Is It Time For A Full Time FD @ WC Airport?

[x635 4,066]

With Westchester County Airport increasing traffic and having bigger planes (the AirTran Boeing 717's and the jetBlue Airbus A320's), is it time for Westchester County Airport to upgrade their emergency response and have their own FD? I know and hope that it would be quite an uneventful job, maybe staffing could be per-diem off duty or retired career firefighters who have gone to Crash Rescue school (the real deal one- I think in Texas?)

From my understanding from visits there, the airport managers are cross trained, and will abandon airport control and go out in the crash rescue truck. However, there are only a couple of guys to man the rigs.

Granted, most of the operation of these apparatus can be done from the cab. However, evacuations of the airplanes and the such need manpower.

I also understand that there is a three department response to the airport. Nothing against these departments, and they would be a big help in any large scale situation, but I think the airport needs to increase their first response capabilties. Especially when a lot of these incidents can happen without notice instantly. I also wonder the level of training with aircraft that the departments and their officers have with aircraft emergencies.

Also, I don't think it would hurt for the county to maintain airstairs such as the one pictured below:

[attachmentid=2406]

[Piranha174 37]

You can't be serious!!!!

That's an absolute ridiculous idea. Take it a step further and suggest that all volunteer department that is in the area go full time paid since a major aircraft disaster could just as easily happen just outside the perimter. It's just not feasible, pratical or considerable when you bring in the call loads vs. justification. Now if the county wanted to cross train the 6 or so law enforcement officers that are there at any given time, that might be sellable, but then again, I would think they would have their hands full doing other things. The current mutual aid agreement makes the most sense for the county airport.

[x635 4,066]

You can't be serious!!!!

That's an absolute ridiculous idea. 

Actually, I'm completly serious and I don't think it's a ridiculous idea.

Sure, a plane could crash anywhere. I was just giving me OPINION that the Westchester County Airport should AT LEAST have DEDICATED staffing for the crash rigs, and not have to rely on cross trained gate control agents/airport managers for the staffing.

You're right in saying that it could happen anywhere. But are the mutual aid companies in the plan all trained or required to be trained in aircraft emergencies? And what capabilities to they have to extinguish a fire? During a weekday, how are they going to help evacuate a 150 person aircraft?

I think that crosstraining the County Police officers is the way to go, like the Port Authority. It can be done, if the County PD has all these other specialized division they certainly could have an airport decision.,

[Guest]

I don't think it would be a bad idea. Maybe in the meantime, put some more Career people on in Rye Brook (which needs it!) and Port Chester and see if we cant do some more training at the Airport. Recently there seems to have been more aircraft related incidents at the county airport then i can ever recall in my 21 years living in Rye Brook.

[bigfitz2004 19]

I think the county airport mutual aid agreement has three stages. Stage one is Port Chester, Armonk, and Purchase. Stage two is Greenwich Conn., Chappaqua, and West Harrison. Not sure who is Stage three. If I'm wrong with anything please feel free to correct me.

[Guest x901]

EMS has a higher call volume at the airport..... how bout a full time medic unit?! PCRRB EMS covers the airport.... and are up there at least 15 times a month.

[Guest partyrock]

EMS has a higher call volume at the airport..... how bout a full time medic unit?! PCRRB EMS covers the airport.... and are up there at least 15 times a month.

←

Are you serious, a full time medic for less than a call a day. Thats even less practical than a full time firefighting force for the airport.

[Guest]

Are you serious, a full time medic for less than a call a day.  Thats even less practical than a full time firefighting force for teh airport.

←

I agree. I know PCRRB EMS stations an ambulance at the Rye Brook FD house when things are quiet, and while King Street can be hectic it cant be more than a 5 - 10 minute drive to the tarmac.

[bigfitz2004 19]

If an incident had happen at the County Airport who would be Incident Commander. Would it go to Battalion 19 Deputy Fire Coordinator?

[nycemt728 49]

QUOTE(partyrock @ Apr 4 2007, 12:55 PM)

Are you serious, a full time medic for less than a call a day. Thats even less practical than a full time firefighting force for teh airport.

I agree. I know PCRRB EMS stations an ambulance at the Rye Brook FD house when things are quiet, and while King Street can be hectic it cant be more than a 5 - 10 minute drive to the tarmac.

