FFPCogs

The traditional rivalries between agencies has long been a bane to smooth operations at larger incidents, even when spelled out in advance. It is no different between FDs alone either..the "this is my sandbox" mentality stills rules in most minds, especially here in the Northeast. Now I'm a fervent traditionalist in many areas of the fire service, mostly having to do with the attitudes and hows and whys of how we conduct operations. One area though where I'm am most definitely not a traditionalist is when it comes to working together, be it between individual FDs or multi agency cooperation. Pride should not get in the way of providing the absolute best service possible, and yet pride is one of the main stumbling block to that end. One of the other huge factors is money...in a nutshell the more we do the more we're worth. Loss of control or authority if you prefer of incidents could cost far more than simply prestige. Jobs, funding and in some cases maybe even the very existance of an organization is tied to their ability to "handle" their duties. Who in their right mind would not fight tooth and nail to protect that? So what then is the answer? Well first off any organization that has as it's primary duty the safety and welfare of the public as it's mission should ensure that it's members are up to the task. If you want to call yourself a fire dept, BE ONE!!!!! Meet the responsibilities of the job by making sure your members are up to the challenge through training and keeping an adequate number of trained personnel available. (For career dept that may mean relying on volunteers at times to assist you and for volunteers that means training your people thoroughly to meet that possibility). FDs that have even a remote chance of working together should avail themselves to training together at least a few times a year and should maintain official contact regularly to update SOP/Gs and info. Now when law enforcement and fire mix there is a long history of an oil and water relationship..the only way to alleviate that is to determine the role of each BEFORE an incident and adhere to that determination during one. Of course there is one more factor and it is probably the most difficult task of all to accomplish...compromise. Maybe a good hard look at how things were and how they are now will dictate that compromise is called for to ensure what is best for those we ALL serve. It may mean reduced funding or staffing for YOUR agency, but a better overall ditribution of resources. Or maybe it means an increase for all. Compromise may mean any number of things to you in your circumstances, the point being that compromise usually in the end serves all. It seems to me that somewhere along the line the most basic of the tenets that should drive us all has been lost, that being that the public we serve comes first. And that loss folks is a cancer the will serve no one well. Cogs

Rest in Peace and condolences to the family and friends Cogs

I do not disagree with the principle of having 2 engines supply attack lines using different water sources at all, and all things being equal would love to see that at every incident. By the same token though in my experience that ideal is not always attainable and the job MUST still get done with what is available. As far as LDH, well I have a hate - hate relationship wth the stuff, but it is now the way things are so..... ah well that's another topic. Cogs

Much has been made here of multi agency/jurisdictional issues, and rightly so since unfortunately they do exist. One possible way to reduce those issues is to train regularly with those other agencies that you may have to work with following mutually established protocols. Proactivity instead of reactivity can do wonders to solve these issues before they start. Cogs

Two water supplies and lines stretched from different rigs is ideal, but in many cases not practical for a variety of reasons. As it is fire scenes have become overly congested with apparatus due to the increases for RIT/FAST and incoming mutual aid in most volunteer areas (not to mention POV responders in many of those VF districts). Then of course there is the pitfalls of operating off the same mains, thereby running the risk of reducing the effective water flow for BOTH Engines, especially with the now ubiquitous 5" supply lines. Does the possibility exist for catastrophic pump failure? Of course it does, but I think a look at statistics will show that this occurs so infrequently that it is a negligible risk. Can supply lines be cut or damaged? Absolutely, but driver's should be trained to fill their booster tanks immediately after a water supply has been established to offset this possibility and allow for the interior crews to make an exit should this occur. Now this attitude is not meant to be flippant or "unsafe", but we can "what if" scenarios to death and work diligently to cover all those what ifs at the expense of simply going in and putting the fire out. In many cases by the time that second supply is established and that second line is in place the fire is (or to be frank should be) long since out. As the old adage says "put the fire out and all the other problems go away" and that folks is absolutely as true today as it ever was. Cogs

