Raz

If I was unclear in my post I am sorry, I am not saying that they are "just" drivers as I stated they perform a very important task, but in my experiance I think that most Career Firefighters would rather be doing the day to day operations. This may not be true of all Career Firefighters, but the vast majority of those who I know, that work in jobs where they are chauffers, always say they wish they could do more. The advice I have heard many times is to try to get to the busiest job you can get to because there is more room to advance and try diffrent things. And FYI the "just" was written like that because we all know that in a lot of cases those "Drivers" are doing a hell of a lot more then driving and in some/many cases are setting the pump, streaching a line, and making a search before the volly's even show up.

And I think that the two of you should take a second to reflect on your storied exploits in the fire service in the scant few years since you've been 18. You know, the ones that allow you to call academy graduates who are 25 years into their career "just drivers." Perhaps those guys transferred because they were sick of 20 year old kids fresh out of FF1 who, in a mockery of the service, wear captain's bars, passing judgment on their profession.

I believe the key term here is "on the job". The firefighters that are possibly going to be replaced are truly "on the job". They took a competative written and physical agility test, passed a medical exam, attended a 14 or so week academy and work on engine/truck/rescue companies with a crew and boss. What these future "career" positions are is nothing short of scab positions that are going to be handed out to friends of the right people, some of whom could not pass a third grade spelling test. It is an absolute disgrace to not only Stamford but the fire service as a whole and it certainly screams to me "well I couldn't get on the job anywhere through the front door, so let me just sneek in through the back". Horrible and sickening!!!

OH PLEASE STOP ALL THE BACK PATTING!!!!!!!!!
This is simple economics 101. If I am giving away 40% of my calls I am not making money on these calls.
So I contract for $400.00 a day for coverage and bill an average $400.00 a call, they are making 80% instead of 60% even for 5 calls a day.
At 5 calls a day after the first call its a profit of $1600 before expenses, not a bad days pay for sitting back. Who will lay me odds that the poor VAC will all so solicit funds in the form of donations. All this and they give their members a $400.00 a month LOSAP.
It will probably be promoted as its helping the public, but they are also helping themselves more

And far more to do than slogans. Actions speak louder than words.

I don't understand what you are trying to ask would you please elucidate for me. thanks

Because the majority of the population of the US pays for career fire services and with this bill they get to subsize communities that chose not to fund career fire departments.
The main purpose of this bill is to convince volunteers to vote for those politicians. We all know that "real" volunteers don't need benefits to get them to volunteer and many on here have honestly stated that the perks have done more damage than good.

That's pretty much what happened. At the beginning of the incident, L4 made the best spot they could under the circumstances. They had two engines in front of them, and multiple LDH lines, on a very narrow street that reached a dead end directly in front of the fire building. Later in the incident, rigs and lines were repositioned and L4 was able to get to a more viable position. I'm still amazed at how the MPO's operated three rigs in such a tight space.

So I'm an idiot, I drew in 171 instead of 174. Substitute accordingly.
To better demonstrate my answer about the ladder positioning:

This is the positioning in the posted pictures. They were taken relatively early on in the course of the incident.

This is the positioning I was referring to in my response. The MPO's (and many spotters) made use of every square inch of asphalt to position L4's turntable almost directly in front of the building (I still refuse to call that thing a "house"). The was literally not an inch of road to spare at the end of it. Webbing was used to slide LDH into positions that that allowed the rigs better access.
Also, I'd like to second the thank you to Scarsdale FD for the ground ladders. That's textbook Fast work.

I wasn't there for the first hour or so of the incident, so unfortunately I can't answer some of those questions, and I'm not going to speculate as to the origin. I will say that the building, while obviously type III construction, was pretty unique in layout. The width of space between the stone exterior walls or slate roof, and wood/sheetrock interior walls was much larger than usual. At many spots, finish carpentry was used to install cabinets, closets, and rather deep shelving recessed into this void space. It is possible that the fire spread rather quickly throughout these voids. This would correlate with the description I was given by guys on the first attack lines.

It doesn't come across in the Google map overhead view, but the driveway is at an incline. Coupled with the retaining wall between the driveway and the front yard, and the guardrail at the end of the street, it would be a tight fit. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, I'm just not sure. A lot of guys' boots were sinking into the lawn while going back and forth from the rigs to the house, so if it couldn't support 200 lbs, I'm sure 60,000 lbs wasn't an option.
No doubt the TL could've helped with this. Regardless of the response time question, I feel this is a prime example of a house (slate roof, steep pitch, elevated master streams needed) that would benefit from having a tower ladder in operation. White Plains did have a bucket on scene, but attempting to put it to work would've proven a logistical impossibility, as it would've needed to get past 4 rigs, 3 of which were actively engaged in fire suppression; as well as roughly 500 feet of LDH.