←

I suspect that the one person saved by a full time medic wouldn't care that the rest of that medic's time had no calls. Those five minuts could be important. I work for a place that doesn't have an large call volume; thats not the only reason for my employment. As for a full time fire company: I agree, I think cross training personell already on staff to handle small scale incidents and initial response is a much better and more appropritate idea. If there is a lack of coordination with the responding departments, I would also emphasize the strengthening of this response through drills and clear and precise plans. I agree w/ X635, prolly not a bad idea for all airports to maintain the mobile stairs.

Edited April 4, 2007 by nycemt728

[Monty 35]

If an incident had happen at the County Airport who would be Incident Commander. Would it go to Battalion 19 Deputy Fire Coordinator?

←

I would assume that it is the Fire District where the incident is in. Albany County airport has a full time department(site). When I was around they had 3 crash trucks (pics), hazmat, and a foam tender. Also they now cover additional county properties (nursing home and jail) as well as the airport.

However, when there were incidents, it was a unified command between the local volunteer department and the airport. Most of the airport is in Shaker Road's district but part was in Verdoy (both Town Of Colonie). It would always be a dual response and if it was an in flight incident, then SRL would establish command - usually alongside the airport chief.

One interesting anecdote was when the President flew in to the airport. Albany FD supplemented the Airport department with a ladder truck (and maybe more). Story was that the Secret Service felt they could vet the career FF's rather than the volunteers ....

[Guest]

QUOTE(partyrock @ Apr 4 2007, 12:55 PM)

Are you serious, a full time medic for less than a call a day.  Thats even less practical than a full time firefighting force for teh airport.

I suspect that the one person saved by a full time medic wouldn't care that the rest of that medic's time had no calls. Those five minuts could be important. I work for a place that doesn't have an large call volume; thats not the only reason for my employment. As for a full time fire company: I agree, I think cross training personell already on staff to handle small scale incidents and initial response is a much better and more appropritate idea. If there is a lack of coordination with the responding departments, I would also emphasize the strengthening of this response through drills and clear and precise plans. I agree w/ X635, prolly not a bad idea for all airports to maintain the mobile stairs.

←

A timely response is important, no doubt about it. The issue is 1) who is this medic going to work for and pay his salary and benefits, 2) is the high cost of maintaining a medic there worth the 15 incidents when you already have a well functioning quasi-municipal EMS system?

Edited April 4, 2007 by 66Alpha1

[Guest partyrock]

If you are truely concerned about saving that arrest, scatters PADs all over the place and train all airport employees in CPR and first aid.

[nycemt728 49]

A medic might not be justified, I would advocate for an EMT, a medic is overkill, both in money and supplies. You are correct, ALS can easily be handle by the municpal response system

[helicopper 1,050]

If an incident had happen at the County Airport who would be Incident Commander. Would it go to Battalion 19 Deputy Fire Coordinator?

←

The airport's plan calls for the initial IC to be the Airport Operations Supervisor who commands the initial response of airport fire resources.

After that it should go to unified command with the airport, FD's, PD, and airline.

  If you are truely concerned about saving that arrest, scatters PADs all over the place and train all airport employees in CPR and first aid.

There is at least one PAD in the terminal and the police cars on the airport have them. In fact, I think it was last year the cops at the airport had a CPR save in the terminal with an AED.

I think the idea that the airport needs to improve their emergency response capability is a valid one especially with the increased traffic but I don't know if anyone will go for a full-time FD or EMS.

[x152 179]

635 -

The issue of full time airport CFR staffing is most likely contained in some FAA regulation dependent on the amount of commercial (or private) air traffic at a particular airport.

The situation at WC airport is not unlike what is found in CT at some of the smaller airports (New Haven and Bridgeport/Stratford). In both of those airports, the FAA has standard CFR rigs assigned with maintenance crews providing the response. The local FDs all provide an assignment to the respective airports as additional manpower and equipment. The largest airport (Bradley) is staffed by full time State of Connecticut fire fighters. I believe the State also assigns their fire personnel to the airport in Groton.

We could debate all day about the "what ifs" and who is best to respond, but if the FAA is the ultimate "regulator" with jurisdiction here, it would most likely rest in their hands.

However, I would agree that (given the increase in flights and service at the airport) it would not be unrealistic to see a more permanent CFR staff in the future.

Perhaps someone more familiar with the FAA could comment and/or correct me?

[helicopper 1,050]

635 -

The issue of full time airport CFR staffing is most likely contained in some FAA regulation dependent on the amount of commercial (or private) air traffic at a particular airport.

