. You don't see that in many fire photographers today. I frankly am not all that interested in pics of big shiny red trucks or scary orange flames and black smoke. To me, it's the human element that is the beauty of our profession and this photog captures that beautifully.

Ove the last two or three years, there have been extensive talks and research involving YFD management, unions, elected and other governmental officials, as well as the developers themselves, regarding the issues you have raised. At this time, no final decisions have been made, and it would not be appropriate for those of us who have been involved in these discussions to divulge any of the details of what has been discussed on this site. Nothing is imminent.

I noticed in the Incident Alert that the Armonk Engine dispatched to the Chappaqua fire today was "retoned for a driver" approximately 30 minutes after the initial dispatch...questions I have are: was this Armonk Engine part of the initial assignment? If not, at what time were they requested / dispatched? Did a driver ever show up? If so, what time did the Engine arrive on scene and how many interior qualified firefighters were on it? Last, did this delay effect the outcome of the fire? Thanks!

We don't have Chauffers, we have Drivers .

Is another year or two too long to wait (assuming you are correct which I'm not assuming) ? Well, ds on whether or not you or amyone you care about will be having a medical emergency in Northern Westchester during that time...if the citizens of this, one of the most affluent counties in the world only knew how long they or their family members will probably have to wait for adequate EMS response for a life threatening emergency and how relatively inexpensively the problem could be fixed... What can be done to improve? Either go with a career/ paid service, or, as OVAC does, sign up for tours and staff the ambulances properly...that's being a true volunteer...commit to being in the station, ready and able to respond 24/7, 365, and I wouldn't care if you were paid or not- this is not a career/volly issue- it's a hypocrisy issue. For a simple MVA with a stable patient and a door pop in most small towns in Westchester the response is so enormous it's almost incomprehensible...why, it's exciting and glamorous- hero stuff, whoopee...Then, next day same time see how long it takes to get two EMT's to show up for a diff. breather or seizures when someones life is truly in danger but not so glamorous...this has been happening daily for at least the last twenty to thirty years.

This reply is what I refer to as "blame shifting" or "attack defense"...there is a real problem in Northern Westchester with EMS and the poster correctly pointed that out. IMO people die and suffer needlessly because completely inadequate volunteer ambulance corps refuse to regionalize / consolidate / allow a career service, or have real accountability. Maybe if those of us in the know keep pointing this out things will change eventually...so, many of us are "concerned about it", and we do want to "become a solution to the problem"...we just realize that the solution os not to "join one of those agencies and cover some of the calls"...to do that would be to become part of the problem, not to solve it.

NIMS guidelines advocate for the use of clear text (plain English) in multi-jurisdictional incidents...there are very many reasons why 10-codes are a more effective means of communication within an individual department or even a region as long as all the involved departments use the same 10-codes. For instance, you and I may differ on what a "working fire" is and what additional resources we will need if we pull up to a working fire...a 10 code such as 10-30 or 10-75 specifies exactly what will be needed at the scene...there are many more examples of the benefits of 10 codes but I'm not motivated enough to go on and on right now...suffice to say that IMO communication is one of, or the, most critical aspects of fire and emergency services, and also IMO NIMS has been useful but the old expression applies...sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing...many in emergency services have had a little NIMS training and they mistakenly feel it is the answer to all of our communications problems...it isn't...

10-30 for YFD = 10-75 for FDNY which previously in FDNY (many years ago) had been 10-30 and before that "all hands fire" which I believe is still used also....prior to late 70's or early 80's Yonkers used the term "working job" then went to signal 10-30 I believe during the tenure of Commissioner McLaughlin, retired FDNY.

I enjoy this site for several reasons, primarily for the ability to check incident alerts to see if anything major is going on in the area. It's frustrating to click on incident alerts such as the Pleasantville Roll Over one today and realize that it is a completely routine incident which probably happens on average a couple of times per day in Westchester County. It would be nice if incident alerts could be limited to major incidents and the routine pin jobs, dryer fires, etc. could be left out.

Seth, I do agree with you that in some ways, Austin seems very progressive. I like the idea of employees being able to submit ideas to reduce costs and employees receiving incentives for their ideas if used....I would hope that the incentives would be a decent percentage of what is actually saved though and not just a small token. City's should operate somewhat like businesses, the problem with funding for public safety, i.e. Police, Fire. EMS, is that most business models do not translate well to the framework for what is necessary to provide adequate public safety departments. Some of what we do is measurable by objective standards, i.e. 'the bottom line", but much of what we do is not. That's why the public has very rarely embraced private, for profit companies providing their Police or Fire protection, alla Rural Metro in Rye Brook. Also, generally, it is highly illegal for a public safety union to strike or have a work slowdown, and our own values and morality would normally not allow us to even consider such measures, so our employers have an equivalent obligation to treat us differently (better) than simply a worker on an assembly line. I couldn't agree more with union / management cooperation and compromise but this is a two way street. I'm not so sure the members in Austin are completely happy with their working conditions or if maybe they are just content and afraid to "fight" city hall.

