efdcapt115

http://poughkeepsiejournal.com/article/200...ONTPAGECAROUSEL
Not much info, but a small description of the incident.

Some of the short comings of the Mohegan FD have come to light with this recent spate of working fires. Among them, 7 positions apparently left vacant, 3 fire stations staffed with one firefighter alone in each station, and the apparently consistent practice of putting a mutual aid "FAST" company to work as a means of supplementing their inability of adequate fire attack.
For starters.......
You lost me after the word "monday." But WHAT has changed if a department cannot field an adequate number of firefighters for a working fire (if this is the case)? The answer is apparent is it not? That community might be in serious trouble if it cannot field a firefighting force effective enough to suppress a "simple" working fire. What about (as someone already pointed out earlier) a school, an elderly care facility, or another place of public assembly?
There have been multiple threads of discussion regarding fire emergencies within Westchester County on this board, and manpower has and is an ongoing issue in this forum.
And sometimes, even in the fire service, with adequate preparation and an effective workforce; things can go right. Peoples' lives have/can/and will continue to be saved, peoples' homes and businesses shall continue to be saved, and that is no fantasy.

Date: 02/28/09
Time: 1604 - Present Time
Location: 32 Harmony Hill Rd.
Frequency: Firegrounds 11 responding, 12 on-scene.
Units Operating: DC-54, Pawling St. 1 All Equipment, CC-16
Weather Conditions: 32 Degrees, Mostly Cloudy
Description Of Incident: House Fire.
Writer: FiftyOnePride
1609 DC-54 Reports smoke in the residence.
1614 DC-54 Confirms fire on the second floor - all occupants out.
1616 Second Dispatch for Pawling St. 1, 54-11 and 54-61 have responded.
1625 Third Dispatch, Pawling to respond with remainder of st. 1 equipment, Dover St. 2 with 1 engine to cover Pawling St. 1, Patterson with 1 engine to cover Pawling St. 2, CC-16 is responding.

A little background: obvious is my affiliation with the fire service. But I am also a student of journalism at the University of Albany. This semester I took a course in magazine writing - and we are going to write a few articles, but right now we are just doing exercises dealing with the 'start' to articles.
So, here is the genre: 'how-to articles,' and I am focusing on the proper use/strategies/techniques for firefighters across the hierarchical system that exists in the service in regards to TIC use.
The help needed: I cannot just give my opinion - true objective journalism is my goal and I need sources to do this. This will only be seen by members on this site and my professor. Like I said it is just an exersize and will not come to fruition as an actual article. If you participate and choose to give me said tips and techniques, I just need an email address. I would prefer a pm for everyone's privacy.
I know this is a lot to ask but I appreciate any feedback I get. Thanks in advance.

I chuckled a bit at the irony, yes, but did not post!

A good way to get this type of info is to take a look at FD's websites. You will get a good insight into the varoius programs in use in he county. Aside from that, I personally an a proponent of Company Inspections. All HFD personnel are certified code enforcement officers, but they only enforce the Fire Preventioh Code. All other code vioations (ie plumbing) are referred to the proper department. All multi-dwellings and commercials are inspected yearly.
I believe that Company Inspections are the singlemost program contributing to the prevention of fires in commercials and multi dwellings. Company Inspections also contribute greatly to Firefighter safety in that Firefighters become familiar with buildings in their first due area. Construction, layout, contents, hazards, egress, etc. are all addressed in the inspection. With a good Company Inspection program, a company should never pull up to a building without somebody in that company having been in that building before.
The reason for doing Company inspections can be summed up by the acronym F.I.R.E.
F Famiarization of the building by Firefighters, and fill out or update a building record card showing all the vital info about the building
I Inspect the building for violations
R Remedy or Remove any dangerous conditions
E Educate the public about fire prevention. Educate members so the building won't kill them.
Guys will moan about doing company inspections, but try to look at the bright side: Its the only time you don't have to CRAWL and JFLYNN won't even yell at you.

Hi Healz,
Congratulations on the well deserved retirement. Welcome to the ranks!
Hey, does Mohegan have a call-back system in place for the career guys? If not, why do you think this is so, and do you think it would make a difference with the manpower problems if they enacted a system?
Thanks, and best of health to you....

If Bobby Valentine can't get the job done, Stamford can bring in Art Howe. If Art can't do it Willie Randolph would be next in line......

