IzzyEng4

In the figurative language obviously "Pork" is considered "fat" or in plain English overspending on line items that are not needed or spending that is viewed excessive on a fiscal spending view. Now we can take that as a wide variety of things from overtime costs to simple purchasing too much unneeded equipment at one time. Trying to just focus on using that term on teh fire department level can be a great debate among a lot of people, mainly us who service in the fire service who beleive if you by a tool and use it only once its worth its weight in gold versus the politicians who many view that as wasteful spending. The worse thing is though you have people using terms like this and actually don't really know the true context of the word of phrase being used and try to pin it on everything.

Hopefully it will work this time..........and everyone plays nice.

If the label says American LaFrance Fire Engine Company, then it might be from the years they were owned by the Foamite Corporation, also better known as American LaFrance - Foamite Corp. Usually if there is a serial number on the label then somewhere near the s/n is the date of manufacture or you can see if there is something stamped on the bottom. By the looks of the extinguisher, label and the gauge by what I can tell it seems it could be from the 1930s to 1950s era. I am not sure when the dry-chemical extinguisher market began though I believe its was around the 30s.

WOW, its just mean and intimidating looking!! Nice job!

Joe, hope you and the rest of NFD have good luck with the new rescue! ...... can I come down and drive it??? LOL

The topic was discussed here previously. I believe the old thread is dead. http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?showtopic=21491&hl= This fire was in the Mattapan section of Boston back on November 11 or 12th, 2007.

That is correct sir!

Open Cab = no doors and no roof Semi Open Cab = no roof with doors (cab forwards with front doors and jump seats are considered semi-open cabs) Canopy cabs = Enclosed cab seating area for drivers and riders in the front with the open jump seat area covered by the cab roof and side cab body panels, no doors to the jump seats or having half doors installed aftermarket are included. Enclosed cabs = totally enclosed seating area. I checked with a couple apparatus buffs and SPAMMFA members on the terms since my last post.

Its the TeD Nugent Special!!! Where's the fire power?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Audio of the fire dispatch from Erie County Fire Wire. Three files, transmission starts with dispatch for Clarence Center and Clarence FD's. http://www.ecfwire.com/id111.html

...........And also no doors, that's a true open cab. With doors and no roof (including cab-forward jobs) is a semi-open cab, then the canopy cab, the enclosed. A lot of people, including me, get it all confused and the old-timers that utilized the really old style trucks still raz me about my terminology.

I have the Scanner Master frequency guide for Southern NYS and NYC. I'll have to look at it since it had a lot of information on it. If its the old way of things I'll post some of the info.

How long has Utica provided ambulance coverage? More importantly, how will this effect their staffing levels if this ruling holds?

It is just like using Class A foam or CAFS, you need to train and know when to use it depending on the conditions. I've seen a lot of departments around here that have both used it successfully and have lost buildings to PPV use. Me personally, I don't think it should be used on an initial attack or when a search is going on, only after the main body of fire is knocked down, which obviously it shouldn't. You have to remember when using PPV it forces more air into the building and what does fire love??? Enough said there. Example, one town had a fire in an old building, they though they all the fire knocked down, put PPV into operation and the whole thing lit up like a candle and they lost the building unfortunately. I believe the outcome during the review, as was passed on to me, was that the PPV was placed into service too early during the course of operations. We have a lot of tools and tactics that the fire service that are great but the attitude of using it because its the new fangeled thing has to stop and proper training has to be focused on it. PPV is made for horizontal venting so like others have said, no going to the roof. Also all the windows should not be taken out also. Trust me I'm no authoritarian on it and I need to learn more about using PPV.

Two words..... FOUR-FIIIVVVEEE!

Nice shots Brian!