Isn't the policy of sending a two man medical squad from an engine staffed by 4 or 5 actually reducing staffing? Are there two SOG/ SOP books- one for when the engine is adequately staffed and one for when it's not? Should they rename themselves Austin EMS Department (and sometimes we do fires)? So, the raise and "perks" which had been mutually agreed upon by the union and the city and were "temporarily" deferred...do you think that if we were in the midst of another booming economy that the city would have agreed to open the contract to change the raises to a larger percentage and given some more "perks" as you call them? BTW, these raises and "perks" are what most of us rely on to send our children to school, ballet lessons, go on vacations, etc., etc. We weren't crying during the dot com boom or the real estate bubble when we were out in the streets in all kinds of weather, holidays, etc., and every idiot with a white collar was making big bucks and looking down their noses at us. Once you show the city that you will give up agreed upon raises or benefits to save jobs you have opened a Pandora's box which will be very hard to close. We live up to our obligations and our employers should live up to theirs. When the contract comes up for negotiation, then talk. Don't ever be ashamed of the fact that we do this for a living, we are worth every penny we are paid and then some, and we will always strive to earn as much as legally possible. Firefighters and unions in general did not cause this mess we are in.

What CAN we accuse you of Chris?? The shame is, sometimes when you "redact" the statements of certain members, you are actually saving them from themselves but I guess it is necessary sometimes.... Have you noticed though that a lot of people on here seem to be getting the whole qtip thing lately? That's good. Repetition breeds Retention.... BTW, I'm typing this as I crawl down the longest, smokiest hallway in the world, in my Carharts, with a stogie in my mouth no less....

Thanks for making me smile Barry Actually I laughed out loud. I wish I had your energy to come up with all the numbers you constantly bring forward...of course, this is all no surprise at all to so many of us, but it's good, healthy fun, isn't it?

You have accused me of presenting "false information", and of "uninformed comments", but you haven't been able to show any of us which of my posts you are referring to, nor have you refuted any of my statements with facts... I agree with you when you say "when a volunteer system works efficiently, a paid system will never be the best option...", of course that's true...if the service is truly "volunteer", meaning no pensions, vacations, oops I mean conventions, exorbitant "training" expenses, elaborate social clubs, oops, I mean firehouses, tax breaks, etc. etc. In other words, the people providing the service do it for free, like many of us on this board do when we volunteer for various charities.... ...now we need to define "efficiently", don't we? Who gets to define "efficiently"? You? Should we all just take you at your word as you suggest? Wait, maybe I should define "efficiently"? Oh, I forgot, I'm just a chest thumping, union, career guy who presents propoganda, false information, and uninformed comments, so I guess it shouldn't be me either....hmmmm, oh, wait, I have an idea...shouldn't we have a process whereby you, I, and anyone else who wants to gets to present their ideas and opinions and then the taxpayers can decide what their definition of efficient is and how much they are willing to pay for it? Just a thought, brother... Now have fun hitting this curve ball out of the park. I'm sure that you will respond and perceive that your response does just that. The proof will be in the pudding though, and the proof will certainly not be the death of the volunteer fire service, IMO. There will always be a need and a place for volunteer fire departments, and as I have stated before, I am no enemy of the volunteer fire service...but change is a coming to both career and volunteer fire departments throughout NYS and the nation...regionalization and consolidation are the wave of the future, and that IMO is a very good thing. It will benefit both the public and firefighters, both career and volunteer, and the only ones who will be "hurt" are those who only care about their own egos and their own little kingdoms, who cannot demonstrably deliver cost efficient, effective fire protection and are not willing to change, because like it or not, the light has been shown on the problems, and serious change is coming.

Nice Kyran...I think I'm one of the few people on here who gets how you know what the spectator was saying AND also your R1/DD label (very creative, btw)

"which in turn leads to the possibility of a community of a fire district foolishly voting to consolidate, when it wasn't their best option." Oh my goodness, Chief, you actually wrote that....this is the crux of the whole issue...do you really think that the residents of your community shouldn't have the option to vote to consolidate because they are too foolish? You make a lot of assumptions in your posts about the intentions of other members of the fire service but you don't back your assumptions up with facts. Again, one of the good things about a forum like this is the posts remain there for all to see. I don't believe that either Bnechis or myself have made statements about other people's intentions, their feelings, or what is in their heads. We have presented factual information, expressed our own opinions, and sometimes asked questions, but never accusations about the intentions of others. Reading your posts gives me the feeling that you are saying to all on this forum, "you're either for us or against us brother"...most on this forum will see right through that...reasonable, intelligent people can disagree on issues, not take it personally, and realize that we are "for" or "against" a certain issue or point of view, but we are never "for" or "against" one another...

You're way off the mark here...please guys, try to get at least the basic facts right before you chime in with an opinion...it has been mentioned many times here that schools are not part of this bill- there already is a mechanism in place to consolidate school districts and over the years many districts have consolidated. Regardless, why in the world would you think that this bill in any way could result in you paying for Yonkers school kids???? BTW, what exactly is a "COMMAND CHIEF"?

If everything is so hunkydory, why are you all so opposed to (afraid of) this bill? The taxpayers love you and appreciate all you do for them and wouldn't even think of changing anything, so giving them the option to do so won't hurt you in any way I guess....

So, when you do the fundraiser for the "Carribean trip", you are very clear with the people who are donating where their money is going, right? And you buy what's best (the best) when "you" have the money? Whose money is it anyway? Obviously you continue to demonstrate whose money you think it is. Wow, thanks for giving me a choice...it's newsday or "the brotherhood", huh? I'll take choice "C", thanks.