antiquefirelt

Well if that's what makes you feel OK with the elections then by all means keep spreading word. For those VFD's that want to be recognized as professional organizations it's time to set rigid standards for promotions with testing and well documented process. There are some career jobs that could also benefit from the latter.

You're saying the Qwest cab looks good? I'll give them the fact that that bucket design is far better than the ones they were using before 2-3 years ago.

Good luck with the new truck! Not to sound like a jerk, but could they get anymore stuff to obstruct the driver's vision? Other than that it looks very well thought out.

Maybe this has been fixed recently, but in the past few weeks a tone of IA's have been in the photo pages? It seem everything some people were posting was being linked to multiple threads? Kept clicking on incident photos only to find the IA and nothing more. For the most part I use the main page and then go to the forums from there.

Are these adopted by the State of NY as law? If not, why do you have to follow them? Not that I disagree with choosing to use them as partial justification for better working conditions, but why do we hold ourselves to one standard while ignoring the one that will have the most positive impact on all firefighters and civilians alike: NFPA 1710?

We have a source capture system and do not allow our members to connect returning apparatus until it is stopped and shutdown. There are two reasons for this. First, the danger of attempting to slip the boot on while the truck is moving, you never know what can happen, the less members in close proximity to a moving truck with reduced visibility the better. The second reason is the need. A hot diesel engine emits very limit "dirty exhaust" compared to the start up. Now if you have a bunch of gas jobs, it may be another story. We can run a diesel in the bays for an hour and not set off the CO alarms, the Chief's buggy takes about 3 minutes to trip all the CO alarms in three other apparatus. If the system is connected there is no alarms or issues, and 5 years later our walls are far cleaner than ever before, as I suspect are our lungs. We had the hanging "scrubbers" for 6-7 years when I started and they were a pain in the a$$. A lot of filter changing and little noticeable effect, we'd still set off the CO alarms in the separated "house" section of the station.

You can also view the IAMRESPONDING screen on your Blackberry or Iphone/Itouch or mobile laptop, which works well for Chiefs vehicles. As the previous posted noted, we use the "batch text messaging" as well as the scrolling announcements on the main screen for announcing drills. It also has an "In service" bar on the main page to show all you apparatus, when one is OOS for any reason the officer goes in and changes the status and it shows up as OOS on the screen.

Here's another from today!http://www.firehouse.com/topics/top-headlines/duty-new-york-firefighters-save-two-blaze

It seems this is really a common experience among POC and combo FD's. With the best intentions we rarely could not create obstacles for responding apparatus. Happened in my first VFD and to a degree when I started on the carer side of a combo FD. BUt as I said before a few officers take their gear, two of us always and another POC Capt. pretty regularly does. We've had guys arrive before the first due and because they were trained and radio equipped were able to be very helpful to the initial crews. It's nice pulling up having a more complete story than dispatch got, and getting said story from a calm collected person, not a screaming distraught homeowner. It's nice knowing it looks like the basement is clear, and the fire seems to be ... Maybe we are told we need a supply line on the way in or there's no room for the tower etc. There are benefits, but like anything too many cooks spoil the soup. For that reason we'll likely capitalize on the fortune that only a few officer take their gear and make that a rule. It's toug enough to be in the Fire SUV and find a place to get out of the way but still see everything or have command equipment readily available, more than 2 or 3 of these in my little burg and we'll all have to be on the neighbors lawns.

