FFPCogs

Very true PJ. Having all the specialized training under the sun is great, but useless if members can't effectively put lines in operation and keep them operating in conjunction with the other basics, such as searches, forcible entry, ventilation, and overhaul. Effective training emphasising the standard operations for your particular response area are what will best serve any department. In other words train as you will work. Cogs

Tactics can be defined as the actions taken based on the Incident Commander's overall plan to mitigate an incident. Cogs

I wasn't on Rock Rimmon so I can only speculate. Based on what little info I have, I believe that there was long stretch to reach the garage from the the interior here. It may have been decided to put water on the visible fire while waiting for the interior line to get in place. I cannot comment on the validity of tactics used since I wasn't there. I also try to refrain from Monday morning quarterbacking, although discussion for the puposes of learning are always in everyone's best interest. Obviously there are a number of factors to consider, and I have to agree that in most cases the first line should go in the front door, or the door closest to an involved attached garage to cut off the fire spread. Without fail a line must ALWAYS be placed between any potential victims and the fire ASAP. That being said IF when we arrive to find a well involved attached garage we have the ability to get two lines stretched simultaneously, I may have the first line put into operation to knock down the heavy fire through the garage, while at the same time the second line is being stretched through the interior to get in position to stop any extension and protect the search crews. Once the first line has knocked down the heavy fire it shuts down and the effort shifts to the interior. That 1st line would then be used only for overhaul. As with any incident the decision would be based on the rule of thumb combined with conditions and resources upon arrival. Cogs

I guess no one wants to be accused of putting the savior on the cross for a second time.

Call in Mulder and Scully....... The truth is out there

I must agree that our new President is not the second coming, but he IS the President and as such I will support him 100%. Stay Safe Cogs Just wanted to add that like him or not we have ALL just lived through history in the making.

All I can say after reading all the info is that it is high time that we the volunteer sector start working to "professionalize" our operations across the board and do away with old time thinking. In one of the comments someone noted that within 10 years only very rural areas will remain volunteer due to the cost of operating a fully carrer staff there. Also noted was the insight that based on our current economic situation all of the Fire Sevice's hard earned grants will start drying up. Combined these things, among others will mean the end to volunteering as it has been. It may very well come to be that volunteers will have to prove their worth by offering the same level of service as our career colleagues for less money to survive. While many do, there are enough that don't to harm the volunteer sector as a whole. And that is not just a phenomenon in VA. Stay Safe Cogs ps: light the torches and bring on the pitchforks...

The politicos have only one groups safety in mind, ...their own. Let them take the money from FEMA what's the difference? It's all a big shell game there anyway. When or if the funds are needed for a REAL emergency they'll come up with them so they can get re elected. Inaugurations are just a show where the new President get's to blabber on about how he will "solve" all our ills while showing us all that things aren't that bad because we can afford to put on these grandiose spectacles. Maybe there's some value in starting off with an upbeat celebration, it might be all we get for a while. To echo many of the brothers here, I'm no fan of our President-elect, but he WILL BE the President and as such I support him if for no other reason than I support the office of President and our Constitution. Stay Safe (and away from DC) Cogs

For all his talk of change, change, change it appears that Mr. Obama is filling his cabinet with a bunch of Clintonites. I guess a return to a past administration is a change, I'm just not sure it's the right one. The Clinton era was not all roses and cupcakes by any means. The appointment of many of good ole Bill's pals smells alot like more of the same, not the earth shattering change we were promised. And frankly Hillary as Sec. of State, wow that is troubling. Her hubby and by default her are bought and paid for by a cabal of Saudi's, the Emir of Dubai and the petty dictator of Kyrgyzistan. Now you can call it sour grapes, but putting in a bunch of old faces, using old policy ideas that feed the Washington money train is NOT change. C'mon Barak live up to your promises. Any thoughts? Cogs

Unfortuantely in the late 1930's it was the lead up to and then our involvement in World War II itself in 1941 which pulled this nation out of the Great Depression. God forbid that is what lies ahead, but with choices such as Panetta and Hillary it may very well be that history will indeed repeat itself.