This is a hard question for me to really think of giving a definitive answer. It’s like comparing apples and oranges but just like everyone has said basically if it wasn't for the past we would have not progressed into the future. I was privileged grow up around and become part of the fire service when things were changing. For example, when I became a vollie, one of the first things I was taught was how to put on a Scott 2A, the second was to take the old elephant trunk and shove it down your coat incase you ran out of air when you were trying to get out of a building. Obviously looking back at it today that was a two-fold practice. On one hand it was plain crazy to do but it could save your life (so to speak) but on the other hand it was "innovative" as it was something to do in case you got into that position and to get yourself out. Firefighters are thinking more instead of just doing something because a book says so. For the longest time I think new firefighters got spoon-feed information from the IFSTA and other manuals out there and the teaching perception was "this is how it should be done". I was always taught that these instructions were the "Point A" and you needed to think of "Points B, C, D, ect." because everything was different. Plus you have to throw in the attitude and dedication factor with this. But also, I believe that there is a shift back in attitude and more career and volunteers are more dedicated than ever than just taking it as a job or for the glory just like the firemen of years before. Just like our innovative forefathers we are starting to think once again out side of the box.

It the bubble a foam based construction material??? I'm not familiar with the building you are refering to.

So are saying you think it is wrong to give a person a slight advantage to work in thier community where they live???

Fire buff, though you are correct in what you are saying, when I mentioned the fact about voting to consolidate (the 51%) then the districts would be abolished. Its up to the taxpayers of those districts to decide their fate. A change in the city charter would lead to such an action if the voters and then a vote would have to be taken in the districts separately. I wasn't clear on that in the initial post. But also, if a city determines that it is more beneficial having their own fire department than have say 3, 4 or five separate taxation districts (I don't like the word municipality since that should refer to borough, town of city government only but that's another topic), the city can enact on it and create their own, if their town / city / borough charter says so and have a "great influence" on all of the residents. Like I said I may also be misinterpreting or missing something also, so yes I am researching it. For instance, I see you are from Middletown and I know you have three separate districts - Middletown, South District and Westfield. Now politically I am not sure how they are set up or if they receive money from the town but I'm going to assume they are totally self-sufficient. Say if the South District, which also had problems recently, was to fold and disband for what ever the case may be, the Middletown and Westfield fire districts have no authority nor do they have to provide coverage for that district (not saying that they would not do so because that would be unethical). Now say for instance the Middletown Fire Department we'll go under the assumption is a city funded department and it is in the city charter to provide fire protection in the city, then the Middletown Fire Department must provide fire protection. In West Haven all three districts are autonomous from the city but work with the city and together. If one of these districts were to fold up, the others do not have provide protection to that one district. Also to with any Special Act or Resolution made by General Assembly, it does state in the last section of that special act it may be repealed at any given time by the General Assembly. And any process to repeal it yes does take a long time because of all the legal-eze

Of course its going to cost more money, that is a fact, so is splitting up one department into several districts. The cost is not for operations and maintenance of the department, buildings and apparatus, its the legal fees and such. The tax rate is going to be the same the difference is under a "City of West Haven Fire Department" under the city charter, the taxes will be mixed with the resident's annual tax bill. In the long run for the city, it would be more beneficial to combine the departments and their medic service under one entity as it seems. But it was widely mentioned previously in the reports from the districts and the city. Also too the city could come in and abolish the districts too just by going for a charter revision stating they would be able to establish and support a fire department under their authority. If the residents of West Haven vote favorably (51% of the vote) for this charter change then it can be enacted. Scary huh? A little unknown fact of CT incorporations. Also this is just a paraphrasing of it and not the full correct outline information so I may be overlooking something as well.

For the towns that have separate fire districts, the merger into a single department would be more beneficial. For instance West Haven having three separate fire districts and merging into one municipal fire department under the city charter or say those towns out east that have say 4 separate fire departments (own commissioners, own budget, own staffing, ect) into a common fire department under a town / district charter would be easier. However there is a major problem for many of the cites. towns and boroughs in the state. All of CT incorporated cities and towns, and a few of the incorporated boroughs in the state have in their charters the right to operate and maintain a fire department and may add fire companies as they seem fit. Under he proposed plan, if you read it in the black and white, would require major charter changes and since there is no county government system in place (which was abolished in the 60s and now would help with the proposal), would cause major problems and would not happen over night. Granted most of the problems would be political level.

Didn't they just get this truck fairly recently?

Just go to WTNH.com and look for the new link on the main page. Its easier.

A shooting in Bridgeport, no say it ain't so!!! LOL At least it was a cop shooting this time!