The '86 Mack it will replace was purchased under Chief Reid, originally new as Engine 27, eventually moving down to Bronxville as E-29. The word back in that day was how the Mack was a "floor model" he bought at a trade show, built cheaply, won't last, etc. Well, 24 years as a frontline rig later, I'd say it's earned it's final rest, and Chief Reid's purchase turned out to have been a wise one.
The three ALFs EFD are running do not carry hard suction either.

A search turned up quite a bit of support for police officers involved in fatal shootings across the country. One that immediately came to mind, was an incident that occured last year in the Myrtle Beach area. A School Resource Officer was forced to shoot a student who it turns out was intent on committing suicide by cop.
Officer cleared:
http://www.thesunnews.com/living/education/story/1216220.html
Here's a recent one in the Boston area. Officer cleared:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2010/02/09/nh_ag_says_keene_police_shooting_justified/
And Salt Lake City, Utah. Officer cleared:
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_14343459
The Chicago area. Officer cleared:
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/12/authorities-deem-rockford-police-shooting-justified.html
And Pennsylvania. Officer cleared:
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/da-says-police-shooting-was-justified-1.65545
Just as a counter-point to what you are saying Sage, I think it's helpful for us to see there is still support for cops and the responsibility they have to shoulder to keep us safe.

This is a quote from the advocate
"Whitbread said he was concerned that this plan would relegate volunteers to a secondary role at working fires because career firefighters could get to emergencies more quickly,"
Isn't this what the whole thing is about? Getting to the emergency (all emergency calls) quickly (with fully staffed crew)? Isn't public safety the main goal here? Apparently what's in the best interest for the residents of North Stamford is not the main concern of the X-Chief of TOR. How can you really say that you don't like a plan that will get emergency crews to a fire quicker then what your current crews can do just because they are CFF's?! I hope the public can see where their safety ranks on the priority list of this so called umbrella plan.

Was going for the saints, and one of my wife's boxes popped up and we won some money, so I am happy all around.

I have always been impressed with the way DC911 monitors their firegrounds, glad to see it paid off tonight - great job to the folks that were on for the incident!

Can you explain this to us in 10 codes?

Note the short wheel base. Bronxville has notorious original cobblestone roadways; twisting, hilly and tight, creating the neccesity of the tight wheelbase. This is why they kept the '86 Mack in service this long, it is short like this one.
The bumper hitch is for the Zodiac boat, quartered in the Station 3 Bronxville with E-29.
I also see a nice telescoping light bar on the roof.
This is a very sharp looking rig, well designed. I'm hoping a member of EFDs apparatus committee might come on here and give us a rundwown of the specs and capabilities.
*I just noticed the engine has no front suction. I think this would be the first new pumper in a very long while in Eastchester (aside from a spare maybe) since the American LaFrance pumpers of the mid 1950s without front suction, which became more or less SOP for the job for many decades; a practical application when engine companies only had a career Chauffer.

And here ya go:
http://www.seagrave.com/index.cfm?display=prod_recentDeliveries_detail&id=626&maxShow=15contentid=46&sectionID=3&chassis=

Note the short wheel base. Bronxville has notorious original cobblestone roadways; twisting, hilly and tight, creating the neccesity of the tight wheelbase. This is why they kept the '86 Mack in service this long, it is short like this one.
The bumper hitch is for the Zodiac boat, quartered in the Station 3 Bronxville with E-29.
I also see a nice telescoping light bar on the roof.
This is a very sharp looking rig, well designed. I'm hoping a member of EFDs apparatus committee might come on here and give us a rundwown of the specs and capabilities.
*I just noticed the engine has no front suction. I think this would be the first new pumper in a very long while in Eastchester (aside from a spare maybe) since the American LaFrance pumpers of the mid 1950s without front suction, which became more or less SOP for the job for many decades; a practical application when engine companies only had a career Chauffer.

http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20100209/NEWS01/302090033

Hi Chief
The union is going through an arbitration right now district will testify @ 10am tomorrow at the Sta-2. It is the same old song here the district and some Vffs say we cost to much. Damn it they'er worth every nickle and if there were a few more, you would have a full attack team from the get go. The media, please!
Thank you very much. Wow the Keys, hows the fishing? I cannot have a signature yet but when I do its going to
I wasted most of my life
the rest I spent fishing
The call back system is used to back fill stations. There are times where we are called in to go to the scene
Yes you are correct the website has to be updated. Numbers are wrong, but the fact are still correct.
I would like thank all you guys for the warm welcome. I know that other CFFs would post but are a little scared for there jobs and retribution.
Thanks again

Capt. your 100% right the FAST should be reserved for firefighters in distress. I believe it would have teeth in the case of Mohegan since they have recently been cited by PESH for respiratory standard violations. Not having the required standby team at an IDLH would probably be considered a repeat violation by PESH and the potential always exists for serious repercutions. And of course the lawyers would have a field day.
To the Mohegan members take Chief Flynn's advice and don't take it personally no one on this thread questioned the effort or the tactics taken by members. The discussion for the most part involves the unsafe pratice of operating with an inadequete number of firefighters on scene.