Ok first off I realize this is the firefighting section but I have some questions for you all pertaining to training which are not training opportunities, so if this is the "wrong" place my apologies. As a member of my FDs training division I would like to get a feel for how training is conducted elsewhere as I (we) are always looking at ways to better the training we provide our membership. To that end I have a few questions for dicussion. 1) How often do you train? 2) What type of training is regularly conducted? 3) Are your drills scheduled in advance? If so how long? 4) How are records kept? Does anyone keep individual personnel training records beyond copies of certs ect? (one of my ideas is to keep hard copy individual records in addition to company or departmental records for each member, tracking each drill so as to insure each member is up to date on not only "new" training but more importantly the basics). 5) Do you engage in scenario or company based drills? (For scenarios if so how often)? 6) Why is your training program designed the way it is? Or what do you hope to achieve by doing it the way you do it? Ok well hopefully that will get the ball rolling and feel free to bring personal opinion into this for discussion, just no bashing alright guys. Thanks Cogs

There is another aspect to training which I didn't mention and this is more opinion than standard. For my department (and most VFDs that I've been involved with) as I see it a good deal of time and effort should be placed on training members to think for themselves. Now this does not mean freelancing, it means giving each member the knowledge and skills necessary to react to an incident properly without an Officer's direction. Now this may very well be the dinosaur in me, but it has been and still is my experience that Officers are not always intitially present when arriving at an incident. Our procedure places the Chauffer in charge and personally I find nothing wrong with that standard, but at a working fire it is the crew that will have determine the course of action once things are going...the Chauffer will have his hands full operating the rig. To that end to me it is imperative that members gain the knowledge and experience to make the "right" choice as to line size and placement, scene priorities, safety and so on (for other incident types the same applies...getting done what needs to be done safely and efficiently). This is where training comes in, by engaging members in scenarios or cimcumstances where no Officer is present during drills, followed by in depth critiques of the drill, they will BEGIN to gain the insight necessary into make those judgements. Informal critiques, which do in and of themselves constiture training, after even minor incidents also helps with this because it allows members to understand the decision making processes utilized by the Officer's in making particular decisions on scene. This further increases the members knowledge and prepares them to make those kinds of judgements themselves when they HAVE to...and again in my experience they will have to. This philosophy may run contrary to some established ICS protocols, but it is a fact of life for many VFDs, as is the reality right or wrong that we don't always have a standard 4 man crew to work with. It is important to train to the guidelines and procedures that are now generally recognized as the standard, of this there is no doubt, but to me we MUST also take into account the realities of our own situation when developing a training program. Sometimes the two don't necessarily line up. As unpopular as the view may be I still adhere to the belief that once on scene we must do something to mitigate the incident with whatever resources we have available. By training members under this philosophy and using the experience of those who have done it as a guide, we can continue to do what has to be done safely even if it is not "by the book". Cogs

