dwcfireman

Are we sure this isn't a rumor? This will have an adverse effect on a lot of things....Rye Brook would lose their night engine, the Village of Port Chester loses on the spot fire demand, never mind where else this will affect the county. If this is true, my heart goes out to the residents of Port Chester and Rye Brook. For Port Chester to disband their paid sector is only bad for the community and it's neighbors. Where I really feel bad is for our brothers and sisters that just lost their jobs; they just lost their livelihoods!

hahaha YES. .NET! I wrote my post while I was tired. Ooops!

Aviation wise, you can listen to their air traffic communications through liveatc.com. If they're operating in the lower Hudson valley you can pick them up on NY TRACON 126.4 or 120.8. Going upstate (like Ulster County) you can pick them up on NY Center (frequencies vary).

Many excuses came back including poor examples at the command level (i.e. unfit, “legacy” police and fire chiefs), union resistance, not wanting to create a “hostile” work environment for members, and “career suicide.” This statement at the beginning of the article makes me cringe. First of all, there should be no excuses. When I was in ROTC, we had a sign above the door to the cadet offices that said "No Excuses! At the command level, there are no excuses. These are the people that are supposed to be setting the example for the rest of us. These are also the people that need to tell their staff that they need to be in shape (and preferably the chiefs should also be in shape!). Set the example, and expect and enforce the troops to follow suit. If the chief is a fat slob, what motivates me to stay in shape other than my own personal safety concerns? I, for one, am never concerned about just my safety. If I go into a fire with three other firefighters, all four of us are coming out. If one of them is out of shape, I don't want the group to end up like the example from the article (2 LODD, 2 severely injured). As an officer myself, I'd rather point out that someone should buy a bike or hit the gym a little more than explain to OSHA why half the crew didn't make it. This ties in with creating a "hostile" work environment, as well. Why are people so concerned with offending others when there's a clear and cut safety issue? Of course someone is going to get upset when you tell them that they are out of shape, but they need to be in shape for a job that is as vigorous as a firefighter's or police officer's. If we're not on our A game, someone is going to get hurt (and it's usually the person that brought their B game or lower). If you are the one that gets told to hit the gym a little more often, then suck it up and get yourself into better shape. And for the love of all that is good, why would a union resist against a physical fitness protocol? Unions fight to keep the troops safe in their jobs. Why wouldn't they just rally behind their brothers and sisters to get them or keep them in shape so EVERYONE can accomplish their jobs safely? Union resistance sounds like a joke to me when it comes to this matter! The last one I don't get. "Career suicide." I understand that there are some people out there that just let it all go and stop caring (i.e. just riding it out until retirement, or the volunteer that just let go and decides "I'll just drive."), but this is still a huge safety issue. Without starting a volunteer versus career debate, because this can happen on either end of the spectrum, let's look at the latter example: A volunteer firefighter gets older and decides to ride out the rest of his career as a driver because he cannot meet the medical qualification to be interior because of weight gain and the associated medical issues. His department is struck out for a working fire, he drives the first due, and has a heart attack behind the wheel because the adrenaline and stress overcomes his body. The rig crashes, sending the other four firefighters to the hospital, and the fire has to wait and grow because the first due water didn't make it. What I'm getting at here is that just because we get older doesn't mean that we can't be fit. Granted, fit for a 20 year old is different than fit for a 50 year old, but there are people 60 years of age and older still fighting fires! I can't account for the law enforcement world, but there are a lot of firefighters that keep trucking along and stay in shape for their entire career! These are the guys we need to be like! Now that my rant on excuses is over.....Do your fire departments (BOTH career and volunteer) have physical fitness standards? Should departments have them and enforce them? Should there be some sort of physical fitness program to keep the troops in shape?

