FFPCogs

This is my initial reaction as well since they also require $750 per seat per year for "upgrades". I'm going to give the demo a try for the hell of it...I'll pass along my thoughts in a few days. Cogs

Well I seem to be in the minority here about putting guys on the roof. My experiences have been that a roof team can open up a tin/metal roof so long as the support underneath is stable, just as with "regular" vertical ventilation. I have done so at both drills and under fire conditions on a number of occasions. Opening up has been accomplished by cutting in some cases, but usually by prying the roofing material away from the rafters and peeling it back. Either way, it's been done with little or no major problems when I've attempted it. I have also found that attempting to pry the roofing material from a portable ladder alone is difficult at best and usually not worth the effort since the reach from the ladder is not adequate to get near the peak. Ditto TCDO415's point on roof ladders Stay Safe Cogs

Depending on conditions upon arrival, start with horizontal venting. If insufficient put a crew on the roof to cut or peel back the tin sections as needed as close as safely possible over the fire area. While yes this is a different type of roofing material the same basic ventilation principles apply as with any other peaked roof PD. Rafter size/spacing appears to allow for a roof team, same as a wood/shingle roof, but conditions will ultimately dictate the viability of vertical vent ops should they be required. Stay Safe Cogs

Job well done by group 2. Best of all everyone went home in one piece. Stay Safe Cogs

Joe, Fact is this is the public's perception of volunteers, and one that many volunteer FDs have done little to refute in the past. I'm fairly certain that you can recall some of our past conversations on the subject or those related to it. To reiterate them in a nutshell...if this is the perception we face than it is our job and responsibility to change it, for no one else can or will. Cogs ps Seems things have been a bit "warm" in the Valley lately. Kudos to the boys, they're doing a bang up job as usual.

Well I can honestly say that I've put out a lot of fire with a booster line way back when. But then again way back when we just did what we had to to get the job done, we didn't need OSHA, the NFPA or any other pencil pushers to tell us how. Cogs

Exactly

This has been my rationale, and how I was taught many moons ago. In all honesty though, right or wrong my "non" compliance has served me well for many years and through many a job. Cogs

Politically correct answer - I wear it every time Honest answer - not always Ear flaps - rarely I have of late made a determined effort to correct the error of my ways....grudgingly Cogs

As do I And I would like to continue to be a part of providing it Cogs

Joe, There are those whose lives are determined by their circumstances and there are those who determine the circumstances of their lives. Sane or not I choose the latter. Cogs

FD, You are of course entitled to your opinions, but there are some aspects in which you may not be fully grasping the gravity of the situation. For now I'll look at the issue of control. One can look at it like this, would having employees working for you at your business, but answering to another boss be practical to you? Remember for better or worse each volunteer department is an independent entity and as such, just like any other business, are the ultimate authority of that entity. Would you accept me working at say 3 company but answering to my Chief or chain of command? Would you allow me the run of the place immune to your department's rules and regulations? Do you believe your administration or some of your colleagues would readily accept such a change without any fore warning or negotiation? Just because we do not get paid or have an organization to bargain for us, does not mean our authority (as it currently stands) is irrelevant or can be dismissed. Doing so does not engender trust, in fact it has the directly opposite effect. To my knowledge this "plan" was thought up and presented by the City administration unilaterally on a take it or leave it basis. And let us be frank here, this is an administration with a dismal record vis a vis it's interaction with Stamford's volunteer fire departments. They have done nothing to either encourage or reward the service, no matter how great or small, of these departments or their members. It is niether folly or malice on our part to think that our existence would ultimately be threatened by entering into any arrangement without negotiated concrete safeguards in place to protect that existence. This did not happen. Take it or leave it is not negotiation. With holding necessary funds is not negotiation. On the contrary these actions clearly show yet again, this administration's utter contempt for us, and our service. On the other hand it is folly to think that anyone should enter into an open ended agreement with parties who have repeatedly shown an unwillingness to negotiate, on the hope that any issues can be adjusted fairly down the road. Now we are all seemingly rational people, and as such we can all probably agree that a resolution to this situation must come about. For that to happen it must be understood that first and foremost we all are driven by the same motivation, to protect and serve the resident's of this city. As difficult as that may be for some to believe, let me assure all that this is my overriding concern, and I believe that of my colleagues as well. I feel equally sure that for most on your "side" this is also of prime importance. So there we are, agreement already. For my part I fully realize that changes will be necessary to some aspects of the volunteer system to ensure that the level of service that will undoubtedly be needed as time goes by is provided. I also realize that what those changes will be will require the input and assistance of our career colleagues. For your part I would hope that you can see that we volunteers have served a vital role in Stamford's overall fire protection, and can continue to do so. In fact we may have to in light of our nations's current economic situation which, although not as pronounced here yet, is sure to grow more serious in the near future. Open, frank and respectful negotiation based on the understanding that we all want the same thing and have, through our resources, the means to provide it can ultimately offer our citizens (and us) what they rightfully deserve. Fire protection second to none. So yes we can agree to disagree, but we must also agree to overcome those disagreements and accept that both "sides" have legitimate points of view and want the same thing. Respect me and I will respect you. Stay Safe Cogs The opinions expressed here are my own and are not meant to be reflective as those of my department.

