FFPCogs

While I do not in any way wish to minimize the loss of life of the innocent victims of another terrorist atrocity, once again the President shows his lack of understanding of the Constitution in his directive to order all flags to be flown at half staff.  A well meaning gesture not grounded in actual law which is very specific as to the persons for whom the flag is to be lowered to half staff.
 
Over time we have diminished the significance of this honor just as we have the label 'Hero'.
 
I hope Obama had a nice time at the ballgame today,
 
 

Pete, aka "FFPGogs", The concerns are much deeper than I ever expected. If changes don't come about soon, under current conditions, the City and it's fire department leaders are leaving themselves wide open for some legal action to be taken. In addition people, including firefighters could get hurt or worse.
 
  I do believe this entire project is going to take much longer than I first expected. Facts are coming out that go much deeper than originally thought. When the lives of citizens, as well as ALL firefighters, are put at risk, something must change to correct such a serious issue. A simple answer has been put right in front of them, but some refuse to accept it. As I see it in this early stage, the blame goes directly on the local politicians and the leaders of the fire service. And NOT at all on it's firefighters, who are out there doing the job required of them.
 
 At this point, nothing else really can be said.

Seth,
TL-45 is now due to rejoin the fleet early next year. If all goes well, by mid January. She is getting a fairly extensive refit with a new body, axles, brakes and upgrades to the wiring and hydraulics where necessary. When she returns to service the only thing will be left that's original is the boom, which has a good 15 to 20 years left on it...especially in Asbestosville..uh ahem I mean Belltown.

Looks like the old employees have re-opened the company
 
http://www.itefire.com/
 
And are finishing Belltown's Aerialscope:
 
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1285476714801726&set=gm.1244283102253463&type=3&theater

Seth,
TL-45 is now due to rejoin the fleet early next year. If all goes well, by mid January. She is getting a fairly extensive refit with a new body, axles, brakes and upgrades to the wiring and hydraulics where necessary. When she returns to service the only thing will be left that's original is the boom, which has a good 15 to 20 years left on it...especially in Asbestosville..uh ahem I mean Belltown.

Seth,
TL-45 is now due to rejoin the fleet early next year. If all goes well, by mid January. She is getting a fairly extensive refit with a new body, axles, brakes and upgrades to the wiring and hydraulics where necessary. When she returns to service the only thing will be left that's original is the boom, which has a good 15 to 20 years left on it...especially in Asbestosville..uh ahem I mean Belltown.

Personally I have no problem with the phrase "In God we trust" but this has to be taken in the larger context of what is appropriate to the community at large. The separation of Church and State is one of our founding principles as a nation and a damn good one of you ask me. That said, I did a quick google search but didn't find an answer as to whether this VFD is a municipal agency or a private non stock corporation. My take on it is this, if the town buys the apparatus with tax dollars than it shouldn't be on the rigs. If on the other hand the rigs are bought and owned by the company and the company is a private non stock corporation than they can put whatever the Hell they want on their rigs.

23 years ago today, marks the first attack on the World Trade Center. A van full of explosives was driven down into the lower parking garage, in an attempt to bring one tower down into the other. Thank God this did not happen.  But it did kill 6 people and injure thousands. NEVER FORGET!

Members,
It's time to kick EMTBravo up a notch.
For the past few months, I've been working on the backend of the site to prepare it for the next generation of software. At first, I hated the new software, because the current software is something I was used to, it worked, and I don't like change. But the more I learned about it, the more I liked it. It will provide a better and easier experience for me running the site, and more importantly, it will provide a better user experience for members using the site (including mobile device options). It will also allow us to add some new features in the future that will help bring EMTBravo.com to the next level.
We've been using this software, which is highly customized for EMTBravo, for over 12 years now, and have upgraded to every version. This makes it difficult, because with every new version we upgrade to, the customizations have to be upgraded as well, which I spend hours coding myself or have to contract out for. Also to note, EMTBravo is hosted on it's own dedicated server.
What this means for you:
-EMTBravo may be offline for a few hours tomorrow afternoon (Thursday) into early Friday morning while the transition is made. I will work as fast as I can to minimize this downtime.
-When EMTBravo is back online, some features may be temporarily unavailable, and there may be some "bugs". We will keep an open line of communication with members to ensure all bugs are worked out and members can get assistance in using the new site.
-It will look very similar to the site now, and the learning curve should be minimal. You will, however, have tons of options to customize how you use and view the site.
-The new EMTBravo site will be "Responsive", which means you can use the site via computer, tablet, mobile device, and smart TV and it will look and function the same on all devices. For example, you will be able to use the site on your mobile device just as you would on your PC, including posting.
-Ultimately, a better EMTBravo.com
We will provide updates on this process as needed. Please check our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/emtbravo for updates while we are offline.
Thank you for your patience during this upgrade.
Seth Granville AKA "x635" AKA "EMTBravo"
Founder And Administrator, EMTBravo.com
Email: seth@EMTBravo.com

