FFPCogs

Not to be sarcastic but: welcome to the fire service, 200 years of tradition unimpeded by progress. excellent post Chris, couldn't agree more. Cogs

Hello....hello...hello...hello. Sure is quiet in here lately..... As usual thanks for the update Geppetto. Cogs

I wouldn't be suprised to see these things floating around CA in the next few years.

Tradition and my self admitted stone age mentality vis a vis "new" tactics and some technology aside, I must say that I was fairly impressed and pleasantly suprised by the demonstrations. Both ideas I think would serve us well after exhausting real world tests. Like Monty I find the Pro pack concept is a really good step forward in terms of personal safety/accountability, as mentioned in the show even the rounded "harness" would be less prone to getting caught up. Mostly though I guess my gut reaction is Damn why didn't I think of that !!! Stay Safe Cogs

Great muster and even greater memories. Thanks for the pics Cogs

Sorry to butt in: No one died or was injured Every FF on scene went home alive and uninjured Job well done !! Cogs

Well I suppose us sh*t stirrers and everyone else in the community can sit by and watch as homes, including possibly our own, and whatever businesses are left burn down. Cogs

If in fact the situation is or were to become so dire that volunteer FFs would be needed to guarantee fire protection it would be the first role reversal that I am aware of. Usually it is the lack of volunteers that is the issue. I would hope that no one would be faced with losing their jobs, that is really the worst possible scenario. But in these times of hard economic realities the opinion that volunteers may actually be needed albeit generally unpopular may not be so far fetched. The news continues to spew stories of gloom and doom regarding the economy, and even if only half true it would serve all well to focus some attention to the what ifs of depleted fire protection due to budgetary woes. Unlike the 1930s or even the 1970s when many cities and towns had only volunteer fire departments, today many communities have at least some career personnel that are needed to protect the community. What happens to those communities if God forbid (and I do mean that) any career fire personnel are let go long term? No politicking, but if as many think things will get worse before they get better are we ready? Cogs

Good point Game about the economy. If it comes down to it who will protect and serve when there's no money? I would bet that a few laid off career FFs would most likely be first in line to help in those circumstances. When worst comes to worst most of us are firefighters first. BTW I am praying... Cogs

Another important factor here is what impact allowing any volunteer FFs would have from the union's perspective. I highly doubt that the union leadership would welcome people volunteering to fill what were once paid positions. And this isn't about the career/volunteer debate exclusively, we are after all talking about people's livelihoods. What happens when the budget turns around and any vacancies are re-filled or would they be? Why pay for what you get for free right? Or why keep people on when they are no longer needed as volunteers? Unfortunately I don't think an all paid career fire department with IAFF representation can " step back" and allow volunteers, it simply is not in their member's best interest. I applaud the author for his common sense approach and all things being equal would love to see such a move, but there are just too many obstacles from what I can see. Just my $.02 Cogs

I think anyone who reads this thread and begins to wrap their head around the questions posed by Seth quickly will come to the conclusion that this is but the tip of the iceberg. The huge variety of rigs and the tendency of departments to buy what is wanted is just another symptom of what is really an across the board problem... the redundancy and wastefulness inherent in many areas of the fire service. I must confess that I may be one who strays too far to the side of "standardization" or the "professionalization" of the volunteer fire service. Be that as it may though it does truly amaze me that in the 21st century the age old rivalries (some over 100 years old) and fierce independence of some VFDs still overwhelmingly dictate how things are done. (Well there I go onto a host of blacklists ). For me there's nothing wrong with independence or buying what you want so long as it is kept in the context of the overall needs of a community. An eye to the "big picture" I believe would better serve all. I guess I'm a traditionalist in many areas having to do with tactical doctrines, the "work ethic" of VFDs and their members or in the validity of volunteering itself and honestly I'm proud of that stance. But I for one wish we could see a more unified or collective approach to the "nuts and bolts" of our day to day operations. Apparatus specs to fill the need being a great place to start. Sorry to go off topic with yet another dissertation. Cogs

