wraftery

16fire5... Cap, at first glance, it looks like we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, old vs, new and so on, but I think we are much closer than it looks. I also consider FDNY and LA County as real FDs. (not so sure about Chicago). These departments take a theory and try it out in a controlled situation. They will analyze it and discuss it until they are happy with it or throw it out. Often they will either send people out of town to observe its use or talk to whoever is the expert. Then they come out with a bulletin with a complete system for when to use it, when not to and how to use it. Then after it has been used at an actual incident, it is critique by those who operated the job, especially the IC. Take PPV on attack. FDNY has strict rules for its use, a specialized company to use it trained officers to make sure it is needed, set up and operating according to plan, and observers as required for safety. There is also a PPV safety BC to make sure it is having no adverse effects. I think that is what makes a good FD.
So what is a not-so-good FD? I think there are a lot more not-so- good FDs out there and it has nothing to do with size of the department. Let's stick with PPV as our example. Someone in the department, usually the Chief or Training Officer goes to a seminar or watches a video like the LAFD one in this thread. Virtually every word in the video is important. That will tell you when to depart from the norm or the tried and true But this department jumps on the PPV bandwagon without info like input size, output size, when it is counterproductive and so on. The Training Officer does a cursory training session and PPV becomes the first tool placed in front of the building and the fan cranked on. As I said, this happens more often than not. Why? Now that FD can announce "We are a progressive FD 'cause we always use PPV on attack and youse guys are living in the past."
My point is not to abandon all your tactics that served you (and maybe your father) well for so long. There is a time and place for everything. I have ordered a knockdown from the outside for several reasons but the situation and application must be right. As I said, along with the LA video, "Don't wreck your vent." The guys in the not-so-good FDs probably let that one go by the wayside and that is one of the major and basic principals of an outside knock-down. A little twist of the wrist will change your stream to fog and screw up the tactic too.
I agree with you too that the BTU output of the average fire has increased tremendously and lightweight trusses add to the tactical problem of today. I would like to add that we also need more Firefighters. Most FD numbers of FFs have dwindled over the years.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

16fire5... Cap, at first glance, it looks like we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, old vs, new and so on, but I think we are much closer than it looks. I also consider FDNY and LA County as real FDs. (not so sure about Chicago). These departments take a theory and try it out in a controlled situation. They will analyze it and discuss it until they are happy with it or throw it out. Often they will either send people out of town to observe its use or talk to whoever is the expert. Then they come out with a bulletin with a complete system for when to use it, when not to and how to use it. Then after it has been used at an actual incident, it is critique by those who operated the job, especially the IC. Take PPV on attack. FDNY has strict rules for its use, a specialized company to use it trained officers to make sure it is needed, set up and operating according to plan, and observers as required for safety. There is also a PPV safety BC to make sure it is having no adverse effects. I think that is what makes a good FD.
So what is a not-so-good FD? I think there are a lot more not-so- good FDs out there and it has nothing to do with size of the department. Let's stick with PPV as our example. Someone in the department, usually the Chief or Training Officer goes to a seminar or watches a video like the LAFD one in this thread. Virtually every word in the video is important. That will tell you when to depart from the norm or the tried and true But this department jumps on the PPV bandwagon without info like input size, output size, when it is counterproductive and so on. The Training Officer does a cursory training session and PPV becomes the first tool placed in front of the building and the fan cranked on. As I said, this happens more often than not. Why? Now that FD can announce "We are a progressive FD 'cause we always use PPV on attack and youse guys are living in the past."
My point is not to abandon all your tactics that served you (and maybe your father) well for so long. There is a time and place for everything. I have ordered a knockdown from the outside for several reasons but the situation and application must be right. As I said, along with the LA video, "Don't wreck your vent." The guys in the not-so-good FDs probably let that one go by the wayside and that is one of the major and basic principals of an outside knock-down. A little twist of the wrist will change your stream to fog and screw up the tactic too.
I agree with you too that the BTU output of the average fire has increased tremendously and lightweight trusses add to the tactical problem of today. I would like to add that we also need more Firefighters. Most FD numbers of FFs have dwindled over the years.

