helicopper

Mike, I share your zero tolerance and agree with all who have posted and called for jail time. The issue is not with the Larchmont PD, State law specifies who's eligible for youthful offender status (all that means is at the end of the criminal process the records get sealed - he could still go to jail and be a YO). As for the FOIL bypassing that, it is an interesting question and I'm sure that the Journal News will try or has tried in the past. A few more comments, As far as the criminal justice system is concerned, anyone over the age of 16 can be charged with DWI so he won't be a "minor". The parents should indeed be ashamed of themselves and hopefully will be held liable - at least in civil court! You can't have "double digits and not be DWI". Intox in NYS (and almost all the rest) is .08. bvfdjc316, can you cite your assertion that this is a breach of the Freedom of Information Act? Finally, you're absolutely right. Some of these kids need a good swift kick in the a**!

Frankly, I don't care if people want to jump off or climb up things with or without a parachute. But, it invariably leads to responses by us and we get put in harms way. How about they legalize base jumping but you have to buy a $1500 permit to do it and sign a waiver that you won't sue the state if you get hurt jumping off their bridge? How is this any different than skiing out of bounds? If you do and get hurt or lost, you get the bill for the search and rescue! Boy do those National Guard helicopters cost a lot!!! And, to compound the irony, there was just a jumper (as in suicide - unless he just forgot his chute) off the Bear Mountain Bridge just a few minutes ago. I think ALSfirefighter is right - we've got to stop publicizing this stupid stuff so people have to come up with their own original ideas!

If they wore boats they'd have to be called Marine Units!!!

They are absolutely incredible animals! I saw them at SeaWorld last month and they are amazing!

Police resources and command post vehicles...

Another perspective of the demo day... Photos are the property of the Westchester County PD.

Yup, it's always the cops that don't play nice. Firefighters have never had attitude problems and their egos are removed in probie school so they've never initiated conflicts with other agencies or even their own. [/sarcasm] Had you said "when everyone plays nice in the sandbox" you would have had my total agreement! Can't we all just get along??? As for the motorcycles, they're a police vehicle - sometimes they're going to be what's assigned to the job. As for their placement, they were probably on the scene prior to the FD and had been spaced to provide as much warning and traffic direction as possible. No, they're not providing "scene safety" but they are indicating the lane closures and the appropriate flow of traffic. Ideally, they're also slowing everyone down. Let's not forget that plenty of people have been hurt at scenes with apparatus blocking lanes so never, never, ever let your guard down because the big red truck is there. The drunks and morons are still going to find ways of hititng us! Who says we can't "hide" when doing traffic enforcement? That was always one of the perks! And as long as we're pointing out all these things about this picture how about noting that there are only TWO pieces of apparatus (not six), no POV's, and NOBODY (not even the dreaded cops) are stopped on the opposing side of the highway! Must be nice to work in Texas!

In reality wouldn't that just triple the call volume by having duplicate and triplicate assignments? One person sees an accident and calls 911 to report it - the police respond, notifying fire and EMS. Another person sees the same accident, calls 811 because they think someone is hurt and by giving a slightly different location generate a completely different response. The third person dials 711 and you see where I'm going... We NEED a SINGLE point of access into the emergency services system and the US has chosen 911 (Personally I like 999 like the UK since we have 914 and 917 in our area and they are responsible for the lion's share of the erroneous calls but that's another issue). Once into the system, there are any number of ways to route the call and interrogate the caller. I'd rather see a mailbox system, press 1 for fire, 2 for EMS, 3 for police once you call into 911 than three different numbers. If the call center is understaffed or overworked that's not a failure of the NUMBER, it's a failure of the system! IMHO

It isn't your typical "basement". It's got moviescreen size monitors, probably 25' ceilings and all the modern amenities. The "moviescreen" can be set to a variety of cameras, TV, CAD status screen, etc. It's pretty well thought out.

My point is that once the LZ is located and identified by the helicopter (and you'll know this because they're circling it with their landing lights on), all unncessary lights should be extinguished to preserve the flight crew's night vision. With all the strobes and LED's on a vehicle bouncing all over the place it can be very disorienting to a pilot. White lights (headlights, etc.) should also never be aimed at the aircraft.