Brother, take a deep breath. I'm not trying to paint you in any light, merely debating some points and explaining my position. You may have missed my point, so I'll say it again, just read it and in those infamous words: QTIP. It ain't about any one it's about every one as an individual.Being faced with the scenario that you are the lone firefighter at the scene of a structure fire with a person reporting a trapped child, you will be faced with a significant decision. What do I do? No one can fault you for taking a safe approach of completing a total size-up, killing the gas, and those duties that will make the attack faster and/or easier. But, you will likely have to wrestle with that decision for the rest of your life if that child dies. Of course there is a great chance that you wouldn't have been able to enough anyway, but you'll not know for certain. If your me, I know I'll have a very difficult time with that, so much so that I can't fathom not making every attempt possible. Now, here;s the tricky part, I'm not some BS hero or suicidal,but I still would push myself within the limits I perceive to be my best attempt.No taking a breath and plunging headlong into zero visibility with no direction, but maybe I go under some smoke, I can check a room, maybe two, who knows. Maybe I'm right back on the doorstep realizing there is n way. The point is while SOP and rules and all of that tell us the "right answer", this could be a life altering event for which you cannot be faulted for choosing the attempt. Depending on how much experience you have, you may be able to take more calculated risk, or maybe your over confident and have no business being in there and mistakenly charge in to your death. We all use risk/reward for every decision in life, not just fireground stuff. Ask 10 people here to evaluate the same scenario and assign a risk value 1-10 and you'll likely get a few different answers based on each individuals personal experiences. So do you just peek in the door? DO you check the relatively clear living room? Do you go to the top of the stairs and yell out? You're the only one who will know. In the end, you/me/someone will make a decision based on the situation at hand, not some made up scenario on computer. The smells, sounds, faces and people yelling will all have an effect. It's like so many people who say, "Screw them, I'd shoot that guy in heartbeat if it was me", without really being faced with the actual decision to end a life. A lot more though and feeling goes into these things than you can muster up while sitting in your office. So don't make this about any one person yourself or otherwise, just know that a decision as significant as the one presented cannot be completely thought through and made into a blanket policy that people will actually follow because it's policy.

Most of us have it preprogrammed into our cellphones for a one button dial. "In the Five Hole"! As soon as you hear the voice, you can hang up and the predesignated response is sent in. Of course this is where 95% of our crew responds to station, otherwise you must push a second number to tell it something else (like "to the scene") and for me finding a number on my phone in the dark is asking for a personal MVA.

As I said, from a departmental aspect this is really the only answer. You cannot tell people they should risk it all with little or no gear. But on a human level, which liability and legal dept's have taken from us, I'd find it difficult to chastise someone who did make the attempt or is willing to. In fact as I said, that's who I want with me day and night. Sorry but if you're a completely risk adverse firefighter, there's other guys (and gals) who I'd rather have. I cannot imagine living with the thought that I may have been able to do more, and I want to be surrounded by folks that have that same feeling, cause when it gets snotty and you're in trouble I want people who are willing to push it not those using a safety algorithm to determine my fate or those of my firefighters. Really? I cannot remember the last time I read of a firefighter dying while making an off-duty or under protected attempted rescue. I do remember many successful rescues and far more often than I care to, I see firefighter LODD's while operating with companies onscene. So while the risk is clearly evident, the cases for us dying while pushing too far before FD arrival don't prove that we assume too much risk to save precious life.

This is similar to EMS services in our state being banned from allowing unlicensed personnel respond to the scene until licensed providers are there. In our case, when call personnel took their gear home, they almost never arrived before the first due, as our district is fairly compact. That being said, I must address the quote above with a likely unpopular bold question: Who's standing around doing nothing? :angry: If someone's real live child is inside, so am I. I can not imagine living with that persons' face and voice in my head if I didn't make every attempt to try and make a difference. Different levels of experience will allow you to go to places in the same scenario. But if you push it until you're certain you cannot go any further, you'll be better in your own mind. Sure the book says stand by, wait for the engine and an SCBA and legally you will have complied, but that's not the end of the story, you'll have the rest of your life to decide over and over if you did enough. Sorry I don't buy the "without full PPE and an SCBA I'm useless" argument. You have knowledge about fire and buildings that surpasses the average person, you can calculate risk better than the postal worker who will knock your sad sack butt out of the way to go in and make the attempt. Stand around doing nothing? I doubt it, pretty soon you'll have to fight neighbors to keep them out if a child is truly in there. It's a lose-lose. If this bothers you, you should certainly make is SOP that no one goes to the scene via POV. I ask this scenario in every new hire interview to see what the candidate says. Do they try and give us the book answer,? Are they paralyzed by regulations and fear? Or do they know the rules but see this as a personal decision that has dire consequence no matter what you decide? I know who I want to work with. BTW see the front page of FH.com today about the Shirley, MA FFer who did just this. http://www.firehouse.com/topics/top-headlines/mass-firefighter-goes-against-procedure-save-woman