What if...stay with me on this one...departments purchased a bunch of sets of wildland gear for the department, but not for everyone? I think it's a nominal idea that a department could at least buy 5 or 6 sets (at a minimum) of wildland gear that would fit a majority of the personnel for brush fires. What do the masses think about having wildland gear around for personnel to use WHEN they need to, and FOR the personnel that are there? (Think similarly to water rescue suits)

I know. This is a good question. From what I see as the norm right now is that firefighters will wear their full PPE and carry the necessary equipment deep into the woods, just to strip off the jacket because it's hot and firefighters get tired from the weight. But, then again, we're not preparing ourselves for these large brush fires, rather the big structure fires (however, brush fires are just as common in rural and semi-subruban areas, and will become more common than structure fires as building codes and safety regulations further reduce the number of structural fires). Should we spend more money and provide wildland PPE? It's not a bad idea....the problem is money. Regardless of cost and what we're doing now, I think, and generally speaking, a lot of trends on the west coast (firefighting wise) have eventually made their ways across the nation, i.e. bunker pants. I would believe that at some point in the future east coast departments will at least have "universal" sets of wildland PPE for firefighters to respond to brush fires with.

Here's a couple of pics of Westchester Airport firefighters doing some night training. The first is Airport 7 in a low attack setting, the second is a few of the firefighters doing some handline training (with a probie on the knob). The photos were taken by duty supervisor Peter Garber.

I'm not in the running for the G-Extreme this year, but it will be nice once we're completely converted over! And I'll try to get some more training shots up here. We have some training this week and next week, so I'll see what I can do.

It's funny how emergency service workers tend to get the short end of the stick (ladder pun intended). At least with the total fleet replacement over the years they now have amazing apparatus to cover the whole city. I'm kind of thinking that, especially with the smaller firehouses, that the midmounts will be lower profile. And with how close houses can be in some of the neighborhoods, I guess the mid mount will have better reach for exposures. But, I'm going to be in Rochester this weekend, so I'll see if I can find an answer!

BUT, the Q/M had an engine respond with them for anything greater than an automatic alarm. Now you have 10. Working fire...add a batt. chief (1), rescue (3), and either another engine (4) or Q/M (6), and FAST (usually another engine with 4)....22 to 24. I personally know a bunch of the Rochester firefighters, and they very much prefer the Q/M system. It may have cut firefighters, but it met the city's needs with faster and more efficient responses to structural alarms. It may not have been perfect for every situation, but you always had enough manpower to start an interior attack. p.s. I was born and raised in Rochester. I'm not swayed by that fact to defend my view of the Q/M system, rather I defend the system because I've seen it work. BUT, to get back to the topic.....I wonder why Rochester is going back to midmounts. I would think that they can continue to have better use of rearmounts, considering downtown high-rises, the large number of rather tall apartment buildings, and the number of large buildings that are set back from the road.

So why can't EMT's be trained to do this? Is it that much more difficult than an EpiPen? Or is it strictly because of the medication?

My curiosity piqued while I was away from the computer....How many Haz-Tac ambulances are staffed each tour? And how many hazmat or tactical assignments do they respond to?

IMO there really is no need for paramedics in the hot zone of a hazmat situation (whether it's terrorism or an accident). It would be better to have an EMT or two in there to quickly triage and pull victims out, allowing the paramedics to give life saving interventions to those who need it in the cool zone. I've never tried to stick an IV with a class A or B hazmat suit on, but I'm guessing it's fairly difficult.

Interesting concept. To me it just seems like overkill for upfront expenses and maintenance, but if it works for them, cool. Do you per chance know the reasoning for each officer to have his/her own personal vehicle? And I really like North Port's K9 vehicle! Especially the "WARNING K-9" on the rear doors. It seems to me that it would give an extra pucker factor to anyone that saw this pull on scene.

I understand when companies or governments want to reinvent their logos, but where's the originality?

At first look I this rig definitely looks like a rescue or hazmat unit. It's a great looking rig, and a nice improvement for the FDNY. Congrats!

Personally, I hope who ever ends up with the property knocks it down (hold the boo's and comments...I'm going somewhere with this!). When the car went through the side of it a few months back, I noticed the structure is very flimsy and not built well. I would never send anyone inside if it was well involved, nor if there was a vehicle sitting in the kitchen. HOWEVER, it would be nice if someone (even if it's the current owners) could turn it around, with a NEW building, and keep the Little Spot tradition in North White alive.