I should have answered my questions to start, so here goes. 1) The department drill night is Tuesday although the second Tues of the month is the monthly business meeting. Beyond that members especially newer ones, are encouraged to train whenever possible in addition to regular drill. It is also an unwritten rule if you will, that senior members NEVER refuse a request to train a member. It is not uncommon to pull a rig to the side of the firehouse and pull lines or throw ladders for an hour or so when a few guys are there. 2) Drills consist of the mandatories ie bloodborne pathogens, medical and haz mat refreshers ect as needed, but most drills involve company operations, driver's training or special topic drill for non probationary members as well as FF I or II classes when necessary. Probationary members are given a 12 week "probie" class to familiarize them with the Dept, its operations, personnel, equipment ect. 3) In this area there is room for improvement as drills sometimes are not scheduled or other factors force a change. Currently our training division is working on developing a schedule that will include not only the preplanned drill for each level of FF but also fallbacks to account for inclement weather, personnel issues or other unforeseen occurences. 4) Computer generated NIFRS stating type of drill and personnel present, a copy of which is placed in a department training binder as well as personnel files containing certs. While this adequately keeps records of drills and certifications, as I originally stated I am hoping to keep individual training records for each member in a personnel file beyond simply copies of certifications. The thought behind this is that this will allow for the training division or Officers to know exactly what EACH member has done specifically throughout the year. With the NIFRS we know that you attended drill and what the topic of the drill was, but we do not have specific knowledge of what YOU did exactly. In other words I want to know when was the last time member X operated a nozzle or pumped multiple lines ect ect. (what part of the evolution did each member accomplish). 5) Drills are company based (ie Engine, Truck, Rescue with the members being rotated through each) about 45% of the time. Another 35% will have the department drilling on specific topics as a whole. Roughly 20% of drills are run as scenario based drills. I am a firm believer in hammering the basics. When I served previously as an Officer I followed this formula, but without fail (except when weather prohibited) at least once through the course of an evenings drill regardless of the topic, the engine companies pulled what we used to call the "quick attack" evolution. This evolution consisted of 1 FF stretching the line, 1 grabbing the irons and sizing up the door, and one throwing a 24ft extension ladder and doing a walkaround, all of whom then entered with the hoseline. The chauffer handled water supply (when possible) and then operated the pump. (I should point out that our district is predominantly SFPD and well hydranted). I kept track of who did what so the following drill (or evolution if doing it multipe times in a night) functions were rotated. Now this may seem excessively redundant to some, but the fact is when it came time to do it "for real" it was automatic. There were variations thrown in as well based on the number of personnel available on the rig to the point of having a 2 man crew (meaning driver and 1 FF) get a line in operation (and yes I know all about OSHA but remember put the fire out and all the other problems go away...but that's another topic). I still try to utilize the above drill formula by doing company ops weekly and then bringing all units together for a scenario about every 3-4 weeks. Another trait of mine was to do live burns at least 5 or 6 times during the course of the warmer seasons say April to October. For a variety of reasons this doesn't always currently occur, but as part of my department's training division I am working to get back to a similar system. 6) We do train extensively in all areas of the service including medical responses, extrication, RIT ect ect, but our "bread and butters" are those SFPD's, so by training in the manner in which we will regularly be operating I believe we are providing and reinforcing the skills our members will need to safely and effectively do the job. As for what I hope to achieve, well certification is wonderful as is specialization, but to me good solid knowledge and practical ability with the basics of the trade is what will serve our members and our community best. I have met quite a few "experts" in this or that discipline who can't just go in and put a fire out without turning it into a major cluster ****. So for me, if I train our members hardcore to do what it is we do and we do it repeatedly, they will do it successfully when the time comes everytime, (this has been proven in my experience over and over). Nothing fancy, nothing complicated, just good "old school" firefighting...it gets the job done and gets it done right. Cogs

Thanks John. I thought so, but apparently we are a very small minority.

Well I can tell you that I would not allow this type of operation no matter what the situation or how "old school" I am, I am not in any way, shape or form into freelancing . If for some reason this scenario was playing out prior to my arrival I would call for an immediate PAR upon my arrival and pull the teams back to designated staging areas (at most two) from which to BEGIN searching like say 1/2 corner and 3/4 corner each of which would have a staging officer present and in contact with me at the CP in front of the building. As this is apparently during working hours, at my side at the CP would be representatives of the company who know the building as well as any witnesses who may have knowledge of what exactly happened and where. Of course industrial accident leaves much to the imagination first off being some sort of Haz Mat op which of course has it's attentant protocols and problems i.e. Haz Mat teams, hot, cold and warm zones, decon, rehab, evacuation ect. So not knowing even a basic idea of what is involved here any further steps would have to be based on the nature of the emergency once it's apparent. Without fail though all activity would be coordinated through the command post and additional resources would be called and staged as needed to ensure adequate personnel and equipment are on scene to mitigate the problem. One more thing if ANY of my personnel allowed such a situation to develop in the first place they would get a good swift kick in the a** at a minimum. Cogs

A great idea, but as has been said repeatedly not financially possible for many dept.s What may work for some as a stopgap would be to have dept's or municipalities help defer the cost of a "personal" set by contributing a portion of the purchase price. If I were to enact such a policy (from a volunteer standpoint), it would be incumbent on a few factors such as active performance, training, certification and need. Just my POV. Cogs