The situation at WC airport is not unlike what is found in CT at some of the smaller airports (New Haven and Bridgeport/Stratford). In both of those airports, the FAA has standard CFR rigs assigned with maintenance crews providing the response. The local FDs all provide an assignment to the respective airports as additional manpower and equipment. The largest airport (Bradley) is staffed by full time State of Connecticut fire fighters. I believe the State also assigns their fire personnel to the airport in Groton.

We could debate all day about the "what ifs" and who is best to respond, but if the FAA is the ultimate "regulator" with jurisdiction here, it would most likely rest in their hands.

However, I would agree that (given the increase in flights and service at the airport) it would not be unrealistic to see a more permanent CFR staff in the future.

Perhaps someone more familiar with the FAA could comment and/or correct me?

←

Federal regulations do provide the minimum requirements for airport certification. I think Seth's point is we should have more than the minimum at Westchester since they're getting so much busier/bigger and I think he makes a great point.

The following is the text from the Federal Aviation Regulations part 139 relating to aircraft rescue and firefighting:

§139.315    Aircraft rescue and firefighting: Index determination.

(a) An Index is required by paragraph © of this section for each certificate holder. The Index is determined by a combination of --

(1) The length of air carrier aircraft expressed in groups; and

(2) Average daily departures of air carrier aircraft.

( For the purpose of Index determination, air carrier aircraft lengths are grouped as follows:

(1) Index A includes aircraft less than 90 feet in length.

(2) Index B includes aircraft at least 90 feet but less than 126 feet in length.

(3) Index C includes aircraft at least 126 feet but less than 159 feet in length.

(4) Index D includes aircraft at least 159 feet but less than 200 feet in length.

(5) Index E includes aircraft at least 200 feet in length.

© Except as provided in §139.319©, the Index required by §139.319 is determined as follows:

(1) If there are five or more average daily departures of air carrier aircraft in a single Index group serving that airport, the longest Index group with an average of 5 or more daily departures is the Index required for the airport.

(2) If there are less than five average daily departures of air carrier aircraft in a single Index group serving that airport, the next lower Index from the longest Index group with air carrier aircraft in it is the Index required for the airport. The minimum designated Index shall be Index A.

§139.317  Aircraft rescue and firefighting: Equipment and agents.

The following rescue and firefighting equipment and agents are the minimum required for the Indexes referred to in §139.315:

(a) Index A: One vehicle carrying at least --

(1) 500 pounds of sodium-based dry chemical or halon 1211; or

(2) 450 pounds of potassium-based dry chemical and water with a commensurate quantity of AFFF to total 100 gallons, for simultaneous dry chemical and AFFF foam application.

( Index B: Either of the following:

(1) One vehicle carrying at least 500 pounds of sodium-based dry chemical or halon 1211, and 1,500 gallons of water, and the commensurate quantity of AFFF for foam production.

(2) Two vehicles --

(i) One vehicle carrying the extinguishing agents as specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section; and

(ii) One vehicle carrying an amount of water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the total quantity of water for foam production carried by both vehicles is at least 1,500 gallons.

© Index C: Either of the following:

(1) Three vehicles --

(i) One vehicle carrying the extinguishing agents as specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section; and

(ii) Two vehicles carrying an amount of water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the total quantity of water for foam production carried by all three vehicles is at least 3,000 gallons.

(2) Two vehicles --

(i) One vehicle carrying the extinguishing agents as specified in paragraph ((1) of this section; and

(ii) One vehicle carrying water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the total quantity of water for foam production carried by both vehicles is at least 3,000 gallons.

(d) Index D: Three vehicles --

(1) One vehicle carrying the extinguishing agents as specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section; and

(2) Two vehicles carrying an amount of water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the total quantity of water for foam production carried by all three vehicles is at least 4,000 gallons.

(e) Index E: Three vehicles --

(1) One vehicle carrying the extinguishing agents as specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section; and

(2) Two vehicles carrying an amount of water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the total quantity of water for foam production carried by all three vehicles is at least 6,000 gallons.

(f) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section, any certificate holder whose vehicles met the requirements of this part for quantity and type of extinguishing agent on December 31, 1987, may comply with the Index requirements of this section by carrying extinguishing agents to the full capacity of those vehicles. Whenever any of those vehicles is replaced or rehabilitated, the capacity of the replacement or rehabilitated vehicle shall be sufficient to comply with the requirements of the required Index.