16fire5... Cap, at first glance, it looks like we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, old vs, new and so on, but I think we are much closer than it looks. I also consider FDNY and LA County as real FDs. (not so sure about Chicago). These departments take a theory and try it out in a controlled situation. They will analyze it and discuss it until they are happy with it or throw it out. Often they will either send people out of town to observe its use or talk to whoever is the expert. Then they come out with a bulletin with a complete system for when to use it, when not to and how to use it. Then after it has been used at an actual incident, it is critique by those who operated the job, especially the IC. Take PPV on attack. FDNY has strict rules for its use, a specialized company to use it trained officers to make sure it is needed, set up and operating according to plan, and observers as required for safety. There is also a PPV safety BC to make sure it is having no adverse effects. I think that is what makes a good FD.
So what is a not-so-good FD? I think there are a lot more not-so- good FDs out there and it has nothing to do with size of the department. Let's stick with PPV as our example. Someone in the department, usually the Chief or Training Officer goes to a seminar or watches a video like the LAFD one in this thread. Virtually every word in the video is important. That will tell you when to depart from the norm or the tried and true But this department jumps on the PPV bandwagon without info like input size, output size, when it is counterproductive and so on. The Training Officer does a cursory training session and PPV becomes the first tool placed in front of the building and the fan cranked on. As I said, this happens more often than not. Why? Now that FD can announce "We are a progressive FD 'cause we always use PPV on attack and youse guys are living in the past."
My point is not to abandon all your tactics that served you (and maybe your father) well for so long. There is a time and place for everything. I have ordered a knockdown from the outside for several reasons but the situation and application must be right. As I said, along with the LA video, "Don't wreck your vent." The guys in the not-so-good FDs probably let that one go by the wayside and that is one of the major and basic principals of an outside knock-down. A little twist of the wrist will change your stream to fog and screw up the tactic too.
I agree with you too that the BTU output of the average fire has increased tremendously and lightweight trusses add to the tactical problem of today. I would like to add that we also need more Firefighters. Most FD numbers of FFs have dwindled over the years.

16fire5... Cap, at first glance, it looks like we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, old vs, new and so on, but I think we are much closer than it looks. I also consider FDNY and LA County as real FDs. (not so sure about Chicago). These departments take a theory and try it out in a controlled situation. They will analyze it and discuss it until they are happy with it or throw it out. Often they will either send people out of town to observe its use or talk to whoever is the expert. Then they come out with a bulletin with a complete system for when to use it, when not to and how to use it. Then after it has been used at an actual incident, it is critique by those who operated the job, especially the IC. Take PPV on attack. FDNY has strict rules for its use, a specialized company to use it trained officers to make sure it is needed, set up and operating according to plan, and observers as required for safety. There is also a PPV safety BC to make sure it is having no adverse effects. I think that is what makes a good FD.
So what is a not-so-good FD? I think there are a lot more not-so- good FDs out there and it has nothing to do with size of the department. Let's stick with PPV as our example. Someone in the department, usually the Chief or Training Officer goes to a seminar or watches a video like the LAFD one in this thread. Virtually every word in the video is important. That will tell you when to depart from the norm or the tried and true But this department jumps on the PPV bandwagon without info like input size, output size, when it is counterproductive and so on. The Training Officer does a cursory training session and PPV becomes the first tool placed in front of the building and the fan cranked on. As I said, this happens more often than not. Why? Now that FD can announce "We are a progressive FD 'cause we always use PPV on attack and youse guys are living in the past."
My point is not to abandon all your tactics that served you (and maybe your father) well for so long. There is a time and place for everything. I have ordered a knockdown from the outside for several reasons but the situation and application must be right. As I said, along with the LA video, "Don't wreck your vent." The guys in the not-so-good FDs probably let that one go by the wayside and that is one of the major and basic principals of an outside knock-down. A little twist of the wrist will change your stream to fog and screw up the tactic too.
I agree with you too that the BTU output of the average fire has increased tremendously and lightweight trusses add to the tactical problem of today. I would like to add that we also need more Firefighters. Most FD numbers of FFs have dwindled over the years.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