In my opinion a "simple" fire would be a room and contents involved in fire, in an unoccupied, single story, type 3 or 5, private dwelling, with no extension, and no water supply issues.
Before I retired, to my knowledge my job never as a practice put a FAST company, particularly a mutual-aid FAST to work, unless as required for a firefighter in distress. It should be illegal (even though it is a violation of the Standard, it doesn't have the teeth it should) to put a FAST company to work for other than FAST purposes with no other company on scene to IMMEDIATELY take it's place. If a firefighter is killed or injured because no FAST is available, the lawyers are going to feast on the IC, and the department. Just my opinion.

I am unsure of their performance, but someone told me that the defender visor for Cairns helmets will not slide over glasses. Not sure how reliable that is because I don't have direct knowledge - but others like them, say they provide better than bourkes at least...

2012 is fast approaching, and auto manufacturers are beginning to deal with the new standards for side impact and roof strength in automobiles.
There are two predominant strategies that the manufacturers are utilizing to become compliant: more steel, or advanced steel.
Both are an issue, I recently watched a webcast with Ron Moore of FH.com, where he presented his case studies on vehicles with advanced steel, delving into actual extrication, and the methodology behind the use of Boron and other advanced steels.
For the most part, he highlighted that most cutters, if any other than a few years - will be ineffective in cutting through the various posts these steels are already being found in (A&.
My first question, has anyone purchased a part of cutters or a combo unit that is acknowledged by the manufacturer to be capable of penetrating the high strength layer? What kind of prices are you running into?
Also, if you do not have a newer set of cutters - how do you plan to compensate?
Like I said before, these steels are already being utilized in vehicle construction - and sawzalls/older cutters do not work. K-12 saws do, but it's obvious why they are not the ideal choice for use in extrication.
He presented a few tactics/strategies to help compensate, and I'd be glad to share what I heard/saw if people are interested.
To answer my own questions - No - our cutters are a bit older than a few years. And because of that, is why I am starting to do this research - the few methods he offers I think are going to be very helpful. I would like to try out our cutters on one of these vehicles to see what kind of shape we are in for 2012.
Thanks for taking the time to read this and I look forward to the responses.

Some of the short comings of the Mohegan FD have come to light with this recent spate of working fires. Among them, 7 positions apparently left vacant, 3 fire stations staffed with one firefighter alone in each station, and the apparently consistent practice of putting a mutual aid "FAST" company to work as a means of supplementing their inability of adequate fire attack.
For starters.......
You lost me after the word "monday." But WHAT has changed if a department cannot field an adequate number of firefighters for a working fire (if this is the case)? The answer is apparent is it not? That community might be in serious trouble if it cannot field a firefighting force effective enough to suppress a "simple" working fire. What about (as someone already pointed out earlier) a school, an elderly care facility, or another place of public assembly?
There have been multiple threads of discussion regarding fire emergencies within Westchester County on this board, and manpower has and is an ongoing issue in this forum.
And sometimes, even in the fire service, with adequate preparation and an effective workforce; things can go right. Peoples' lives have/can/and will continue to be saved, peoples' homes and businesses shall continue to be saved, and that is no fantasy.

In my opinion a "simple" fire would be a room and contents involved in fire, in an unoccupied, single story, type 3 or 5, private dwelling, with no extension, and no water supply issues.
Before I retired, to my knowledge my job never as a practice put a FAST company, particularly a mutual-aid FAST to work, unless as required for a firefighter in distress. It should be illegal (even though it is a violation of the Standard, it doesn't have the teeth it should) to put a FAST company to work for other than FAST purposes with no other company on scene to IMMEDIATELY take it's place. If a firefighter is killed or injured because no FAST is available, the lawyers are going to feast on the IC, and the department. Just my opinion.