(g) Foam discharge capacity. Each aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle used to comply with Index B, C, D, or E requirements with a capacity of at least 500 gallons of water for foam production shall be equipped with a turret. Vehicle turret discharge capacity shall be as follows:

(1) Each vehicle with a minimum rated vehicle water tank capacity of at least 500 gallons but less than 2,000 gallons shall have a turret discharge rate of at least 500 gallons per minute but not more than 1,000 gallons per minute.

(2) Each vehicle with a minimum rated vehicle water tank capacity of at least 2,000 gallons shall have a turret discharge rate of at least 600 gallons per minute but not more than 1,200 gallons per minute.

(3) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (g) of this section, any certificate holder whose aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicles are not equipped with turrets or do not have the discharge capacity required in this section, but otherwise met the requirements of this part on December 31, 1987, need not comply with paragraph (g) of this section for a particular vehicle until that vehicle is replaced or rehabilitated.

(h) Dry chemical and halon 1211 discharge capacity. Each aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicle which is required to carry dry chemical or halon 1211 for compliance with the index requirements of this section must meet one of the following minimum discharge rates for the equipment installed:

(1) Dry chemical or halon 1211 through a hand line, 5 pounds per second.

(2) Dry chemical or halon 1211 through a turret, 16 pounds per second.

(i) Extinguishing agent substitutions. The following extinguishing agent substitutions may be made:

(1) Protein or fluoroprotein foam concentrates may be substituted for AFFF. When either of these substitutions is selected, the volume of water to be carried for the substitute foam production shall be calculated by multiplying the volume of water required for AFFF by the factor 1.5.

(2) Sodium- or potassium-based dry chemical or halon 1211 may be substituted for AFFF. Up to 30 percent of the amount of water specified for AFFF production may be replaced by dry chemical or halon 1211, except that for airports where such extreme climatic conditions exist that water is either unmanageable or unobtainable, as in arctic or desert regions, up to 100 percent of the required water may be replaced by dry chemical or halon 1211. When this substitution is selected, 12.7 pounds of dry chemical or halon 1211 shall be substituted for each gallon of water used for AFFF foam production.

(3) Sodium- or potassium-based dry chemical or halon 1211 may be substituted for protein or fluoroprotein foam. When this substitution is selected, 8.4 pounds of dry chemical or halon 1211 shall be substituted for one gallon of water for protein or fluoroprotein foam production.

(4) AFFF may be substituted for dry chemical or halon 1211. For airports where meteorological conditions, such as consistently high winds and precipitation, would frequently prevent the effective use of dry chemical or halon 1211, up to 50 percent of these agents may be replaced by water for AFFF production. When this substitution is selected, one gallon of water for foam production with the commensurate quantity of AFFF shall be substituted for 12.7 pounds of dry chemical or halon 1211.

(5) Potassium-based dry chemical may be substituted for sodium-based dry chemical. Where 500 pounds of sodium-based dry chemical is specified, 450 pounds of potassium-based dry chemical may be substituted.

(6) Other extinguishing agent substitutions acceptable to the Administrator may be made in amounts that provide equivalent firefighting capability.

(j) In addition to the quantity of water required, each vehicle required to carry AFFF shall carry AFFF in an appropriate amount to mix with twice the water required to be carried by the vehicle.

(k) FAA Advisory Circulars in the 150 series contain standards and procedures for AFFF equipment and agents which are acceptable to the Administrator.

[Doc. No. 24812, 52 FR 44282, Nov. 18, 1987; Amdt. 139-14, 53 FR 4120 and 4258, Feb. 12, 1988]

§139.319  Aircraft rescue and firefighting: Operational requirements.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph © of this section, each certificate holder shall provide on the airport, during air carrier operations at the airport, at least the rescue and firefighting capability specified for the Index required by §139.317.

( Increase in Index. Except as provided in paragraph © of this section, if an increase in the average daily departures or the length of air carrier aircraft results in an increase in the Index required by paragraph (a) of this section, the certificate holder shall comply with the increased requirements.

© Reduction in rescue and firefighting. During air carrier operations with only aircraft shorter than the Index aircraft group required by paragraph (a) of this section, the certificate holder may reduce the rescue and firefighting to a lower level corresponding to the Index group of the longest air carrier aircraft being operated.

(d) Any reduction in the rescue and firefighting capability from the Index required by paragraph (a) of this section in accordance with paragraph © of this section shall be subject to the following conditions:

(1) Procedures for, and the persons having the authority to implement, the reductions must be included in the airport certification manual.

(2) A system and procedures for recall of the full aircraft rescue and firefighting capability must be included in the airport certification manual.