I, being a proud member of that "fraternity of Northeast firefighters" and yes being somewhat arrogant too, just find that the OVER emphasis on safety and an OVER reliance on technology are a major concern that has in fact impeded our ability to do our jobs effectively. The job of a firefighter has not changed since it began 2000 years ago, no matter how many advances have been made in our methods of doing it. We are here to safeguard the public we serve, and yes to be frank we are here to put ourselves in harms way FOR them. That is the basis of what being a firefighter is and anything less is a breach of trust. When we put ourselves above those we serve we are in fact condemning them to their fate...for no one else is capable of saving them. It is wonderful that technological advances have made the job "safer" (although the number of firefighters killed in the line of duty has remained relatively static for a long time and yes proportionally fire, heart attacks, MVAs), but now we have regulations that hamper or prevent the firefighter from carrying out his DUTY unless certain conditions are met. Well maybe in some places those conditions are a regular fact of life, but for me and the departments I've been involved with that is not the case. So to follow the safety guidelines we should let people perish, or allow their property to be destroyed when with a little effort and using your experience they can be saved....NONSENSE!! Now I'm fully aware that the number of actual fires is down, so too then is the experience level of those now "on the job", but truth is no amount of book smarts, science or regulation will make up for that. Firefighting CANNOT be learned from a book, or done effectively by following guidelines that require us to stand outside waiting for conditions to warrant entry. As it was, it still is...firefighters go in when even the cockroaches scurry out...that is WHY we are here. And with all due respect, experience is the only true teacher in this field that makes that possible. So instead of looking outward for the knowledge, members should be looking where it is and has been all along...with the senior members who have done it for years. They have seen it, done it and lived it and are worth far more than a stack of textbooks, diplomas and certifications to gain the skills necessary to do the job. (Let me just clarify that I am not anti education or certification as I hold a number of them myself, but these are not the end of journey as some seem to think, but just the first steps on the road to becoming a good fireman). I had the good fortune (or curse) of working with a large number of FFs from across U.S. during my stints overseas. One of the major focuses of conversations was how we all do what we do back home. Well having put many of the latest and greatest theories and procedures to the test while there I can say in all fairness and frankness that the "fraternity of Northeast firefighters" has it right and I thank God everyday that I came into the service not only when I did but where I did. I truly am all about doing the job safely and everyone going home at the end of the day, I am just one who feels that regulation and technology are not the ONLY means to achieve that. They have their place side by side with, not in front of, the experience of those who have been at this for all these years. Cogs

Yes isn't it amazing that we managed to put fires out and actually live to tell the tale without all the safety regulations and innovation of today's fire service? How did we possibly do it without all the "knowledge" that we are blessed with today? Will wonders never cease? I do really believe that sometimes we have to take a step back to move forward...in other words what "used to " work STILL does!! Careful the safety goons may soon be at your firehouse to save you from yourself. To them experience counts for little if anything on the fireground. Cogs ps: For those who haven't, find and read LT Ray McCormacks speech from FDIC

Chief, Any miscommunication is purely unintentional, so no harm no foul. And while it may be that the facts are "wrong", the point of your post most assuredly is not. Thanks for making us think and starting the discussion. Cogs

That crawling when there is limited or no visibility is even an issue is completely absurd to me. Now maybe the tactic elsewhere is to not advance (or search) when there is no visibility and that's great, but that simply won't fly in my neck of the woods. Nor would I want it to. Soapbox time: That this most basic of manuevers is not being followed speaks volumes about the state of the American Fire Service. We have gotten so far away from basic evolutions and "common sense" due to "safety" or technology that we are actually putting ourselves at greater risk by relying on these factors. No matter what anyone says the old tried and true is what works....it has managed to keep the vast majority of us alive for all these years now hasn't it? If newer members aren't following suit than that is the fault of the "seniors" for not setting them straight immediately. There is no sustitute (i.e. thermal imagers, heat detectors on the mask, all manner of PPE ect) for good solid knowledge of the BASIC skills (like crawiling with high heat and/or no visibility) of this job. If members aren't getting that than it's time to hammer it in a bit harder. Put away the toys and hit the drill tower. Cogs

Great pics, although I don't see anything wrong with the turnout gear at all... Cogs