The medevac crash in MI made we wonder about the decision to place helipads on the rooftop of a buliding, particularly a hospital. In this case, a helicopter crashed and burst into flames on the roof of the 11 story hospital building. According to the article, fuel also leaked into the upper floor of the hospital building complicating the response. Does anyone know if special provisions are made for firefighting operations at a rooftop helipad? Special standpipes, foam storage, pre-positioned equipment, for example. Did the FD have to hump all its gear up 11 stories while the wreckage burned? I know that NYC banned rooftop landings after a crash there in the 70's or 80's but many other places still use them including I believe the Albany medical center - perhaps someone from there can provide some info on their plans. X-ref: http://www.emtbravo.net/index.php?showtopic=25725

While watching tonight's Yankees game in Minnesota, cameras focused on a group in Yankees jerseys proudly holding a banner from the Peekskill FD, local 2343. Way to go guys, I hope you enjoyed the trip!

That is a support vehicle for the FD's incident management team (IMT). The FDNY has two type 2 IMT's that have been developed since 2001. About the vehicle: http://www.policeone.com/police-products/v...eleases/140839/ About the FDNY IMT's: WNYF articles WNYF2.pdf WNYF3.pdf http://199.134.225.50/nwcc/t1_pnw3/nyfd_in..._WebVersion.pdf http://wcbstv.com/topstories/Firefighters....s.2.236527.html

Personally, I would say that bike messengers are the most dangerous form of transportation... Helicopters do not become rocks when the engine quits but they're certainly not gliders either. The aerodynamics change when the engine quits and in the very simplest of terms (since I'm not an aerodynamicist) the flow of air reverses providing very limited lift allowing the copter to be landed wherever it may be. Most small helicopters out there are single engine and will have to autorotate if the engine quits. Twin engine aircraft like the BK-117 or EC-135 that STAT/Life-Net use have two engines but when one quits they're not going to go too far before landing either. As for practicing autorotations, that is one of the biggest parts of helicopter pilot training. Before receiving your license you have to demonstrate to the FAA that you can safely land by autorotation when the engine quits. As for fun, once you get the hang of them it's fun to practice but no, for real it can't be too much fun!

When you are speaking on behalf of the Department in an official capacity, YES, you certainly can. According to the first article he was acting as the Department's "media liaison". If that wasn't the message that he was supposed to deliver, there are quite likely going to be problems. It is different than if he had written a letter as a "concerned citizen" or simply was identified as a member of the agency. Please note that I am not defending the action, nor do I agree with it, but that is probably how this all came to be.

Did they also say that once the aircraft has identified the landing zone and is coming in to land all flashing/rotating lights should be turned off (especially alternating headlights aimed directly into the LZ)? Strobes and the newest generation of LED's can be very disorienting and the last thing you want is a pilot getting disoriented as he's putting the helicopter on the ground. The alternating headlights are generally right at the pilot's eye level, that's why they should be off.

Crash, I'll agree with you that you should never wait for the helicopter instead of initiating ground transport but saving 10 seconds will not make a bit of difference in the patient's outcome. Saving 10 minutes, MAYBE! But I suspect that's still the minority of calls where time makes such a dramatic difference. TREATMENT is the key.

Sorry TAPS but I have to agree with ALSfirefighter. Traffic, red lights, and the "possible" accidents that you cite are no reason to request air transportation. We fight traffic every day because that's part of the job. This decision should be based on the patient's condiction and a risk/benefit analysis of ground transport to a local hospital vs. air transport to a trauma center. The sole reason for using an air ambulance (and that's all it is by the way) is to more expeditiously get a serious/critical patient to an appropriate medical facility. If you are 15-20 minutes by ground from St. Francis (an area trauma center right?), you can be there before the helicopter can transport regardless of stand-by requests prior to response requests. It takes time to launch, respond, land, contact the patient, initiate treatment, package for transport, load, take off, fly back and unload. As NY10570 also points out, Yonkers is less than 30 minutes from several different trauma centers so time is not a compelling factor in requesting a helicopter there. There was a time when on-scene times were exceptionally long further calling into question the efficacy of air transport over ground. I bet the bill is also substantially more than $3000 too and that is an issue your patient will have to face later. As for the view, they're only seeing the roof of the cabin so it ain't much! As for doing substantially more in the back of the aircraft versus the back of ambulance, the flight crew may be qualified to do more but the reality is that during flight they are severely limited - in access, in mobility, and in space. This is probably why they used to spend so much time on scene prior to taking off. I said it the last time this topic came up and I'll say it again. EVERY air transport should be closely reviewed for appropriateness in an objective QI/QA program and those individuals or agencies that are abusing the resource should be better educated. You know that I think helicopters are awesome (obviously) but there's a time and a place for them. There is a substantial risk inherent to air travel and putting an aircraft up when not warranted is an unncessary liability. If a patient transported by air is discharged the same or next day with no trauma a poor triage/transport decision was made. We are all here to save lives but we also have to be advocates for the patient and professional providers who do what's in the best interest of their patient. The vehicle by which you transport is seldom the determining factor in whether or not you did in fact save a life. Your assessment, appropriate treatment, and safe expeditious transport to the right facility is what saves the life! There's very little guesswork involved in that process; the assessment provides insight into the injuries and a informed decision is made. I didn't "guess" I need to fly a patient out. The saying "when in doubt, fly 'em out" makes great t-shirts but it is not a substitute for the medical decision making process. If the helicopter flies but doesn't transport a patient I don't believe there is any bill but I'm not 100% certain. If the State Police transport there's no bill at all - we as taxpayers subsidize that flight so I hope it was justified.