Manpower is allowed to drop to 6 (between the two engines and the ladder) before OT is used to fill vacancies.
Someone is always supposed to be present to help the driver back up the rig. Whether that person is a rider on the truck, or a firefighter from another rig, will vary.
The front and rear jacks, like the outriggers, are hydraulically powered.
It does have a lot of strength, but I couldn't tell you any specifics and be confident about the numbers.

If there are so many issues with this unit is worth it to rebuild / rechassis?
In investigating the costs I found you save approximatly the resale value so bying new and taking the trade in is almost the same, but you end up 100% new and the old one stays in town until the new unit arrives. Otherwise your only ladder is out of town for months.
Can you explain why you think it is perfect for Hartsdale?

Thanks Chris. Exellent points. Just for clarification our additional alarms are normally 2 Engines and 1 Truck so that would be only 12 people total (all companies are staffed by 1 Officer and 3 Firefighters). The remaining Battalion Chief with his Aide (there are two on duty at all times) and the on call Deputy (no aide) come with the second alarm so the second alarm would actually have 15 members and all additional alarms would have 12 members.
We call mutual aide once we go below 3 Engines and 2 Ladders in the City and we do try to get them back to their municipality as soon as possible by freeing up in service companies as well as recalling off duty members to man spare apparatus which are normally equipped and ready to go. We also call in an off duty Battalion Chief with Aide to man a spare Battalion car and cover the city once we go to a third alarm. One thing we are lacking which we have been fighting for years for is 24 / 7 Fire Department supervision of the civilain Fire Dispatchers which would really help in situations like last night. There was a lot of scrambling behind the scenes to keep the city adequately covered, as well as get our off duty members in and out the door on the spares, send the mutual aid back, rotate fresh crews to the fire scene, transport injured or exhausted members etc. while at the same time maintaining accountability of everyone and everything....thanks to the mutual aid departments who came in as well as cooperation from union leaders, off duty members, etc. this was all handled pretty well last night.
Although you point out the benefits of certain aspects of our manning and organization, I would state that we are actually at a bare minimum right now and I couldn't imagine what would happen if we were forced to operate with less companies, less manning on the companies, or less staffing on the administrative side.

^^^Excellent post, really sums everything up perfectly.
Yes, it's class time on EMTBravo, which always seems to be given by the members who are eager to share the wealth of knowledge from their 3 years in the volunteer fire service.
You can argue semantics all you want, but at the end of the day, fire departments are funded by tax money (and EMS billing if they're savvy/sketchy enough to split that portion off into a separate entity like some districts). If you honestly believe that every single non-firematic expense of a district, professional or volunteer, is paid for solely through 2% money or fundraising, then you're being purposefully obtuse.
Furthermore, I would argue that an overwhelming majority of the public has absolutely no idea of the differences implied by signs that read "Support X Fire District", versus "Support X Fire Company." You can argue that that's not your problem, but then it veers into the murky area of misleading the public.
Either way, this is a simple contract dispute that will be settled by a grievance, and rather quickly.

There've been many discussions on this board about the pros/cons, advantages/disadvantages, etc. of various staffing configurations and response times. Here's a great example of what can be done (numerous rescues and, as PEM03 said, preventing extension to exposures) when you respond with a full complement of qualified personnel in a timely fashion. It also highlights the benefits of training, pre-planning, and discipline to make sure that the two first and second due ladder companies were able to set up at the front of the fire building.
On the initial call there were (approximately)32 +/- fully qualified "interior" firefighters managed by at least one Chief and seven or eight company officers. I guess we can forget the 4 in 4 or 10 in 20.
The second alarm and third alarms brought (again approximately) 20 more firefighters plus officers to the scene and the fourth brough still another 16 plus officers. This doesn't count the support services that were undoubtedly involved (mask service, fleet maintenance, etc., etc.)
All this was in the first 22 minutes - sixty-eight firefighters plus officers and support. Add EMS and at least a dozen police officers and supervisors too.
The other interesting note in the IA (great one BTW Truck4 and you still managed to get pictures!) is that the mutual aid was relieved by reserve apparatus staffed by recalled firefighters so as not to hold equipment out of its home jurisdiction for a protracted period of time. How many departments have the apparatus to do that or organize their own personnel to release mutual aid instead of holding everyone at the scene. Didn't a recent thread on the subject of staffing say something about having 50-60 firefighters on the scene of a fire in a single family dwelling? How many weren't working and could have been deployed to other apparatus to increase available resources in that community?
I don't understand why instead of aspiring to meet NFPA and other standards, we buck them with all kinds of excuses and then criticize those who advocate a single standard to raise the bar and improve things for everyone.
Given the proximity of the exposures, narrow one-way street in front and limited access from other sides, it was indeed an impressive stop.
Before the nitpicking begins, the times and numbers are all approximated.