Never have truer words been spoken (or typed...LOL) Cogs

Some of us are working diligently to resolve the issues, whether or not we will succeed remains to be seen. But no matter which "side" you believe is "right" in all this one thing is for sure... Failure to try guarantees only one thing...failure. Cogs

Here's a link to an article by LT Ray McCormak FDNY about working with an axe. Good stuff to remember. http://thehousewatch.netfirms.com/wordpress/?p=298 As usual LT. McCormack is right on the money. I for one still consider an axe my primary roof vent tool and irons for forcible entry. Personally I am quite content to use it over a saw or rabbet tool anyday. As the LT so eloquently points out, the axe "always starts". Cogs

I gotta throw my two cents in here. NY pizza definitely out does New Haven pizza of which Pepe's and Sally's as well as Roseland's in Derby are quite good. But for a GREAT pie there is no better than the Colony in Stamford. Sausage and stingers please. And for those who don't know Colony pies are made by, of all things....Irishmen. My goomba ancestors are rolling in their graves that I should tout Irish pizza, but hey when a joint is good there's no substitute. Cogs ps Just thank God we live in the NorthEast where even a bad pie is at least still a pizza ...pizza anywhere else is pizza in name only

About damn time if you ask me...way to go Dave.

Love him or hate him the guy was a great entertainer (although not really my kind of music...I'm into stuff a bit "heavier" like say made of Led)..anyway it is indeed a loss. What is most sickening of all, maybe even equal with his "affection" for little boys is the field day the leech papparazzi is going to have with all this. Can you imagine the funeral...I wouldn't be suprised if those sleazeball parasite photogs trample each other trying to get a shot of the coffin. I wonder how many of them got rich stalking Jackson like the hyenas they are. Fame ain't all it's cracked up to be that's for sure. Cogs

First and foremost: Congrats to TRFD. An appeal is most assuredly guaranteed, but the fact is the victory has been won in terms of funding. As expected I am glad to see that result, but that jubilation is tempered by the reality that money doesn't in and of itself solve all of the issues plaguing Stamford's fire services. Now that it is clear that as far as the courts and therefore the law is concerned TRFD is entitled to it's funding, it is time for all to move forward fully appreciating that fact to resolve those issues. Cogs

I guess I'm the pessimist here. I'm very worried about North Korea and the possibility of renewed hostilities on the peninsula. Kim Jong-Il and his regime are increasingly bellicose and more importantly desperate. People are starving including the elite now, as even their traditional protectors have begun to alienate the regime. With no natural resourses and the world cutting them off from access to the basics there is nothing to lose. Desperate people take desperate measures. Like Japan just prior to Pearl Harbor it may seem to Kim Jong-IL that war will be worth the risk especially with a nuclear capability to deter interference and the U.S. tied up in miltary actions elsewhere. Our downsized armed forces are hard pressed now to meet the commitments of the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan let alone a large scale conventional conflict. It would take months at a minimum before we could ready and deploy enough forces to Korea to dislodge the worlds 3rd largest standing army from any gains they would most certainly make in the South, just as they did at the outset of the first Korean War in 1950. There is little doubt that with their backs to the wall Kim Jong's regime will use WMDs to protect those gains regardless of the consequences. We are now firmly on the razors edge. The UN has mandated that North Korean vessels can be searched, but has not authorized the use of force in doing so. Failure to stop and search those vessels will allow for the distribution of nuclear or other WMD material out of North Korea thereby spreading the threat and further diverting attention away from the peninsula, opening the door for a strike South by Kim Jong. Not only that but it will encourage military action against the South by Kim Jong to secure his regimes future as we will be seen as weak (the same mistake made by Japan in 1941). On the other hand stopping and searching the vessels will cause the complete loss of revenue and prestige at home for the North and further exacerbate the problems for the regime, which will increase their desperation and erode whatever sense may still hold sway in Pyongyang. A quick strike South to control the peninsula reinforced by the willingness to use WMDs to protect that effort may seem a plausable option to that lunatic Kim Jong. While war is not inevitable it may be that the option is fast becoming the only choice left for Kim Jong-Il and company to survive. Cogs

Rest in peace Randy. You will be sorely missed by all who knew you in and out of the fire service. Deepest condolences to the family. Cogs