If the crew on the "Meat Wagon" is as well trained as the transplant teams that currently go around to hospitals and interact with the people involved in the decision making and organ harvesting process, the contact with the family may not be so contentious. Personally, I think it is a fascinating idea and can't wait to see the results of their study. So many people are not successfully rescucitated in the field that there may be a lot of viable organs out there. On the street there are also very few family members around to be concerned about offending. This way when some 20 year old gets shot in the head on the street the remainder of his organs don't go to waste. As for that Saturday Night Live commercial, I will never forget it! It was one of the funniest things I ever saw and I remember the fallout from it for weeks after - people were calling NBC to complain about the tasteless product they were advertising. If I remember correctly, it was also around Christmas time and billed as a "great gift idea". Wow, SNL used to be really clever!!!

Pennsylvania has three separate DWI offenses each with a different series of penalties/sentences. The minimum offense is the .08 as required by Federal highway regulations and the next two... at .10 and .16 respectively, just increase the penalties. Source: http://www.dmv.org/pages/pa_intpage.php?ur...2Fchapter_4.pdf

Not so. The TMC and SP Hawthorne are collocated within the same building but are entirely different operations. SP Hawthorne is the Zone Headquarters for the State Police; the TMC is the regional traffic management center. The State and County have EOC's in the buildng, plus DOT, Thruway Authority and WC OEM all have offices there as well. The TMC handles all communications for SP and local agencies they dispatch for (that's why you hear TMC on the radio); receives and routes cellular 911 calls; coordinates DOT activities (road closures and responses and such) and HELP Trucks, etc. from there. x648e119 hits on a lot of their functions too. For more info about it you can go to: http://www.hudsonvalleytraveler.com/

The PD Marine Units were on the water already so their response was faster than even SeaTow. They responded, verified that there was no emergency and in this particular case towed the vessel to the George's Island dock to await SeaTow completely eliminating any potential hazard/safety concern. The helicopter response was purely coincidental since we were already in the area. Hearing many of the calls for "vessels in distress" a great many of them ARE in fact handled by SeaTow. Bottom line not all "vessels in distress" warrant an FD or PD response.

Yeah, cause THEY always get the location right! One of the accidents I got sent to on the Hutch would have put me into Orchard Bay in the Bronx if I followed the OnStar directions... Hey guys, quit bickering about the lines and maps and post a GIS image of one already!

Alas your own statement confirms the liability issue - you got a RIDE not a DRIVE!!!

Just out of curiosity, why is Westchester PD getting flamed for this when the call came through Rockland County? The WCPD has tried to educate our fellow responders about our resources so when we're all out on the river together we operate collaboratively - what does that have to do with this call? It is pretty ridiculous to ignore boats (or a helicopter) that are already out there because they're part of the PD and not an FD resource. We were actually out flying one night when you guys were searching for a jumper off the Bear Mountain Bridge but had no idea and never got north of Croton. Had we known (or been part of a coordinated response) we could have provided an immediate large scale thermal imaging search and/or provided illumination to make your operations safer and possibly more efficient. Good point... Two boats were staffed and on the water, the Rockland County SO and Westchester County PD. In addition, the helicopter was already airborne and assisted in locating the vessel just to save time (and because I'll use any excuse to fly ) since the operator was severely map challenged - he didn't know where he was or that there was shallow water near the shore! . Thanks! I was going to ask the very same question. This was nothing more than a bad disabled vehicle (albeit a boat) or a minor property damage accident. Why would that require an FD response? It only got an aviation response because we were flying already. It is a good thing this happened early in the season so we can iron this out and all get on the same page before a real incident occurs on the river.