wraftery

This is Eatchester's R-5. It went into service in the mid to late 50's

This is Eatchester's R-5. It went into service in the mid to late 50's

This is Eatchester's R-5. It went into service in the mid to late 50's

I have to agree that these pictures were later than the 1950s. I think this is the second generation of a rescue style White chassis style body. The first was similar in compartments but was powered by a White (brand name) truck.
Eastchester had a White in the late 1950s. I think the Chief was FDNY's and said "I'll take one of them"
I'll look for pics

Kudos to the HFD for a job well done, especially given their limited resources. The first-due crew and IC made an excellent size-up, and succeeded initiating an effective attack AND rescuing one of the occupants. Once again, the HFD's culture of training aggressively and often paid-off.
To the Monday-morning quarterbacks who have posted above, I was there and this was a text-book operation. Well-trained and combat-ready FFs & officers went above and beyond, which resulted in a life being saved.

Please join me in welcoming one of our newest Moderators.
M' Ave
M' Ave has been a member since 2007. He is very active,
knowledgeable and contributes a lot to EMTBravo.
Welcome aboard Dan.

The 360 is not a newly instituted part of tactics, and it is not necessarily done by the IC himself, but by a subordinate who is assigned by either the IC or assigned by a SOP. Part of the roof man or OV man's responsibilities is to check the rear and report. Chiefs that are lucky enough to have an Aide will often send the Aide to do the 360. Of course, the IC can elect to look for himself.

The 360 is not a newly instituted part of tactics, and it is not necessarily done by the IC himself, but by a subordinate who is assigned by either the IC or assigned by a SOP. Part of the roof man or OV man's responsibilities is to check the rear and report. Chiefs that are lucky enough to have an Aide will often send the Aide to do the 360. Of course, the IC can elect to look for himself.

The 360 is not a newly instituted part of tactics, and it is not necessarily done by the IC himself, but by a subordinate who is assigned by either the IC or assigned by a SOP. Part of the roof man or OV man's responsibilities is to check the rear and report. Chiefs that are lucky enough to have an Aide will often send the Aide to do the 360. Of course, the IC can elect to look for himself.

The 360 is not a newly instituted part of tactics, and it is not necessarily done by the IC himself, but by a subordinate who is assigned by either the IC or assigned by a SOP. Part of the roof man or OV man's responsibilities is to check the rear and report. Chiefs that are lucky enough to have an Aide will often send the Aide to do the 360. Of course, the IC can elect to look for himself.

The 360 is not a newly instituted part of tactics, and it is not necessarily done by the IC himself, but by a subordinate who is assigned by either the IC or assigned by a SOP. Part of the roof man or OV man's responsibilities is to check the rear and report. Chiefs that are lucky enough to have an Aide will often send the Aide to do the 360. Of course, the IC can elect to look for himself.

A story that was relayed to me by a Chief up county was that their dept. responded to a structure fire in a 2 1/2 story, type V, platform construction, residential occupancy. On arrival, a female on scene was screaming "My baby, my baby. My baby is inside". The Chief then initiated a search team to conduct a primary search. The results of that search were negative. The woman continued to claim her baby was trapped inside the house. The Chief then sent in a second team. The subsequent results were negative. The fire at this time had been going and conditions were starting to deteriorate quickly. The woman was inconsolable and still claimed her child was inside. The Chief sent in a 3rd search team. With identical results. Long story short, not only was the woman intoxicated on PCP, she didn't even live in the home.
As for 360's & IC. In the military we call it RECON/INTEL and the establishment of Command & Control; and further, a term which has been creeping into the fire service is situational awareness. Intelligence is gathered, disseminated, and then implemented. There are clear delineation of roles, development of overall strategies and the resources & tactics necessary to accomplish them. There is no deviation. Fire Service specific, overall strategy is 1. Life Safety 2. Incident Stabilization 3. Preservation of Property/Environmental. Tactics are contigent on available resources. Of course ad hoc accomodations must be made as the situation warrants. Further, to be NIMS compliant as per established by NRF (NRP) & carried out via HSPD-5 & HSPD-8 the establishment of the Incident Command System is integral. It is mandatory for federal agencies. I also believe if you recieved federal grant money, i.e. SAFER, it is also mandatory. Without it some attorneys could come in and establish negligence as it is considered a standard. In most depts it's addressed in their respective SOP/SOGs. The role of the IC is very specific. It's analogous to the head of a snake. Without it nothing moves.
http://www.fema.gov/implementation-and-compliance-guidance-stakeholders

I am not sure how many of you have pulled into a job with 5-6 firefighters but let me tell you its no fun. decisions have to be made and made quickly--the lives of your firefighters depend on those decisions. second due mutual aid may be coming but its those first few minutes that are critical. From everything I have read about this job it was handled--professionally with firefighters doing what they have been trained to do since probie school--they put their lives on the line for one of their citizens.
you can criticize all you want but until you have stood in those boots and made those decisions you just don't understand.