Have you seen this video yet? Just a reminder that things can go to (well you know) pretty fast. http://www.vententersearch.com/?p=208 Cogs

Thanks for fixing the link. I do my best work on the fireground not the keyboard....

Agreed, But it is indicative of a society that thinks that a firefighter's death is a part of the job regardless of the conditions leading to that outcome. Or worse a society that views anyone in uniform as an enemy who got what they deserved, because in some circles we are seen as just that. Cogs

Unbelievable and what a legal tactic..shift blame onto the FDNY itself for their "chaotic" response. Why hold people accountable for violating building codes or creating unsafe conditions....that's the FD's problem if there's a fire right? Just another example of how expendable we all really are in the public's mind. I'm sure all the defendants and their (expletive) lawyers slept quite soundly last nite as the families of these dedicated firemen suffered through yet another injustice. It makes me sick. My deepest sympathty to the families and the FDNY not only for the loss of the guys, but for the utter contempt and ignorance of the jury. Stay Safe Cogs

My apologies for the previous "outburst". Cogs

I mean I'm sorry for the family and my condolences to the widow, but is everything now going to be about race? Where's Sharpton? Ahhh who am I kidding..he's probably prodding her along. I can't type what I'm really thinking here since it would simply look like this... [edited] that greedy scumbag chisling dirtbag of a lawyer to even entertain such a [frivoluous] lawsuit!!!! I hope they dismiss the case and him before the ink dries. Stay Safe Cogs MOD NOTE: The original content was in violation of the forum rules concerning profanity (direct or masked with symbols). Because you're feelings and emotions are valid, only the content that was in violation was [edited] out and the balance remains. This is an exception for this particular thread. Ordinarily the entire post would be deleted. To everyone else, please comply with the forum rules about profanity when expressing your feelings about this situation. Thank you all for your understanding.

I've read through the report a couple of times, and not suprisingly found it to be biased in support of what many (and yes including me) consider a flawed merger plan. Also, as one would expect I do believe there is validity to the complaints of the volunteer chiefs. In regards to the report itself, I do not believe that the volunteer firefighters of Stamford are now useful only in support or specialized roles. There is far too much knowledge, experience and capability that would be lost by following that route. Although some reevealuation of their current operational capabilies may be in order, approaching that with the set goal of reducing them to support only is not to me a wise stratedgy. It would be far more useful to identify any current shortcomings and address them with the goal of improving the situation with long term incentives and programs to attain and maintain a fully operational volunteer fire service that would be an integral part of Stamford's overall fire protection. The report offered little in this vain. Although on a bright note it did say the City should do more to encourage and retain volunteers, but only insofar as they would be a support service to an all paid fire dept. Personally, and I'll be the first to admit I am biased as well, I remain convinced and optimistic that there are other alternatives to that inevitability.....although it is getting a bit lonely Stay Safe Cogs

Talk about right on the money, it can't be any simpler than that. Amen PJ. Glad to see I'm not the only dinosaur left. Cogs