To be honest I don't have a name, but I would have started with the agency itself. If no one acceptable was available there, then it would have been onto the NSA or DIA. First and foremost I most assuredly would have picked someone with actual intelligence experience and a familiarity with al Qaida and bin Laden as well as the Middle East. Some one who has actually been there on the ground at some point and someone with a military background who is familiar with our other advesaries as well. Remember all of those Clintonites had the chance years ago to deal with bin Laden and sat idly by as he grew in stature and power, not to mention the Balkan or Rwandan fiascos. I'm sorry but stepping back to that mentality is to me the wrong road to take. Clinton's foriegn policy and national defense "accomplishments" were few and far between, and while yes our domestic issues should take center stage, a withdrawl or return to the pacifist Clinton (i.e. Democrat) policies on the world stage will have dire consequences. Not to be insensitive but I think we've learned that lesson already. Cogs

Just like most of Obama's picks

Not this time he didn't!!!

I had to take this thread out of mothballs based on Pres-elect Obama's choice for CIA director. Now Leon Panetta may be a great guy..and a paisan to boot, but by ALL accounts he is at best a novice when it comes to intelligence matters. What the **** is Obama doing nominating him as CIA Directior...and what in God's name is Panetta thinking by accepting. He says he will "rely" on his subordinates to "help" him. Is this what we are going to be forced to rely on when it comes to our national security....a NOVICE CIA director with by his own admission NO experience, answering and reporting to a NOVICE President who wants to gut the military. Thank you 53.4% of Americans for putting us all at risk. Stay Safe...or as safe as you can from now on Cogs

RIP Chief...and deepest condolences to the family.

I realize this is a Westchester thread, but just thought I'd throw some of my "insight" into the discussion. After all the idea of consolidating services has spread far beyond the borders of Westchester, and we may all be on that bandwagon before you know it. I have been an advocate of consolidation in varying degrees for many years, and as a result have found myself on quite a few s***lists. Through all those years some important factors have become apparent, at least to me. First off is what I'll call the perception factor. As with almost any facet of life when people call for a change the preception emerges that what is must be wrong, why else would there be a call for change right? Alot of resisitance stems from this perception, since virtually no one likes to be told or even face the implication that they or what they are doing are wrong. In many cases though this perception itself is what is wrong. Change does not have to mean that the "traditional" methods are wrong, only that they need to be reexamined and improvements MAY be in order. Consolidation of fire services falls squarely into this mis-perception, and as a result resitance to it can be almost impenetrable. Next we have the fear factor. Any proponents of consolidation will have to address the very real fears that come with the loss or potential loss of money, power, independence and autonomy. For most departments and by extension their Chiefs, they have maintained these aspects since their inception. Now someone comes along, and no matter how well intentioned, calls for a district, town or county to merge with their neighbor(s). Well if this happens someone or all will have to give up control of what has always been "their" area. For most this is not an easy pill to swallow, and they will use almost anything they can to prevent that loss. This is not about incompetence, greed or any other negative, it is about relinquishing what many feel has always and still does "belong" to them. After all they have always served that community, and in most cases are a part of it. Then comes the career vs volunteer factor. This is another major impediment which in part feeds on the previous ones when there is talk of the consolidating of paid and volunteer sectors. Beyond the two previous points above there are other ones which are just as potent. For career departments there are concerns about the quality, quantity and reliability of what their new volunteer "partners" will bring to the table. Coupled with those concerns is the potential reduction in jobs or future growth of the career side due to the influx of a number of volunteers into "their" system. On the flip side for many volunteers there are concerns about being reduced to "second class" firefighters, SCBA bottle changers and hose packers or simply becoming subservient to career demands, standards and necessities. Then there is the loss of "community" that volunteers feel, justifiably so, will inevtiably happen once the "local" volunteer based fire department disappears into one larger service provider. Think of it as "the big fish in a small pond becoming a small fish in a big pond" syndrome. There is of course one more glaring "universal" factor which stands in the way of consolidation.....the age old rivalries that are as traditional as the fire service itself. No need to go any further into that one as I'm sure you are all well aware of what I mean. There are other factors as well, some general some more specific to an area or city, all of which stand in the way of "progress". So what's the answer? I'm not sure....to get one you must first ask yourself if consolidation is really in your department's and community's best interest. In most cases that I know of the answer is yes, in 2009 it is. The only definite way to make consolidation a reality is to lobby the legislature and individual departments with proven facts that are irrefutable, and then work like hell to make it so. As most know there are many "consolidated" countywide departments now in operation. and although all is not peaches and cream, in general the services provided have improved. For those who truly believe that this option is best for the future, do the research, contact those areas to find out what has and hasn't worked, and work on developing a plan to present to all parties involved...oh yeah and count on alot of resistance and ruffling more than a few feathers. Stay Safe in 2009 Cogs One more thing, and this is just a personal observation. I believe that "consolidation" will most assuredly become the buzzword in the coming months and years, if for no other reason that the economy will take some time to recover. The "penny pinchers' may come to see merging as a sure fire way to save money, regardless of the impact. I for one would much rather beat the curve and come to the table prepared with a fire service "plan" in place, than have it thrust down my throat to serve someone else's agenda. Just some food for thought.