Agreed to everything 16fire5 says. One line that particularly bothered me was "Leaders lead from the front, and cowards lead from behind their men". Your job as an officer isn't to be upfront doing the work, its to make sure your firefighters do their work safely and properly. Would Eisenhower have been a more effective leader if he was the first to step foot on Normandy? I get pretty annoyed with this whole "coward" idea as well. Personally, until I'm shown otherwise, anyone who's in this field is not a coward. This whole macho way of thinking doesn't help anybody. "Oh its getting pretty hot in here, I'm running out of air and this fire isn't going out. Better not get out of here or I'd be a coward". Here's a crazy idea, instead of everyone going " to the front" how about just do YOUR job. If you're the engine company boss, do your job and supervise your crew on the line, don't "lead from the front" and take the nozzle from a kid who could use the experience. I'd much rather my IC was "leading from behind" and actually had a scope of the incident so he could look out for everyone's safety.

You are absolutely correct. The person communicating with FD/PD is most likely the pilot. I don't understand the confusion but it seems to be with which place on the ship the transfer will occur. It may be a problem with the ship's crew as opposed to PD/FD.
HE WAS RUDE??? He had a huge ship that was drifting towards land, shallows and other ships, and as they say in the maritime industry "A collision can ruin your entire day." His job was to regain maneuverability and get control of his ship. I thought he was being very calm in consideration of his situation. Also note that a collision could cost him his pilots license.

You are absolutely correct. The person communicating with FD/PD is most likely the pilot. I don't understand the confusion but it seems to be with which place on the ship the transfer will occur. It may be a problem with the ship's crew as opposed to PD/FD.
HE WAS RUDE??? He had a huge ship that was drifting towards land, shallows and other ships, and as they say in the maritime industry "A collision can ruin your entire day." His job was to regain maneuverability and get control of his ship. I thought he was being very calm in consideration of his situation. Also note that a collision could cost him his pilots license.

You are absolutely correct. The person communicating with FD/PD is most likely the pilot. I don't understand the confusion but it seems to be with which place on the ship the transfer will occur. It may be a problem with the ship's crew as opposed to PD/FD.
HE WAS RUDE??? He had a huge ship that was drifting towards land, shallows and other ships, and as they say in the maritime industry "A collision can ruin your entire day." His job was to regain maneuverability and get control of his ship. I thought he was being very calm in consideration of his situation. Also note that a collision could cost him his pilots license.

You are absolutely correct. The person communicating with FD/PD is most likely the pilot. I don't understand the confusion but it seems to be with which place on the ship the transfer will occur. It may be a problem with the ship's crew as opposed to PD/FD.
HE WAS RUDE??? He had a huge ship that was drifting towards land, shallows and other ships, and as they say in the maritime industry "A collision can ruin your entire day." His job was to regain maneuverability and get control of his ship. I thought he was being very calm in consideration of his situation. Also note that a collision could cost him his pilots license.

Cogs;
Happy Easter.
If You are in CT, stay safe.
If you are in Afganistan, stay extra safe and say thanks to the troops

Just want to take a moment to say Happy Easter and Happy Passover to all who celebrate them out there.

When a governing body browns out a firehouse, they are making an assumpton that either nothing will hapen in the company district, or other companies can handle it just for that night. I don't understand their logic but it makse sense to them.
How about reversing the logic. What would happen if a Fire Chief recalled the entire department for one day a month because he assumed that there would be a major fire that day? He would probably be fired innediately for come up with such a preposterous theory.
But isn't it the same logic as the brownout?

Cold, hard statistics are not necessarily cold nor hard. Very often they can be twisted by leaving out categories you don't like or massaging things to get the result you want.
For example, we've all heard that something like 25% of all personal injury auto accidents involve the use of alcohol.
That means that 75% are caused by a******* that are stone cold sober! You don't see any checkpoints to get them off the road.

Cold, hard statistics are not necessarily cold nor hard. Very often they can be twisted by leaving out categories you don't like or massaging things to get the result you want.
For example, we've all heard that something like 25% of all personal injury auto accidents involve the use of alcohol.
That means that 75% are caused by a******* that are stone cold sober! You don't see any checkpoints to get them off the road.

When a governing body browns out a firehouse, they are making an assumpton that either nothing will hapen in the company district, or other companies can handle it just for that night. I don't understand their logic but it makse sense to them.
How about reversing the logic. What would happen if a Fire Chief recalled the entire department for one day a month because he assumed that there would be a major fire that day? He would probably be fired innediately for come up with such a preposterous theory.
But isn't it the same logic as the brownout?