Traditionally many volunteer FDs buy what they want, now this may or may not be exactly what is needed. And some departments suffer from the misconception that each new rig must be bigger, have a larger pump or be stuffed with more tools then what it replaces. Throw in a good salesman and it's a done deal. Remember too that many of the NFPA guidelines are developed by the apparatus manufacturers, so it is of course in their best interest to "suggest" what they believe best serves our needs. Any who read my comments on this site know that I am a big fan of standardization whenever and where ever possible. Apparatus is one area from which we could all benefit in a number of ways by standarizing, but to many that is against the tradition of independent volunteer service. In the end though so long as the needs of the departmment are met I guess a little overkill is ok. A little off topic but another pet peeve of mine is the Quint concept without the practical means to apply it. A quint requires TWO operators, one for the stick (or bucket) and one for the pump in addition to it's normal compliment of firefighters. So buying a Quint to serve two functions without the means to accomplish them defeats the purpose for which it was intended. In Richmond or St. Louis where the concept is department procedure and all resources are trained and staffed to utilize them, Quints work well. When departments try to squeeze two rigs in one to save money or manpower, they usually end up with a rig that does neither function well...i.e. an engine without enough hose or a truck without a proper aerial. The dinosaur that I am I still believe in dedicated truck, engine and rescue companies and personnel cross trained to operate them all effectively. Cogs

Tradition and age old rivalries.

My point exactly...the system of checks and balances is being circumvented or ignored by those in postions that should adhere to them. Otherwise all the self serving "big corporations" who are "robbing us blind" would never have been allowed to do so. It is all part and parcel of the decline of the liberties and equalities this country was founded on. If you think me and others who agree paranoid just read up on your history, this type of decline has happened over and over again and those who benefit have always used "civilian security forces" to increase and maintain their positions and control. Cogs

Exactly !! And in the case of Hitler remember that he was ELECTED and won by a narrow margin, but the Nazi Party also had a slim majority in the Riechstag (i.e. German Congress), and it was they who enacted the Enabling Laws. For those who don't know these laws gave him total control after a "national emergency". It was then that the "civilian security forces" developed by the Nazis swung into high gear. May all be just a prudent call to help make the nation safer, but then again maybe not. Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. Cogs

RIP

Thanks for the large type, I didn't need my reading glasses for those parts of your post. As innocuous and worthy as Obama's statements would seem, history is full of examples of leaders who used just such talk to justify an increase in government interference into the lives of their citizens, and the subsequent loss of liberties by those citizens. As a patriotic American I support our Constitution, and whoever is President. As a responsible American I don't take everything politicians say at face value. Cogs

His words not my interpretation He DOES NOT say a civilian "service" corp like the WPA, but SECURITY force. And nowhere does he say "to free up the military for other jobs like national security"..he says ""A force to achieve the national security objectives that WE set". That's a pretty big difference. A WPA type organization which would put people to work is fine, and has precedent..a force or "Corp" composed of civilans to achieve "national SECURITY objectives" is quite another. Again these are HIS words not an interpretation. And they too have precedents... any two bit dictator voted in by a well meaning, and desperate populace that got more of a "change" than they bargained for. Cogs

My post has nothing to do with guns, it has everything to do with what amounts to a "civilian" political police force. The Nazi Brownshirts come to mind as well as the institutionalized network of informers employed by the NKVD/KGB. These too started out as "civilian security" forces to protect the innocent from the bad guys who disagreed with their government (KGB) ) or opposed a political party(NAZIs). He calls for a force equal to the military in strength and funding...for what?....domestic tranquility? Why not spend that money and resources on the military to begin with? He says "A force to achieve the national security objectives that WE set". Who is the we? And are we going to send "civilians" to fight our wars now?...don't civilians usually stay home..hence civilians? Are we expecting a war here? Are they going to be armed? Who will become the "terrorist"? Who will be the enemy for this "security" force to guard against? Alot of questions with NO answers....what is this 1932 Germany? He's gone so far left he's on the right. Cogs