We'll see if any real fire depts. go for this "change." Close all the doors on the inside and hit it from the outside first. It seems to me that if you could get in to close doors, you could get in and put the fire out. This sounds like Lloyd Laymen deja vu...it works in a confined space but that's all.
Bear in mind that when you hit it from the outside, you've created steam inside. You lose much of your visibility for fire attack and search and steamed any victims that might be present.
Sometimes the tactic of an outside knock-down is a good one for perhaps a fully involved basement fire that has made the basement stairs untenable. However, if you do choose the outside knock-down, bear in mind that you may not be able to get down the stairs because it is still the chimney. You're still going to heavy steam and probably zero visibility.
Look at the picture in the article at the beginning of this thread. That's a vent hole, lad. It is only one window, so you don't know the whole situation, but your best bet is to leave it as a vent hole and go inside and bang a straight stream off the ceiling of the fire room then finish it up with a lower angled line. You kept a lot of your visibility for extinguishment and search, so just thank Mother Nature she had the wind blowing in your favor.
All these studies are under controlled conditions and you can do that at an actual incident too. Just get the fire to a manageable point, by tried and true methods, then pick up your radio and say under control.

absolutely a great topic--Avon Rob is right on the money with who he mentioned. All great men in the fire service but I think I would have to bring it closer to home--and include my dad ex Chief od NTFD for it was with him that I took in my first fire. My cousin Joe Moore another family member that taught me well. Finally-- I knew I was going to be of some value to the fire service when I entered a fire building from the rear of Kaldenberg Place Tarrytown. the fire was in a hardware store that faced Broadway. I took the line with 2 members of TFD--one was Dick Nagle and the other was Allen Mazzaros. We took the line in paint cans were popping all around us fire over our heads-later I found out that theses tow firefighters just got out of FDNY probie academy I was just 18. We kicked that fires ass pretty good-- that was back in 1968 no masks--came out all snottied up --saw my dad standing there--Dick came up to my dad and said "don't worry about him pop he did you proud in there"
years later Dick and I are spending a nice afternoon up at the State Academy-ok it was at the Lodge over cocktails cant lie- he as the head of the Academy me as a NYS Fire Instructor teaching a class, we had a great laugh about it because neither of us ever forgot the incident.

I'm not sure about the first, I think it was Duncan, but I think you are talking about Scotty MacPhail

I know there is probably alot of people that have the same feeling here But Ray Rush, awesome introduction to the fire service. He was a tell it like it is No BS. he did my essentials class in 1993. My father introduced me into the volunteer side of things at a very young age and taught me what it was all about, volunteering for years with many good people in northern westchester helped me to become a fireman in the greatest fire department in the world. Thanks to all who were a part of this

Yes, those guys were definitely the ones when it came to Building Construction, Fire Prevention, and investigation.
I saw Ed Sere mentioned. I only knew him for one thing, but it was a big change in how we operate. Ed took us out of the ladder belt rappelling method, and taught us figure eights and beeners using kernmantle rope. He had a 2-part rescue harness for a victim that I am surprised hasn't sold millions. Made of webbing loops, it could easily and hastily be put on a conscious or unconscious victim.
Then there were the Westchester Community College classmates. Those guys, like me were there on the GI Bill. The Bronx Bunch, however, were older and worked though he Burn, baby, burn era. They did trial and error tactics at not less than one multi-alarm job every night. From them came the trench cut and much more. In my class were also great men like Silvio Burigo, Capt,NRFD and Asst Chief ED Dunn, YFD. My success in the FD stems from "I wanna be like them."
Then, a good friend, Tommy Brennan, Capt, FDNY, probably best known for his Random Thoughts on the last page of Fire Engineering. Most readers of Fire Engineering read the mag from the back page first. His thoughts were not random at all. Tommy was a very focused individual and when he first met you he would ask you a few questions before he decided to talk to you.
Finally, the guy in the mirror. He always knew if I was doing the right thing.