Chinese (Cantonese) Gung hay fat choy (a New Year greeting meaning, "May you become prosperous.") Sun nien fai lok (meaning, "Happy new year") Chinese (Mandarin) Xin nian yu kuai Danish Godt Nytår Dutch Gelukkig nieuwjaar Farsi Aide shoma mobarak French Bonne année Gaelic Aith-bhliain Fe Nhaise Dhuit German Gutes Neues Jahr Hawaiian Hauoli Makahiki Hou Hebrew Shanah tovah Hmong Nyob zoo xyoo tshiab Indonesian elamat Tahun Baru Italian Buon Capo d'Anno Japanese Akemashite Omedetou Gozaimasu Norwegian Godt Nyttår Pilipino (Tagalog) Maligayang Bagong Taon Polish Szczesliwego Nowego roku Portuguese Feliz ano novo Romanian La Multi Ani Russian S Novym Godom Spanish Feliz Año Nuevo Sudanese Wilujeng Tahun Baru Swedish Gott Nytt År Turkish Yeni Yiliniz Kutlu Olsun Welsh Blwyddyn Newydd Dda </FONT> Or simply HAPPY NEW YEAR !!! ...from my family to yours..... Stay Safe in 2009 Cogs

Merry Christmas...or: Happy Christmas = English (UK)Glæd Geol = Old EnglishSretan Božić = Croatian (Hrvatski)Feliz Natal = PortugueseFeliz Navidad = SpanishJoyeux Noël = FrenchBuon Natale = ItalianBon Natali = Sicilianвесела коледа [vesela koleda] = BulgarianCrăciun Fericit = RomanianGëzuar Krishtlindja = Albanianکرسمَس مبارک [krismas mubarak] = UrduΚαλά Χριστούγεννα [kal-a christooyenna] = GreekMele Kalikimaka = HawaiianСчастливого рождества [schastleevogo rozhdestva] = RussianGelukkige kerstdagen = Dutch圣诞快乐 [shèng dàn kuài lè] = Chinesebaxtalo Krečuno = RomaniNadolig Llawen = WelshFrohe Weihnachten = GermanFrohi Wiehnacht= Swiss GermanGlædelig Jul = DanishHyvää Joulua = FinnishBoldog Karácsonyt = HungarianMaligayang Pasko = FilipinoMaligayang pasko [ma-lee-ga-yahng pass-ko] =Tagalog# God Jul = Swedish and Norwegian (don't say god like "god" in english try to keep the o down, like when you say ooops)Wesołych Świąt = PolishShnorhavor Soorp Tsanoond= ArmenianChuc Mung Giang Sinh = Vietnameseশুভ বড়দিন (shu-vo boro din) = Bengali (বাংলা)Linksmų Kalėdų = LithuanianSelamat Hari Krismas or Selamat Hari Natal = MalayFrohe Weihnachten= GermanFrohe Weihnachten=- NorwayThat should cover it. Best wishes everyone...from my family to yours... Stay Safe Cogs