(3) The reductions may not be implemented unless notification to air carriers is provided in the Airport/Facility Directory or Notices to Airmen (NOTAM), as appropriate, and by direct notification of local air carriers.

(e) Vehicle communications. Each vehicle required under §139.317 shall be equipped with two-way voice radio communications which provides for contact with at least --

(1) Each other required emergency vehicle;

(2) The air traffic control tower, if it is located on the airport; and

(3) Other stations, as specified in the airport emergency plan.

(f) Vehicle marking and lighting. Each vehicle required under §139.317 shall --

(1) Have a flashing or rotating beacon; and

(2) Be painted or marked in colors to enhance contrast with the background environment and optimize daytime and nighttime visibility and identification.

(g) FAA Advisory Circulars in the 150 series contain standards for painting, marking and lighting vehicles used on airports which are acceptable to the Administrator.

(h) Vehicle readiness. Each vehicle required under §139.317 shall be maintained as follows:

(1) The vehicle and its systems shall be maintained so as to be operationally capable of performing the functions required by this subpart during all air carrier operations.

(2) If the airport is located in a geographical area subject to prolonged temperatures below 33 degrees Fahrenheit, the vehicles shall be provided with cover or other means to ensure equipment operation and discharge under freezing conditions.

(3) Any required vehicle which becomes inoperative to the extent that it cannot perform as required by §139.319(h)(1) shall be replaced immediately with equipment having at least equal capabilities. If replacement equipment is not available immediately, the certificate holder shall so notify the Regional Airports Division Manager and each air carrier using the airport in accordance with §139.339. If the required Index level of capability is not restored within 48 hours, the airport operator, unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, shall limit air carrier operations on the airport to those compatible with the Index corresponding to the remaining operative rescue and firefighting equipment.

(i) Response requirements. (1) Each certificate holder, with the airport rescue and firefighting equipment required under this part and the number of trained personnel which will assure an effective operation, shall --

(i) Respond to each emergency during periods of air carrier operations; and

(ii) When requested by the Administrator, demonstrate compliance with the response requirements specified in this section.

(2) The response required by paragraph (i)(1)(ii) of this section shall achieve the following performance:

(i) Within 3 minutes from the time of the alarm, at least one required airport rescue and firefighting vehicle shall reach the midpoint of the farthest runway serving air carrier aircraft from its assigned post, or reach any other specified point of comparable distance on the movement area which is available to air carriers, and begin application of foam, dry chemical, or halon 1211.

(ii) Within 4 minutes from the time of alarm, all other required vehicles shall reach the point specified in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section from their assigned post and begin application of foam, dry chemical, or halon 1211.

(j) Personnel. Each certificate holder shall ensure the following:

(1) All rescue and firefighting personnel are equipped in a manner acceptable to the Administrator with protective clothing and equipment needed to perform their duties.

(2) All rescue and firefighting personnel are properly trained to perform their duties in a manner acceptable to the Administrator. The training curriculum shall include initial and recurrent instruction in at least the following areas:

(i) Airport familiarization.

(ii) Aircraft familiarization.

(iii) Rescue and firefighting personnel safety.

(iv) Emergency communications systems on the airport, including fire alarms.

(v) Use of the fire hoses, nozzles, turrets, and other appliances required for compliance with this part.

(vi) Application of the types of extinguishing agents required for compliance with this part.

(vii) Emergency aircraft evacuation assistance.

(viii) Firefighting operations.

(ix) Adapting and using structural rescue and firefighting equipment for aircraft rescue and firefighting.

(x) Aircraft cargo hazards.

(xi) Familiarization with firefighters' duties under the airport emergency plan.

(3) All rescue and firefighting personnel participate in at least one live-fire drill every 12 months.

(4) After January 1, 1989, at least one of the required personnel on duty during air carrier operations has been trained and is current in basic emergency medical care. This training shall include 40 hours covering at least the following areas:

(i) Bleeding.

(ii) Cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

(iii) Shock.

(iv) Primary patient survey.

(v) Injuries to the skull, spine, chest, and extremities.

(vi) Internal injuries.

(vii) Moving patients.

(viii) Burns.

(ix) Triage.

(5) Sufficient rescue and firefighting personnel are available during all air carrier operations to operate the vehicles, meet the response times, and meet the miminum agent discharge rates required by this part;

(6) Procedures and equipment are established and maintained for alerting rescue and firefighting personnel by siren, alarm, or other means acceptable to the Administrator, to any existing or impending emergency requiring their assistance.

