thebreeze

Where do you read anything like that?

Total ruse, shell game nonsense. The sh*t sandwich contract says that staffing level "C" is guaranteed. Currently "C" calls for five guys on the backstep of every ladder, but there is nothing preventing the city from going in and changing the definition of "C". Bought hook line and sinker by a few thousand guys. Driver is included, the boss is not.

I really don't see the advantage of the folding bucket? What does it do for? Save a little room? With a rig that size it's kind of just a drop in the bucket. It seems more of just a gimmicky novelty to me. Additionally what protection from heat might it provide the occupants of the bucket if its trying to pass or go above fire? I understand that they shouldn't have to rely on the bucket for protection but situations do arise where it could be necessary and could mean the difference between being safe and being seriously injured.

WHY ARE YOU YELLING? 😁

You're gonna hear far worse in the years to come, one day it's going to be "wow, Major Department Still Cares About Hiring Standards", or "Wow, Major Department Still Goes INSIDE to Fight Fires"

They are also trying to make basement apartments legal again, it's like they forgot why these things were put in place. Then they will be shocked and horrified and blame the FD when fire fatalities go up.

I stopped checking in as regularly because I get tired of ten new dead end thread topics starting every day. Usually just to announce a new TV show or something else that invites no follow up discussion. I still chime in when it's a thoughtful discussion or when there's useful information I'd like to try and share, but in general there's too much clutter. It's good to post job filings for people to see but do they have to all have their own thread? Kind of like all the new apparatus postings got consolidated into one thread, can't that be done? I still enjoy some of the good discussion here, but it's increasingly becoming more and more like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

It's a much needed new fire scene unit for the Marshals. Multiple features that the Fire Marshals of the FDNY need for the examination and collection of evidence at fire scenes, photography, communication capabilities, etc. They currently fulfill this role with an old ambulance body unit that needs to be replaced.

I've seen a lot of guys look a lot more "not right" who were good guys. A lot of places take in people who end up being their biggest problems. Happens all over, the system can't stop every problem from occurring, it's a shame though.

Because you always say who you are speaking to, and they are speaking to 60 control at that moment so they say 60 control.

Sounds like you drank too much Hi-C.

Because one person's opinion, standing alone by itself, with nothing to strengthen or support their argument, is obviously always correct.

No one is surviving long UNDER the water, however in the water with flotation is a very different story. Dive teams are more likely a recovery resource than a rescue resource in reality http://gcaptain.com/cold_water/ The link is to an interesting article about the facts about cold water drowning and immersion in cold water, both with and without flotation. Seems like by the time a dive team is assembled, unless it just happens to be on the shore nearby, if the person has already gone under, they are likely to expire. I feel cold water rescue teams would be a resource that would be more beneficial to duplicate and have many of than dive teams, since they are more than likely doing recovery they are not necessarily needed to assemble and respond as quickly. I agree with you that it's a realistic risk in our area that we will need water rescue resources, and I agree cold water rescue units would be useful, I just don't think the dive teams are as realistic a resource to maintain for what they can actually provide. How many times is a dive team called where in reality the person isn't actually under the water and it's simply a cold water rescue? One quote that stood out from the article that struck me as pertinent to the conversation was this, "I’m going to come right out and tell you something that almost no one in the maritime industry understands. That includes mariners, executives, managers, insurers, dock workers, for certain – fisherman, and even many (most) rescue professionals:It is impossible to die from hypothermia in cold water unless you are wearing flotation, because without flotation – you won’t live long enough to become hypothermic." Give the article a good read, its written by a well heeled former Coast Guard member who knows his stuff, it certainly opened my eyes to a few new things.

This is true in Manhattan, not quite as standard in the outer boroughs though.

Civilian dispatchers, who still work for the municipality, are different than dispatchers from a private company. The thing about private companies is that they are profit driven, they are taking the contract to make money. When those municipalities you mentioned hire civilians they aren't looking to make a profit off of it, they are looking for someone to do the job proficiently. What might suffer with a private for profit company is the level of service you receive.

I'm not against the idea, I just don't think it's actually going to accomplish anything. Another law passed to make politicians look good and everyone feel all warm and fuzzy, but like I said, it's not going to protect you from those real a$$hole employers who it's directed at in the first place.

It's nice to do something for the rig, I agree, but this is over the top stupidity. The last rig my department put in service, there was a small ceremony. Attendees came, there was breakfast, some thanks were said to those who participated in the process to obtain the rig, the chaplain said a prayer over it, and a bottle of champagne was broken over the bumper. Simple, quiet, traditional, and gave the department a chance to give the rig some well wishes for future success. What's wrong with this type of a ceremony? People seem to prefer this other absolute nonsense, more of a chance to make asses of themselves I guess. It's a terrible waste of resources and a terrible image to put forth to the public. Not to mention unsafe and full of possibility for liability, especially when it's conducted like this.