In our combination FD all career personnel except Chief Officers must leave their gear in the station and report there for any recall. All POC personnel are allowed to carry their own gear, though as of now, not a single person does. The career staff responds 1 engine, 1 tower and one bus. This leave 2 engines and 2 more buses as well as a utility vehicle. Upsides: much less congestion on intown streets during alarms. Even with decent discipline, POV's are hard to get out of the way in most of our intown district and with poor hydrant spacing, this can be a real issue. This also allows us to utilize second and third due engines in a more traditional fashion, rather than have all of them respond and get parked as many "paid driver" FD's do. Our on duty career personnel function as companies rather than drivers. On the downside, knowing when the 2nd/3rd due is coming is not consistent. You never know who will be jumping out of these pieces and the reality is there is a difference. The Chief and myself are the only two who routinely carry our gear out of the station. His is in the City Chief's SUV and my in my POV as I live in an adjoining town and next to another that we frequently respond M/A to and I can be onscene 10 or more minutes ahead of our apparatus (7-12 miles). We use the I Am Responding system and really like it. Basically as the IC or Duty officer I get updates from ost dispatchers who have our IAMRESPONDING screen up on their computer, or at worst I can request the status and they'll tell me (ex: 4 FF, 1 LT, 1 A/C). The issue it doesn't solve is their response time. The times are preprogrammed for each individual based on their travel time from home, so the number is inconsistent and almost useless. The best thing for us with IAMRESPONDING is using it when recalling station coverage (anytime fewer than 2 personnel are in house. This allows the DO to see who is coming in and if another call occurs he can contact them and have them respond direct (mostly EMS) as this is a fairly frequent occurrence.

Can your "light duty" members work on an engine or truck?

I doubt that's in the cards. FDNY had a few a long time ago, though I think they were quints or at least had pumps as most (all?) Sutphens do. While Sutphen seems to make a fairly bullet proof truck, the bucket specifically is less versatile than many (most) other platforms. If you notice the front is the only section with a lip edge (a very small one at that)from which to work, or escape to. The doors face the front with virtually no angle requiring the operator to place the bucket nearly straight on the objective. IMO the twin guns are too slow to maneuver and are awkward to position. Thankfully they did away with the hanging down steps with kept the bucket up of the roof, though it may still be there on the SP? Even Peirce finally is offering another bucket besides the big and small dumpsters they stuck on the ends of their towers. E-One also redesigned their bucket to have the angled faces and lip edges, while Scope, KME, ALF and Crimson already were doing this. The SPH among other differences has the bucket that does not hang down behind the rear compartments where the SP does. We ran a Sutphen for a year or so and it was not a user friendly truck compared to most. Nonetheless I hope Stamford has good luck with theirs.

Any thoughts on why then the switch to four doors? Could this really be just for transporting relatives? Maybe more ride-along preceptorships? It defies normal logic on the OAL increase, though as noted I'm sure there's a reason that's just alluding us.

A lot of Fire based EMS in FL run three personnel on the bus. I just heard the other day that at least one large FD is now switching to four doors to ride these members in forward facing seatbelted positions when ever responding to a call. I can't imagine a good reason why you'd increase the length of any apparatus in NYC unless you saw a significant need? I'm sorry, but make the family take a cab, don't buy a new 4 door cab! But I assume they have their reasons, it's not unheard of for the FDNY to actually research things and try something and can it later.