(k) Emergency access roads. Each certificate holder shall ensure that roads which are designated for use as emergency access roads for aircraft rescue and firefighting vehicles are maintained in a condition that will support those vehicles during all-weather conditions.

[Doc. No. 24812, 52 FR 44282, Nov. 18, 1987; 53 FR 4258, Feb. 12, 1988, as amended by Amdt. 139-15, 53 FR 40843, Oct. 18, 1988; Amdt. 139-16, 54 FR 39295, Sept. 25, 1989]

[Guest]

I am shocked there isnt one already in place at the field. As a fairly large regional hub with that much traffic flow, im surprised the FAA does not mandate it. I think Seth is right on with his assessment. I know some cities use the airport as their sort of "pasture" for the older guys which would solve some of the manpower issues. I know the Navy mans some of their outlying fields with overtime personnel (true here in Corpus Christi and Pensacola). Some navy outlying fields do have dedicated CFR personnel trained by the military at a very rigorous school here in TX. Some descriptions I have heard put near one of the most grueling courses in the country. Due to the heat they maintain crazy hours (i.e. start at 0400-1000, 1900-2300 for practicals).

As for the need to staff, this is a no brainer. Airport firefighting is an entirely different breed of the game. Unless a large number of the volunteers in the surrounding area are trained to that standard and possess the proper equipment, there should be no reason why they are first due to an incident on the field. Yes, an aircraft can go down anywhere, but generally they are smaller civilian planes and can be dealt with a couple engines. Those people will probably be dead on impact anyway. A commercial jet with an engine failure making an emergency landing demands ARFFs and, if need be, people trained to properly search a large aircraft. The volunteer departments on the periphery do play a very important role at that point and will still be needed in resolving the emergency. In pensacola, the volunteer department i belonged to was second due to an airport emergency. The department had converted an engine to park and pump with a deck gun controlled from the cab. We also had a foam tender we could bring in.

Also check out this article,

http://firechief.com/mag/firefighting_arffs_evolve_air/

Currently HPN falls into index B (source http://www.airnav.com/airport/KHPN). Which requires 1-2 ARFFs. You can use that site to figure out why aircraft are always flying over your house with the instrument approaches on the bottom.

We should give the volunteers in question the chance to defend themselves. What do the local departments have to offer?

If they cannot protect the airfield properly, it is by no means their fault. Shame on the county for not adequetely protecting the people who use the airport. CFR is a boring but absolutely necessary post for any towered regional airfield.

[helicopper 1,050]

I am shocked there isnt one already in place at the field.  As a fairly large regional hub with that much traffic flow, im surprised the FAA does not mandate it.  I think Seth is right on with his assessment.  I know some cities use the airport as their sort of "pasture" for the older guys which would solve some of the manpower issues.  I know the Navy mans some of their outlying fields with overtime personnel (true here in Corpus Christi and Pensacola).  Some navy outlying fields do have dedicated CFR personnel trained by the military at a very rigorous school here in TX.  Some descriptions I have heard put near one of the most grueling courses in the country.  Due to the heat they maintain crazy hours (i.e. start at 0400-1000, 1900-2300 for practicals). 

As for the need to staff, this is a no brainer.  Airport firefighting is an entirely different breed of the game.  Unless a large number of the volunteers in the surrounding area are trained to that standard and possess the proper equipment, there should be no reason why they are first due to an incident on the field.  Yes, an aircraft can go down anywhere, but generally they are smaller civilian planes and can be dealt with a couple engines.  Those people will probably be dead on impact anyway.  A commercial jet with an engine failure making an emergency landing demands ARFFs and, if need be, people trained to properly search a large aircraft.  The volunteer departments on the periphery do play a very important role at that point and will still be needed in resolving the emergency.  In pensacola, the volunteer department i belonged to was second due to an airport emergency.  The department had converted an engine to park and pump with a deck gun controlled from the cab.  We also had a foam tender we could bring in.

Also check out this article,

http://firechief.com/mag/firefighting_arffs_evolve_air/

Currently HPN falls into index B (source http://www.airnav.com/airport/KHPN).  Which requires 1-2 ARFFs.  You can use that site to figure out why aircraft are always flying over your house with the instrument approaches on the bottom.

We should give the volunteers in question the chance to defend themselves.  What do the local departments have to offer?