Departments don't care, they will do what they want. Its already a waste of time, money, and resources on the part of the departments who hold them, and those that come to them. They don't give any thought to these things as far as a reason to not do wet downs, so why would some other common sense stop them?

If your employer is crappy enough that you even had to worry about this in the first place, then I don't think the bill will realistically be able to do much for you. If in the past they would have fired you for taking off to help at a declared disaster, then in the future, sure they won't fire you after you go donate your time for a week, its illegal. What they WILL do then, being such a shining star of an employer, is wait for a while after you come back to work, and drum up a reason to leave you high and dry, unrelated to the disaster. Am I saying every boss will do this, no, but with people with attitudes that poor to begin with, they will find a way around this law to do what they want.

Mind boggling right? That this could come as a surprise to anyone.

Spoke to that LCC shortly after the incident, he did in fact look down that side, made sure it was clear, ran back and started lowering and the RMP squeezed in and parked there at just the right time, for all the wrong reasons.

The police officer didn't appear to be all that concerned, you can't be certain he even had the keys to move those THREE police vehicles blocking the block. This wasn't overly aggressive, he didn't smash through the cop cars at speed causing any serious damage or potential for major catastrophe, he moved them until he had enough room to get by and squeezed through. He even had his guys out of the rig spotting him as he went through. I don't think he did anything particularly terrible, stopping where he was on a tight block like that, before the fire building, isn't exactly the ideal spot for an engine. He would have further blocked out any other apparatus, particularly ladders who should be in front of the building. None of us know all the facts, but this isn't exactly a video to freak out about, sometimes you need to pull a maneuver like this, should you be trying to smash into a police car on every run? No, of course not, should the police be a little more cognizant of their vehicle positioning at a fire? Quite probably. I don't think this guy made a mistake or had bad judgement, I don't think it was the oh the fire department can do no wrong mentality either. He decided pushing those cars and doing some damage was worth the reward of getting himself into position, it looks like it worked out just fine.

I'm aware of the extreme difference in cost, what I worry about is the impact on safety each measure has. One practically negligible, and one invaluable. I know that it's not realistic in the world today, but I don't believe you can put a price on the safety of the members. Obviously city hall and governments across the country feel differently. The voters don't care because they don't see an upfront result for themselves, but they all sure like those million new trees being planted, at least for the few months they're alive before they wither and die from neglect. Then they just come plant three more on the other side of the street.

I agree with your analysis of the way it's going to go when its the men vs. Chief. All I am trying to say is for people to stop saying "this is what the FDNY wanted", when its not in fact a true interpretation of the the desire of the job as a whole. Just a few staff chiefs out of touch with what's really going on and what's needed. If you want to know what the members actually need and want, maybe ask them, maybe go to a few random firehouses and ask guys what they would like to be able to better get there job done. I'm not talking about R&D either, or SOC companies, or the Rock, just regular guys getting on the engine and truck everyday, the actual end users for your product. I am positive the Pak-Tracker would be extremely low on every wishlist if it was on there at all. In terms of increasing everyone's safety I think the top of every guy's list would be getting back the fifth man in the engine, instead of trying to just keep adding gadgets to carry, but hey, that's a whole other story.

The problem here is us disagreeing on who exactly the "FDNY" is, telling me some high ranking brass members demanded this and that this therefore means it's what the FDNY wants isn't accurate in my eyes. Thousands of firemen didn't call up demanding the Pak Tracker be developed, nor were they petitioning the Staff Chiefs for it. There are plenty of other things the rank and file members of the FDNY want, some that we get, some that we don't. I don't care that the Pak-Tracker adds zero weight, because for the most part it adds zero functionality as well. I think in most cases it just ties up another guy from the FAST Truck who gets stuck staring at a poorly designed display, and when he might be needed is stuck trying to follow this tool, that is spotty in many of our buildings at best, instead of using his brain to try and figure out where the guy actually may have been based on our operations. I think the EFAS is great for this, as it immediately lets the FAST Team know who gave the mayday and what position they have, that gets you halfway there, the Pak-Tracker is going to slow you down trying to make your way to the guy. I think it does have its place, like I said, in collapse situations, large area searches, or maybe rows of taxpayers. For this simply having one in every Battalion vehicle will suffice, I think sticking one on every truck was just a profit move for Scott coordinated with someone on the FDNY staff. One more aside, you say this was in development before 9/11, and that after 9/11 Scott was asked to make it a priority, so basically almost fifteen years has gone by and this is really what they gave us? Fifteen years and we have a bare bones version of a tool that is hard to use, not liked by the members who are supposed to use it, and doesn't really increase our operational safety. That's just ridiculous to me, we waited that long for this, and if they actually decide to listen to the men for once, then it will be in the trash in two years replaced by a newer improved more expensive model, that we will then buy a few hundred more of. Fifteen years and we didn't get what was wanted or needed. That's not a great way to run a business. I will say again, I love the mask Scott makes, but this is a joke if that's the best you can do in fifteen years.