It is always horrible when people get laid off, or worse lose their jobs permanantly. The cuts there are drastic and the safety of those firefighters is put way to far on the line. Notice too that this will have an effect on other departments in the area as well due to an increase in mutual aid requests. Unfortunately there seems to be no other solution. If the City doesn't have the money to pay it's firefighters what are they supposed to do?..it appears the firefighters have already taken a severe pay cut. ..so what's left other than cuts?. To the taxpayers and Mayor, the fire dept. is but one of many departments and services people pay taxes for. There is only so much money, and it has to be divided to cover all City services. As much as we may understand that a fire dept requires a certain level of staffing or operating budget, most citizens and politician don't. They want all the services they are "entitled" to for their tax dollar. Do you cut education to keep FFs, or garbage collection or any number of other services? It is a balancing act and there will always be losers...the fire dept is not alone in having to do more with less. And since Gary is not the most prosperous of communities, raising taxes to keep jobs most likely is not an option either. The current "recession" is causing widespread suffering, and Gary is not alone in facing severe budget woes. I am not condoning the City's choice, but as a realist I can fully appreciate that there are times when there is no other choice. As horrendous as the situation is there, and as much as I feel for those FFs affected by the cuts, I look at this as a sign of things to come for many. NO ONE is safe, the wells of many cities are running dry and the prospect of lay offs, wage reductions and staffing shortfalls is one many here may well face in the not too distant future. I hope and pray for a quick recovery of our economy. I truly hope no more firefighters have to face this type of situation, but the reality is that many of us may. My advise is to hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Remember it took 3 years before the full effects of the Wall Street crash of 1929 were felt resulting in the Great Depression. Unfortunately I fear that is the road we are on now...BTW so do many high profile and well respected economists. If, God forbid that is the case I think there will be many more firefighters, cops and EMS personnel feeling the pinch like the brothers in Gary. Stay Safe Cogs

NH pizza is good, but I like NYC pizza a little better. My personal favorite though is a pie from the Colony in Stamford..try the sausage w/stingers. Eat in for the "atmosphere" i.e. gin mill...LOL or take out. The kicker is it's a great pizza made by a bunch of Irishmen...my Goomba ancestors are spinnin'.... Stay Safe Cogs Happy Holidays all...from my family to yours

And today's "heavy duty" aerials are considerably longer. My current department operates a twice refurbed '72 'scope, (ex 157 Truck). We have found that it's shorter wheelbase allows us to get in where others can't, but there is a drawback. The cab cannot be fully enclosed on it's current chassis. Brrrrrr... I'm looking forward to the pics as well. Others can try all they want, there really is just no subsitute or better tower ladder out there than the Aerialscope....I M not so H O. Stay Safe Cogs BTW..Happy Holidays All....from my family to yours