If they cannot protect the airfield properly, it is by no means their fault.  Shame on the county for not adequetely protecting the people who use the airport.  CFR is a boring but absolutely necessary post for any towered regional airfield.

←

I'm sorry if we weren't clear already - airport operations personnel staff the two airport fire trucks required by FAR. They have a minimum level of coverage as required but they are all performing double duty - first operations, then fire rescue.

Unless I misunderstood X635's point - he's saying the activity at the airport warrants a higher level of preparedness than the current coverage. 635?

[Guest]

Do you happen to know what their "operations" job is on the field?

[Future Fireman 4]

Simply put, if you have a possibility for a large plane crash with multiple casualties, it is wise to staff a full-time FD and/ or Emergency Management agency to moderate everything going on over there.

Mike

[emt301 4]

I'm sorry if we weren't clear already - airport operations personnel staff the two airport fire trucks required by FAR.  They have a minimum level of coverage as required but they are all performing double duty - first operations, then fire rescue. 

Unless I misunderstood X635's point - he's saying the activity at the airport warrants a higher level of preparedness than the current coverage.  635?

←

All airport operations coordinators and supervisors are trained in ARFF. They perform double duty...but I wouldn't say operations first, then fire-rescue. When an aircraft alert comes in from the tower, crash-fire-rescue becomes the MOST IMPORTANT JOB for operations personnel, and the response is immediate. The airport supervisors & coordinators staff 2 crash trucks, with a third truck in reserve. There's also a stock-pile of foam on hand to be used in the event of a major incident. When I was at the airport, our manpower during the day wasn't much of a problem...especially when factoring in the presence of upper management & maintenance personnel, some of whom also have firefighting & ARFF training...and also factoring in the massive (and at times excessive) response from the neighboring departments. I say excessive, because there were times when a 2 seat cessna came in with a problem, and we bascially stripped the entire surrounding community of its resources due to the set-up of the airport response plan. I believe that plan has been or is in the course of being corrected, giving a more "tiered" response based upon aircraft type. When I was there, airport operations manpower was really more of a problem during the evening & overnight hours when our staffing levels dropped down...and our first response capability therefore dropped way off as well. I believe that after 9-11 the evening & overnight staffing was bumped up at least slightly...but this problem still needs to be addressed further.

Edited April 5, 2007 by emt301

[hudson144 150]

the county ops people are very well trained and have great knowledge of the aircraft assigned to the airport. they are dedicated to both the ops of the airport as well as firefighting. The concern to me is once the arff rig is depleted of water and agent it is up to the mutual aid departments to be involved with water resupply,ems, firefighting etc. Is the plan a good one? Over the years many people involved have been involved to make the mutual aid plan a more effective plan to include the use of outside agencys. We all know that an aircraft incident can easily happen on the airfield as well as off of the airfield. The key to this is training and education with aircraft. Some airfields throughout the nation are protected by major city depts who have specially trained firefighters at the airport. Should westchester be any different? Good question. If the airport continues to grow you might see a change because of requirements. If you read all that chris 192 posted you might understand how the system works. Stewart might be changing in the near future. Only time will tell with both airports when it comes to fire protection.

[Guest]

I don't think it would be a bad idea. Maybe in the meantime, put some more Career people on in Rye Brook (which needs it!) and Port Chester and see if we cant do some more training at the Airport. Recently there seems to have been more aircraft related incidents at the county airport then i can ever recall  in my 21 years living in Rye Brook.

←

how did this slip by...more guys in Rye Brook? For what a bigger basketball game?

[emt301 4]

the county ops people are very well trained and have great knowledge of the aircraft assigned to the airport. they are dedicated to both the ops of the airport as well as firefighting. The concern to me is once the arff rig is depleted of water and agent it is up to the mutual aid departments to be involved with water resupply,ems, firefighting etc. Is the plan a good one? Over the years many people involved have been involved to make the mutual aid plan a more effective plan to include the use of outside agencys. We all know that an aircraft incident can easily happen on the airfield as well as off of the airfield. The key to this is training and education with aircraft. Some airfields throughout the nation are protected by major city depts who have specially trained firefighters at the airport. Should westchester be any different? Good question.  If the airport continues to grow you might see a change because of requirements. If you read all that chris 192 posted you might understand how the system works. Stewart might be changing in the near future. Only time will tell with both airports when it comes to fire protection.