After 11 years as a volunteer in Westchester I could not tell you which depts operate with that company/district funding separation. I'm fairly savvy and involved and still can't tell, what are the chances the average citizen can? When you go out collecting as the company do you do so completely independent from the district? For example wearing or using district equipment? How about on district property?

^^^Excellent post, really sums everything up perfectly.
Yes, it's class time on EMTBravo, which always seems to be given by the members who are eager to share the wealth of knowledge from their 3 years in the volunteer fire service.
You can argue semantics all you want, but at the end of the day, fire departments are funded by tax money (and EMS billing if they're savvy/sketchy enough to split that portion off into a separate entity like some districts). If you honestly believe that every single non-firematic expense of a district, professional or volunteer, is paid for solely through 2% money or fundraising, then you're being purposefully obtuse.
Furthermore, I would argue that an overwhelming majority of the public has absolutely no idea of the differences implied by signs that read "Support X Fire District", versus "Support X Fire Company." You can argue that that's not your problem, but then it veers into the murky area of misleading the public.
Either way, this is a simple contract dispute that will be settled by a grievance, and rather quickly.

I never understood how people can say this out loud and think that it sounds like a logical argument in defense of their position. I'd rather be without the extra yahoos that show up for the "big game" as they generally tend to:
-Get in the way of people who are properly trained and practiced.
-Make the situation worse by making the wrong decisions.
-Use resources that would be put to better use in more capable hands.
-Complicate the chain and scope of command.
I'm not denying that big games draw big crowds, but to hear people put that forth as a positive thing is ridiculous. Give me a small army over a large armed mob anyday.

I never understood how people can say this out loud and think that it sounds like a logical argument in defense of their position. I'd rather be without the extra yahoos that show up for the "big game" as they generally tend to:
-Get in the way of people who are properly trained and practiced.
-Make the situation worse by making the wrong decisions.
-Use resources that would be put to better use in more capable hands.
-Complicate the chain and scope of command.
I'm not denying that big games draw big crowds, but to hear people put that forth as a positive thing is ridiculous. Give me a small army over a large armed mob anyday.

That's actually not what mutual aid plans are drawn up for, at all.

What happened yesterday at the Mohegan fire on Young Street?
I heard E258(?) state they did not have enough personnel on scene to make an interior attack.
Is there a problem with manpower? Would it be safe to say that it's time to start automatic dual responses there?
Is this part of that OSHA issue a few months ago citing the District for reducing staffing?
Thanks.

This guy is his own worst enemy when it comes to being taken seriously. "Firefighting attracts a lot of immature people, who feel they don't need to grow up." OK, that's fair. Hell, I might even be inclined to agree. Then he goes on to list a few examples that back up his point, but what's with the rest of that list? A fill the boot to benefit Muscular Dystrophy? It sounds like conditions might not have been optimal (where I live, excessive fill the boot events caused the city to put an end to them altogether), but to count that as a "childish act?" Really? Also, that "loose change" that's "shaken down from motorists" adds up. I think my union cleared 5 figures for a few hours worth of effort.
As for some of the other examples, they're despicable acts that go way beyond immaturity. This guy needs to go back to journalism school.

This guy is his own worst enemy when it comes to being taken seriously. "Firefighting attracts a lot of immature people, who feel they don't need to grow up." OK, that's fair. Hell, I might even be inclined to agree. Then he goes on to list a few examples that back up his point, but what's with the rest of that list? A fill the boot to benefit Muscular Dystrophy? It sounds like conditions might not have been optimal (where I live, excessive fill the boot events caused the city to put an end to them altogether), but to count that as a "childish act?" Really? Also, that "loose change" that's "shaken down from motorists" adds up. I think my union cleared 5 figures for a few hours worth of effort.
As for some of the other examples, they're despicable acts that go way beyond immaturity. This guy needs to go back to journalism school.

This guy is his own worst enemy when it comes to being taken seriously. "Firefighting attracts a lot of immature people, who feel they don't need to grow up." OK, that's fair. Hell, I might even be inclined to agree. Then he goes on to list a few examples that back up his point, but what's with the rest of that list? A fill the boot to benefit Muscular Dystrophy? It sounds like conditions might not have been optimal (where I live, excessive fill the boot events caused the city to put an end to them altogether), but to count that as a "childish act?" Really? Also, that "loose change" that's "shaken down from motorists" adds up. I think my union cleared 5 figures for a few hours worth of effort.
As for some of the other examples, they're despicable acts that go way beyond immaturity. This guy needs to go back to journalism school.