Yes, those guys were definitely the ones when it came to Building Construction, Fire Prevention, and investigation.
I saw Ed Sere mentioned. I only knew him for one thing, but it was a big change in how we operate. Ed took us out of the ladder belt rappelling method, and taught us figure eights and beeners using kernmantle rope. He had a 2-part rescue harness for a victim that I am surprised hasn't sold millions. Made of webbing loops, it could easily and hastily be put on a conscious or unconscious victim.
Then there were the Westchester Community College classmates. Those guys, like me were there on the GI Bill. The Bronx Bunch, however, were older and worked though he Burn, baby, burn era. They did trial and error tactics at not less than one multi-alarm job every night. From them came the trench cut and much more. In my class were also great men like Silvio Burigo, Capt,NRFD and Asst Chief ED Dunn, YFD. My success in the FD stems from "I wanna be like them."
Then, a good friend, Tommy Brennan, Capt, FDNY, probably best known for his Random Thoughts on the last page of Fire Engineering. Most readers of Fire Engineering read the mag from the back page first. His thoughts were not random at all. Tommy was a very focused individual and when he first met you he would ask you a few questions before he decided to talk to you.
Finally, the guy in the mirror. He always knew if I was doing the right thing.

Jim Taxter Joe Butler Dan Berry Frank Brannigan

Yes, those guys were definitely the ones when it came to Building Construction, Fire Prevention, and investigation.
I saw Ed Sere mentioned. I only knew him for one thing, but it was a big change in how we operate. Ed took us out of the ladder belt rappelling method, and taught us figure eights and beeners using kernmantle rope. He had a 2-part rescue harness for a victim that I am surprised hasn't sold millions. Made of webbing loops, it could easily and hastily be put on a conscious or unconscious victim.
Then there were the Westchester Community College classmates. Those guys, like me were there on the GI Bill. The Bronx Bunch, however, were older and worked though he Burn, baby, burn era. They did trial and error tactics at not less than one multi-alarm job every night. From them came the trench cut and much more. In my class were also great men like Silvio Burigo, Capt,NRFD and Asst Chief ED Dunn, YFD. My success in the FD stems from "I wanna be like them."
Then, a good friend, Tommy Brennan, Capt, FDNY, probably best known for his Random Thoughts on the last page of Fire Engineering. Most readers of Fire Engineering read the mag from the back page first. His thoughts were not random at all. Tommy was a very focused individual and when he first met you he would ask you a few questions before he decided to talk to you.
Finally, the guy in the mirror. He always knew if I was doing the right thing.

Yes, those guys were definitely the ones when it came to Building Construction, Fire Prevention, and investigation.
I saw Ed Sere mentioned. I only knew him for one thing, but it was a big change in how we operate. Ed took us out of the ladder belt rappelling method, and taught us figure eights and beeners using kernmantle rope. He had a 2-part rescue harness for a victim that I am surprised hasn't sold millions. Made of webbing loops, it could easily and hastily be put on a conscious or unconscious victim.
Then there were the Westchester Community College classmates. Those guys, like me were there on the GI Bill. The Bronx Bunch, however, were older and worked though he Burn, baby, burn era. They did trial and error tactics at not less than one multi-alarm job every night. From them came the trench cut and much more. In my class were also great men like Silvio Burigo, Capt,NRFD and Asst Chief ED Dunn, YFD. My success in the FD stems from "I wanna be like them."
Then, a good friend, Tommy Brennan, Capt, FDNY, probably best known for his Random Thoughts on the last page of Fire Engineering. Most readers of Fire Engineering read the mag from the back page first. His thoughts were not random at all. Tommy was a very focused individual and when he first met you he would ask you a few questions before he decided to talk to you.
Finally, the guy in the mirror. He always knew if I was doing the right thing.