←

Hudson, you make some good points. The mutual aid companies need to train frequently with airport operations so they are familiar with the arff trucks, supplying them with water, and familiar with the aircraft using HPN. This was always one of our biggest worries...we knew we'd have adequate foam product, but what about a water supply? There are hydrants placed in various spots on the airfield....the mutual aid companies need to know exactly where these hydrants are, and they need to be comfortable stretching hose & connecting to the crash trucks to feed them with water. You are also correct in terms of aircraft familiarization for the mutual aid units...especially in the event of an off-airport incident - in this case the airport's mutual aid companies will be the first responders - awaiting the arrival of the airport units. HPN's mutual aid companies should have more training than merely NY State's 12-hour ARFF course - the course is a great introduction, but can't compare with the intensive class work & live fire training that HPN's ARFF personnel receive when they train with the career departments in Salt Lake City and Pittsburgh.

Edited April 4, 2007 by emt301

[TimesUp 148]

Having personal cross trained is a great idea. But with different shifts and vacation to consider, not to mention sick days are the customers really well protected? With the volume of flights increasing the chance of an accident also increases.

I don't think that increasing the protection by having arff staffing should upset anybody.

Having a crew on site would be best in case of an aircraft emergency. Lets not squabble about who's incharge. Or "do you know what that will cost" I'm sure the same guy that complains about cost would be the same guy signing up for the job.

Yes, a plane could crash anywhere, but its where all the flights arrive or depart that should be the best preparred for an aircraft emergency.

[emt301 4]

Having personal cross trained is a great idea.  But with different shifts and vacation to consider, not to mention sick days are the customers really well protected?  With the volume of flights increasing the chance of an accident also increases.

I don't think that increasing the protection by having arff staffing should upset anybody.

Having a crew on site would be best in case of an aircraft emergency.  Lets not squabble about who's incharge.  Or "do you know what that will cost"  I'm sure the same guy that complains about cost would be the same guy signing up for the job.

Yes, a plane could crash anywhere, but its where all the flights arrive or depart that should be the best preparred for an aircraft emergency.

←

Personally, I wouldn't be upset by having dedicated ARFF staffing...the opportunity to learn about ARFF was the main reason I took the job - and I would have loved to have had ARFF as my only job. However, whether you're using dedicated ARFF staffing or cross-trained ops personnel, you'll still have to deal with the issues of shifts, vacations, and sick days. I think the bottom line is are there enough personnel on shift (either cross-trained ops, or dedicated ARFF) to get the job done...and like Hudson was refering to...is the mutual aid plan a good one with adequately trained local FD's.

[Guest]

If the County Airport was surrounded by municipalities that had 24hr. adequate, Career FF Staffing Levels, who could support the Airport in the event of an Emergency, then having a full time FD may be questionable, but when it's surrounded by Depts. that are either all Volunteer or Combo., which have enough problems getting enough personnel to show up during certain times of the Day and Week for a reported structure fire, implementing a full time Career FD at the Airport is definitely the way to go. Especially, since it seems to be getting bigger and busier as we speak. They in turn would also be able to expeditely respond to any aircraft emergency within the surrounding communities, or even maybe an overturned fuel delivery truck on I684 for that matter.

[TimesUp 148]

Personally, I wouldn't be upset by having dedicated ARFF staffing...the opportunity to learn about ARFF was the main reason I took the job - and I would have loved to have had ARFF as my only job.  However, whether you're using dedicated ARFF staffing or cross-trained ops personnel, you'll still have to deal with the issues of shifts, vacations, and sick days.  I think the bottom line is are there enough personnel on shift (either cross-trained ops, or dedicated ARFF) to get the job done...and like Hudson was refering to...is the mutual aid plan a good one with adequately trained local FD's.

←

So you think it would be good to have a deicated arff crew at the airport?

[ja3kfd 34]

If the County Airport was surrounded by municipalities that had 24hr. adequate, Career FF Staffing Levels, who could support the Airport in the event of an Emergency, then having a full time FD may be questionable, but when it's surrounded by Depts. that are either all Volunteer or Combo., which have enough problems getting enough personnel to show up during certain times of the Day and Week for a reported structure fire, implementing a full time Career FD at the Airport is definitely the way to go. Especially, since it seems to be getting bigger and busier as we speak. They in turn would also be able to expeditely respond to any aircraft emergency within the surrounding communities, or even maybe an  overturned fuel delivery truck on I684 for that matter.

←

I agree it is time to start a full time dedicated FD on site hey with all the OT they posted in Journal News County Employees were able to earn take some of that and put it to use there.

Edited April 4, 2007 by ja3kfd