Experience far and away is the best teacher in firefighting, but it is not the fault of "newer" members that the number of fires are down. I think that yes firemen of yesteryear were more experienced in the nuts and bolts of the job simply because they saw more fire, but they did so without the benefit of some of the technological advantages we take for granted today. Attitudes have also changed considerably over the years, for a variety of reasons, and that in and of itself does impact the fire service in what many (including me) consider a negative way. But that is the world we live in. People now expect instant gratification, and generally speaking are not willing to "endure" some of the "hardships" which were a normal part of coming up in a department years ago. There is no real fix for that, it is what it is, so it is incumbent on fire service leaders to accept and work with that fact to produce "good" firemen. Another aspect of all this is the fact that in many cases the traditional backgrounds of many newer firemen no longer exist. Most younger people have grown up in the computer age, so the basic skills many of us learned prior to joining or while still new aren't there. The fire service of today wants college graduates not carpenters, mechanics, iron workers and plumbers ect. I mean you can't even find those classes in high school anymore, everything has been reduced to silicon chips and keyboards. Unfortunately while a computer may help you learn this job it can't do it for you (at least yet thank God). Another downside of this (at least to me) is that our rigs and equipment while technologically more advanced, are also computerized to the point where they almost don't need us, and are far more likely to breakdown. I don't know about anyone else but I'm still wary of a computer chip deciding if I get water or not, or if my aerial will operate. But again that is the world of today. Firemen of today are as only as good as the "elder" statesmen of their departments have made them, and that has always been so. Cogs

Good topic X, Personally I often find myself longing for the "good ole days", when men were men, we rode the back step and we still "ate smoke"... . Truth be told I don't think firemen (ah yes the "old" term) are any better or worse then in times past. What is different is what we know and to an extent, how we apply it. Technology is great and has improved much for us, as has the emphasis on safety. But these can be a double edged swords..more firemen are dying today because as we encapsulate ourselves we cut off vital senses, or we have become so "safe" we don't practice the aggressive tactics of yesteryear. Now I know full well that there have been changes in construction techniques and materials which require a different approach, but there is something to be said for aggressive tactics which when applied...uh well, "aggressively" solve the problem thereby reducing the dangers posed by these "new" factors. Personally I still view firefighting as an inherently dangerous undertaking and as such one in which bad things can happen. That's not to say that we shouldn't be safe, but we must temper that with the realities that this is a dirty, dangerous business and to effectively do it, necessary risks must be taken. I'm sure the pitchforks and torches will come out now, but that's my view. Cogs

What strikes me whenever this topic comes up is that many of us can list a litany of reasons as to why this won't, can't or shouldn't work but seem to overlook or ignore what should be the primary concern as to why it could, must or should...improved service to best serve the community. Without fail the main goal must alway be to get the proper number of people on a scene to mitigate any incident, (since that is what our service is all about), which in many cases consolidation addresses. But what about some of the factors that, in conjunction to that, lead to better service? Things like saving taxpayers some money, which especially in these hard times will do much to better serve the community. So will things like standardized training and SOP/Gs, throw in unified command and distribution of resources and the community gets yet another bonus. I'm sure you get the idea. We in the fire service have generally done what we want....because we could. This is not necessarily a bad thing, it is just how things are. Unfortunatey we may find that this is no longer the case, not only because money is tight and getting tighter, but also because peoples expectations, and industry standards have changed as well. Heads in the sand, or resistance based in keeping the status quo may in the end, do far more damage than a proactive approach based in some simple realities of today's world. As I've said, if indeed this is coming or rising on the horizon we will be far better off by heading in that direction and being prepared for it on our own terms than we will by sitting idly by as consolidation is force fed to us. Stay Safe Cogs

Regionalization/consolidation will more than likely become the trend in the near future, resistance or not, for a variety of reasons (which thankfully I will not delve into now since I can't find my soapbox... ). The point being, wouldn't it make far more sense to work collectively towards that goal now, on OUR terms rather than having it forced upon us by those who may have other agendas? This is not about paid vs volunteer, or vol. vs vol. ect, it's about FFs vs an at times less than sympathetic public or bureaucracy. Simply forming exploratory commitees to look at the difficulties and develop plans for that eventuality would be a great start. Not to mention the side benefit of increased cooperation at any level. If nothing comes of it...fine, nothing will have been lost for the effort. But if indeed circumstances force the issue, we will be that much better off for having put in that effort. Stay Safe Cogs

Well G, as much as I am in favor of unification/consolidation (at least to a degree), I have to say.....sadly you are correct. Cogs