Not sure why there is a difference, but I assume it's poorly worded legalese. I doubt anyone today see a real difference between those who have a duty to act. On the opposite side, many people could believe laws like this were enacted to protect public servants and if EMS was a predominantly private industry when the law was enacted, they may have been "left out".

Spot on. A good recon will likely tell you if the fire is in the basement, especially in frame dwellings. Between opens such as doors and windows, the joints at the sill/foundation are usually not tight enough to contain any smoke under pressure. Smoke coming from the siding low on the first floor should also raise your level of suspicion. Of course the TIC is a fine tool that can be invaluable, but is also not infallible. Knowing what to look for when the TIC fails is paramount.

From all the Brothers up here, our sincerest condolences.

Our newest piece has seatbelt monitoring. The audible is so loud you cannot stand to move the truck out onto the apron without buckling the seat. They work in conjunction with a "seat pressure" indicator so empty seats do not alarm. To "disable" them, I believe would be considered gross negligence. It would take either messing with the wiring or the occupant to manually clip in the belt then sit on it, clearly indicating his/her intent on recklessly not following the State seatbelt law. Nonetheless, I still contend my FD is 99.9% compliant, with the .1% being those operators and officers who allow the apparatus to move before all personnel are fully buckled. Sometimes finding the receiver is difficult on older apparatus with them being short and close to the engine tunnel and some of us have some accessory weight in the midriff.

I've flowed 3300 gpm with a 1500 gpm pumper on a hydrant! Now that we have 5" LDH I'll bet we can do more. This was on a hydrant rated for about 4200 gpm @ 20 psi. If you can get the water via multiple inlets and you can get it out via numerous large discharges, the pump becomes a large manifold with some pressure boosting power. At draft the pump will be near it's max capacity as rated. Some pumps are able to get more but basically once you exceed 165 psi at draft, you're maxed out. Because pumps work on Net Discharge Pressure (NDP) not Engine Pressure to attain high volume flows, you can subtract a large portion of the incoming flow pressure from an outside source such as a hydrant or relay pumper.

Frankly, I'm of the mind that it is stupid to put a firefighter on the tip for a defensive operation. Reasons: 1. We've already determined life safety is not the issue. We're limiting fire spread at best, more likely burning the building down to a manageable size. So on the reward/benefit side of the scale, we're pretty light... 2. Hazards: Firefighter is generally above and close to the heat and smoke. Any wind change, sudden intensification of the fire from collapse (expected), or unforeseen materials may expose the firefighter to dangerous heat/flame. Smoke better not be a concern, as the firefighter should be in SCBA breathing air, as rapidly donning a mask while in the air is not feasible. 3. Aerial movement: It's never a good idea to retract/extend an aerial with a firefighter on it, regardless of the folding footrests at the tip. Most accuracy requires full range of motion over the operational duration. 4. What is your aerial rated for? If you have a low load rating for your aerial, it is going to be far more susceptible to damage from sudden flow changes. Many ladders fail when water is shut down too quickly causing them to to "spring" forward then back. Not only does the firefighter get whipped about (better have a belt on) but the stick could fail as this is not what they're designed for. Basically I see this a failure of the basic risk/reward benefit. I'm far from a Safety Sally, but I don't see the benefit in lieu of far better/safer options when this is a defensive job. You want an accurate aerial master stream? Get a tower ladder in there, Far better safety for the firefighters, much more accurate stream placement, far less safety risks.

This is obviously a significant issue anywhere that taxes are used to pay for services. Our tax-free property also hovers between 30-33% year to year. This, when faced with more tax cut programs, is a major issue. We looked into user type fees, to which our State says, NO! There are no fire districts and no provision to allow a separate fire tax. We wanted a City tax on lodging, being we're a vacation destinination, but no new taxes are allowed, only those imposed by the state. We're looking to increase our fees to towns we provide ALS services to, to a rate which we can either hire more help or they'll stop calling. Either way, we need more staff or less calls. No raises this year, no increases in budget lines (aside from those outside our control).