Speed up so the ones climbing fall off and run the rest over is what I say. If nothing else you'll guarantee THEY won't be climbing on any more fire trucks anytime soon. Just kidding.... Cogs

There is also the Intrepid Fallen Heroes fund which helps the families of those KIA. For anyone who purchased a Camp Rustamiyah patch that's where your money went. Cogs

I was just reading a similar topic elsewhere and thought some might like to discuss it here. What policies are in place in the VFDs out there for officer criteria/selection? Similarly what if any opinions or ideas to improve them does anyone have? Here's my $.02 on the subject. First off I think appointment by the Chief is one of the worst..especially, if it is basically at their whim. To me there should be a four step process 1) All Candidates must have a minimum amount of time as active members and a minimum of 1 year of active service at the previous rank (other than Jr. LTs) Lts. 3-5 years service with the department Capts 5-7 years service with the department, at least 1 of which as LT Chiefs 7-10 years service with the department at least 1 of which as LT and 1 as Capt 2) All candidiates must meet certain certification levels to move on to step 3 (these of course are partly determined by the availabilty of courses in your area and number of members actually taking classes). But at a minimum I would use the following. Lts - FF II preferably FO I Capts - FO I preferably FO II Chiefs - FO II preferably FO III Skip to step 3 for any or all positions for which the requirements cannot intially be met with the proviso that the candidates must attain the lowest certs for the position within 1 year per rank of taking office. i.e. 1 year for LT, 2 years for Capt. and 3 years for Chief. 3) All prospective candidiates must take a written test for their respective positions based on the knowledge of the certification material (when applicable) and department SOP/Gs. Top 2 or 3 candidates for each position move on to the final step unless no one passes at which time a retest is given. Sitting officers do NOT have to take the test for their position unless their term is up when the tests are regularly updated. A 4-5 year update cycle should be adequate. Also I would suggets using and rotating a number of different versions of any tests to prevent cheating and ensure equality. 4) Election by the general membership of the department (in accordance with any voting by-laws). This step gives the membership the final and ultimate say as to who their leaders will be. Combined all 4 steps should provide the department with suitable pool of candidates, and creates incentive for members to increase their fire service education. Why bother taking classes when "promotion" is based on someone's personal choice rather than a member's knowledge, experience and dedication? If the above sounds similar to what some career FDs do in terms of certification and testing for promotion, that's because it is. I also happen to be a firm believer in "professional" volunteer firefighting. Times have changed considerably since I first joined the fire service in 1980, as has what is required of ALL firefighters. We in the volunteer sector are generally expected to provide the same levels of service as our career counterparts, therefore we need to do all we can to provide it. As has often been stated by volunteers to prove their worth "fire doesn't know or care about the difference between career or volunteer FFs". To me, neither should we. Just one guy's view Cogs

Believe it or not I too believe that internal or department specific training is a must prior to any outside training to ground newer members and ascertain their commitment level. Each department will always have "their" way of doing things, as well they should within reason. In a region or City where there is constant interaction between departments though, it is in EVERYONE's best interest to standardize operations as much as is possible. Using the same criteria and selection process is a step in that direction. As is the cooperative effort in pursuing that process. No one or at least not me is calling for a loss of autonomy by any individual department, but as was pointed out above certification is now the "industry" standard, and a standard by which we are all judged career and volunteer alike. Cogs

A hearty THANK YOU to all our nations veterans. God Bless America and all who have and do serve her. Cogs

When I think of "civilian security force" I think of Brownshirts, swastikas and stiff upraised arms with chants of Hiel Hitler. Hitler by the way was viewed as the "change" candidate in his time, a unifier and like Obama promised better days for everyone. History does indeed repeat itself. Be afraid..be very afraid. Cogs