The combining of volunteer departments is fast becoming an idea whose time may have come in many areas. So in answer to the above in the general sense: 1) Those departments who are suffering a lack of personnel which is effecting their response times and /or manpower availability on scene. 2) Because in most cases there is no assigned staff for any particular piece of apparatus, this point is a bit tricky. Using career guidelines may not provide the necessary levels of coverage to an all volunteer area. It may be that a higher number of units will need to be assigned to a box to ensure that the minumum arrives on scene in a timely manner. 3) The idea of using the system mentioned in Bnechis post is a good start, and may well be the guideline. But it must take into account traffic conditions that can hamper a responder's ability to either reach the station, or if POV responses are used the scene, in a reasonabler time. Unlike a career dept. most volunteer FDs still do not staff their FDs so station placement and by extension the equipment housed there, is directly affected by the members ability to reach any station. 4) Based on the above situations, the responses must ensure that a minumum amount of personnel and apparatus are assigned to all alarms to provide the necessary level of coverage on scene...no easy task when there are no "guarantees". At a minimum a 2 engine, 1 truck and 1 rescue assignment is what I would consider adequate for a SFPD response. To achieve this minimum on scene in a timely manner though it may require the dispatch of 3 or 4 engines, 2 trucks and 2 rescues if we cannot guarantee those intial units will be on the road quickly..it only take once for a shortfall to have disasterous consequences. Of course as the hazard increases so does the intial response assignment required along with the attendant draw on the areas resources. 5) The only real way to lessen or eliminate many of the problems that bring about the need for combining, is to address the root cause..lack of personnel to guarantee an adequate response. Combining two or more departments in a small response area may have the desired effect as this will increase the manpower pool within that small area which should offer better service. But as the combined districts grow larger so to does the time and effort required to respond with the necessary resources. Combining will almost always save money, but two or more depleted/failing departments combined can simply result in one larger failure without fundemental changes in operation and administration. To me combining volunteer departments does have some definite pros, but the manpower issue almost always remains the major con. I have become more and more inclined towards the idea of minimum volunteer staffing in conjunction with combining to help alleviate or eliminate that which causes the problem in the first place. Only when we can guarantee a minimum response can we consolidate the resources we have to ensure the communities needs are met. But that's another topic. As Eleanor Roosevelt said: " Simple minds discuss other people Average minds discuss events Great minds discuss ideas" Oh, and make mine apple... Cogs

History repeats itself. For an insight to a future devoid of manufacturing and service jobs read "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire". Although an extremely long tome, you would be suprised at the similarities. The stongest, richest "nation" of it's time, the superpowerr of the ancient world, became a hostage to it's enemies as piece by piece their ability to feed, manufacture for, and defend themselves were "privatized" or shipped overseas for profit. Cogs

I agree 100% with making doing business in this country as difficult as most of our trading "partners" do in theirs. At the very least we shoudn't trade with any country that doesn't meet our anti-pollution standards. Not simply to help keep the world "green", but hey those standards cost our businesses millions if not billions to meet...let our competitors shell out a nice chunk of their profits to do busines here and level the playing field. But let's be fair Americans themselves are to blame as well. As sickening as it may be you really can't fault a Company for sending jobs overseas for a couple of reasons. 1) The main goal of any business is to make money, if costs are lower overseas even with all the logistical expenses, than that move is expedient from profit standpoint. It is no different than a mom and pop lowballing the competition do get customers. So long as profit is king, jobs will be lost. 2) The main culprit of increased costs for American companies here...wages and benefits. Now this may be an unpopular view, but we Americans expect the most for the least when it comes to salaries. The concern for the nation or even the next worker takes a far backseat to our personal gain. I'm not condemning anyone for trying to make a living, or getting what they are worth, but at some point the common good should overtake personal gratification. Unions for all their good work and necessity can and do price themselves and their workers right out of the game. One can only go to the well so many times before it dries up, or the owner of it cuts you off. The auto industry being a good example of this. Their bailout package deal was lost in large part, due to the union's choice NOT to make the concessions necessary so that ALL or worst case MOST could keep their jobs. BTW I'm not anti union, I was in a couple over the years, but as with many aspects of American life it seems that greed has overtaken all else, and we are now enjoying the fruits of that attitude....and yes even in the Fire Service. Cogs

Sad, but unfortunately very true. Cogs