I never said that the luxury items were a bad thing. If your department can afford them and justify the cost for it's use, then buy it and use it. On another note, to operate the drone (since this thread is about drones) you have to invest someone on the fireground to fly it. This takes a person away from the fire fight that could make a difference elsewhere on the fireground, all just to put a miniature helicopter in the air. We already have manpower issues (which you mentioned). We don't have enough people on scene as it is, so why make one of them operate a drone. My bad about the course. It's something the FAA has thrown around a few dozen times, but it hasn't grabbed yet. I'm sure they'll require it soon (probably after an accident happens). And, yes, you are correct, you can fly a registered drone at the airport. Airport Operations and the Control Tower must agree, and if the Control Tower agrees you must have an aviation radio to remain in constant contact with the Tower (you must also obey ALL of their instructions). But, I don't know of many airport operators and controllers that would allow you to fly a quadcopter or other R/C aerial device AT an airport....you could probably get away with it at a remote uncontrolled field upstate, or just go to a certified Radio Control "Airport." I know for a fact that if you try to fly anything at Westchester (at least for recreational purposes) you're going to be told no. We've already had a handful of incidents with drones.

The technology I was referring to the is the fancy fancy stuff, like computers in pumps, TICs with Bluetooth to a command screen, remote control deluge cannons, and DRONES. I won't disagree with you, the technology in the firematic world has evolved immensely to either keep us safer or make our jobs easier. But you have to remember, our electronic technology is susceptible to failure (dead batteries, user error, formula error, etc.), and we should never allow ourselves to rely on our technological advances to do our jobs for us. Using a TIC makes it easier to find victims or fire in the walls, but if the TIC fails you have to rely on the basics that we were all taught in the beginning of our careers. The same goes for when you're at the pump panel and the auto-throttle goes berserk; You have to know the basics of the pump and go to manual throttling/pressure control. Technology is awesome, and it's great if your department can afford all of the cool toys. But, the toys should not be doing our job for us.

I believe the bucket is in Mexican airspace...Is that a problem? hahaha

BAM! Such a true statement. I like where your head is. We don't need fancy stuff to fight fires. Technology doesn't fight fires. We do!

If the drone is registered, the "pilot" has taken the online course and done the proper paperwork, and the drone is flown at less than 400 feet above the ground greater than 5 miles of an airport, then yes, it's legal (and of course you're not spying/stalking, stealing, or shooting anything). Thankfully, Westchester only has one airport and NYC airspace doesn't come into play, but the airport's location would suppress firematic drone use for quite a large area; specifically Armonk, North White Plains, West Harrison, Purchase, Rye Brook, Port Chester, Purchase, and areas of surrounding districts would be off limits. Then, if the Medical Center is counted due to the helipads, then the entire mid-section of the county is off limits to drones (then imagine if every registered helipad is included...). Will the FAA give fire departments leeway for firematic drone use? Probably in a few years after some lobbying and argument, but I don't see this going anywhere any time soon.

Are they replacing E89?

How is the GFD organized? I know there is a decent career staff, and I know that there are a few volunteer companies throughout the town. Can anyone explain to me how they are situated?

100% true. Some departments are lucky to have people around during "normal" business hours (daytime), and some departments have response times equivalent to most paid departments. It's really the luck of the draw on this. It's either the cards are in your favor, or you've bust. It would be awesome to see every department have the upper hand with manpower, training, response times, etc. Unfortunately, we live in a time and place that volunteerism isn't at a high like it was in the in the 1970's and 80's. The good news is a lot of departments ARE coming out the low point (as volunteerism, especially in emergency services, is cyclical). Things are slowly kicking back into shape. I can speak for my department where we have been processing a lot of new firefighters. We're lucky to be getting the manpower...Now we just have to retain them! And can anyone answer me as to how a dog gets it's head stuck in a tree?!?!