Yes, those guys were definitely the ones when it came to Building Construction, Fire Prevention, and investigation.
I saw Ed Sere mentioned. I only knew him for one thing, but it was a big change in how we operate. Ed took us out of the ladder belt rappelling method, and taught us figure eights and beeners using kernmantle rope. He had a 2-part rescue harness for a victim that I am surprised hasn't sold millions. Made of webbing loops, it could easily and hastily be put on a conscious or unconscious victim.
Then there were the Westchester Community College classmates. Those guys, like me were there on the GI Bill. The Bronx Bunch, however, were older and worked though he Burn, baby, burn era. They did trial and error tactics at not less than one multi-alarm job every night. From them came the trench cut and much more. In my class were also great men like Silvio Burigo, Capt,NRFD and Asst Chief ED Dunn, YFD. My success in the FD stems from "I wanna be like them."
Then, a good friend, Tommy Brennan, Capt, FDNY, probably best known for his Random Thoughts on the last page of Fire Engineering. Most readers of Fire Engineering read the mag from the back page first. His thoughts were not random at all. Tommy was a very focused individual and when he first met you he would ask you a few questions before he decided to talk to you.
Finally, the guy in the mirror. He always knew if I was doing the right thing.

So we throw the word "Expedite". It will soon be replaced by another word which implies the same urgency.
Any word like expedite which implies urgency will have the same reaction to those who would put the pedal down and kill or injure people with their reckless abandon.
I used forthwith before. It used to be a word like expedite, but it seemed to wear off and go to the place of adrenaline- producing words that lost their effect This is where expedite will go when the effect wears off. It's not the word that is the problem, it's that squirt of adreninene that gets people to lose control. It looks like a widespread Safety issue. Let's have a stand-down and come up with all the words and phrases that might activate the adrenal glands of the untrained. Throw the squirt-words out.
Here's a starter list:
Expedite, 10-75, CPR commenced, worker, working fire, take a hydrant, smoke showing, shots fired, pin, entrapment
Come on! If you panic over a "word," what are you going to do when you get a "situation"

Over the years, I have seen many appointments to the position of Chief that have left all the "rules" back in the dust. I have seen a department give an internal promotion test then not like the top 3. They then threw out that list and gave an open-competitive test. Not liking that list, they brought one of their Assistant Chiefs out of retirement (long after the come back period had expired) and made him Chief. They gave him a pass/fail individual test which I believe he failed. The game was not over though. He gets 3 chances to pass the test and if he test is only given once every 4 years, he can stretch this out for a long time.
Barry, I know you are good at the letter of the rules, but this is one interpretation you won't find. The State Civil Service Commission told me in their official hearing "the Department bruised the system but didn't break it."

So we throw the word "Expedite". It will soon be replaced by another word which implies the same urgency.
Any word like expedite which implies urgency will have the same reaction to those who would put the pedal down and kill or injure people with their reckless abandon.
I used forthwith before. It used to be a word like expedite, but it seemed to wear off and go to the place of adrenaline- producing words that lost their effect This is where expedite will go when the effect wears off. It's not the word that is the problem, it's that squirt of adreninene that gets people to lose control. It looks like a widespread Safety issue. Let's have a stand-down and come up with all the words and phrases that might activate the adrenal glands of the untrained. Throw the squirt-words out.
Here's a starter list:
Expedite, 10-75, CPR commenced, worker, working fire, take a hydrant, smoke showing, shots fired, pin, entrapment
Come on! If you panic over a "word," what are you going to do when you get a "situation"