There's no doubt that in our collective neck of the woods, (i.e. NY, CT) the level of redundancy borders on the absurd and that this is a costly and unnecessary waste. But on the flip side there is also no doubt that volunteers are far less costly than an all paid service, even with all that waste. To that point, I would contend that this would be so even if stations were consolidated and staffed by paid FFs and property/insurance losses were reduced by having that staff able to effect more positive outcomes sooner (although there's no empirical evidence to support that claim to the best of my knowledge). There is also no doubt that a paid service would provide a higher degree of protection in terms of trained personnel and the availability of that personnel, but as I stated earlier that too comes with a trade off, as less stations means longer response times in getting those trained personnel to incidents. Bottom line here is that volunteers will almost always be cheaper (and that's not even counting the transitional costs of shifting from a volunteer to paid service) and since they are, Mr. John Q. Public will happily live with having them as his sole source of fire protection. He doesn't think he'll ever need the fire department in the first place so he see no need to pay more for it then he already does, and besides, that's how it's always been. And if God forbid he does have a fire, well then...when Blubbery Barney and One tooth Willie (as some see volunteers) show up in their big red shiny parade piece firetruck and squirt water in his window, he's ok with that because his friends and neighbors came to his aid in his time of need and he's got home owner's insurance.
Career FFs will never fully replace volunteers, nor could they. The cost is just too prohibitive and thus there is no political will to make it so. Unfortunately for far too long the volunteer fire service in general has lived off that fact and refused to take steps to provide the best possible protection to those we serve. Like most of the rest of America it seems settling for mediocrity instead of striving for excellence is the new normal.
​And one last point that although it's been said before it bears repeating. Many of our predecessors on both sides of the paid / volly divide worked tirelessly to make our service better for us and our communities. When we spend more time infighting or pushing this or that agenda then we do serving, I think we are all doing a great disservice to those who came before us and those who will come after. We are all in this together and we could accomplish so much more, for those we serve and for ourselves, by building each other up than we do by trying to tear each other down..and that is something we should all strive for, because in the end there's nobody looking out for us but us.

There is no question that Volunteers save on payroll costs. The other costs they may or may not save vary greatly by department/district. Do LOSAP's cost what pensions do, too many variables. Does training cost the same, depends on who is getting paid for what. I know of one department that pays volunteers a per Diem wage to attend classes. We know that Volunteers don't save money on turnout gear, although some of that is because of certain standards that do not take usage or overall condition into consideration.
Is there duplication of apparatus due to the district lines, yes there is. However this is usually not because of how many career or volunteer firefighters there are, this is almost always a creature of the management involved. When I was a Volunteer my department had 3 Engines, 1 Truck & 1 Rescue, for just over a mile square district. Our Truck was the busiest piece in the house because we were also the first due truck in two other districts, both of which had trucks, and parts of a third that also had a truck.
However to see why this had happened you need to look at a couple of historical things. City planning wise, when these departments were formed, there were not the roads we have today and mutual aid was not an easy thing to accomplish. Historically many of these small communities were very isolationist. So apparatus was needed because calling the guys next door was not seen as a viable option. By the time I joined, just under half our runs were automatic aid.
Since then one of those districts sold their truck and did not replace it. One of the districts went from 3 engines to 2. So there is some progress being made, but it is by the nature of apparatus and how long they last (at least the older rigs) going to be a slow process.
As for how many rescues are needed, I do not think FDNY is a fair comparison to most communities. Many suburban communities use their rescues for extrication at MVA's. FDNY uses truck companies for that. Then there is NYPD ESU which also does extrication. When I joined my former department we took the rescue on EMS calls, we went on all medicals in the district. As a result the Rescue was busier than the engines. That changed when a powerful lobby got the engine to go on medicals and suggested getting rid of our rescue. The Chief could not be swayed by the actual data / statistics. Although the rescue was saved, it stopped going on EMS calls. After the advent of a first responder policy (precursor to EMD) the engine's medicals went way down. However is you compared the number of rescues in Westchester to the number of rescues, ladders & ESU trucks in NYC, what would you get? I am guessing a little closer to apparatus parity. That of course is where call volume comes into play.

There's no doubt that in our collective neck of the woods, (i.e. NY, CT) the level of redundancy borders on the absurd and that this is a costly and unnecessary waste. But on the flip side there is also no doubt that volunteers are far less costly than an all paid service, even with all that waste. To that point, I would contend that this would be so even if stations were consolidated and staffed by paid FFs and property/insurance losses were reduced by having that staff able to effect more positive outcomes sooner (although there's no empirical evidence to support that claim to the best of my knowledge). There is also no doubt that a paid service would provide a higher degree of protection in terms of trained personnel and the availability of that personnel, but as I stated earlier that too comes with a trade off, as less stations means longer response times in getting those trained personnel to incidents. Bottom line here is that volunteers will almost always be cheaper (and that's not even counting the transitional costs of shifting from a volunteer to paid service) and since they are, Mr. John Q. Public will happily live with having them as his sole source of fire protection. He doesn't think he'll ever need the fire department in the first place so he see no need to pay more for it then he already does, and besides, that's how it's always been. And if God forbid he does have a fire, well then...when Blubbery Barney and One tooth Willie (as some see volunteers) show up in their big red shiny parade piece firetruck and squirt water in his window, he's ok with that because his friends and neighbors came to his aid in his time of need and he's got home owner's insurance.
Career FFs will never fully replace volunteers, nor could they. The cost is just too prohibitive and thus there is no political will to make it so. Unfortunately for far too long the volunteer fire service in general has lived off that fact and refused to take steps to provide the best possible protection to those we serve. Like most of the rest of America it seems settling for mediocrity instead of striving for excellence is the new normal.
​And one last point that although it's been said before it bears repeating. Many of our predecessors on both sides of the paid / volly divide worked tirelessly to make our service better for us and our communities. When we spend more time infighting or pushing this or that agenda then we do serving, I think we are all doing a great disservice to those who came before us and those who will come after. We are all in this together and we could accomplish so much more, for those we serve and for ourselves, by building each other up than we do by trying to tear each other down..and that is something we should all strive for, because in the end there's nobody looking out for us but us.

There's no doubt that in our collective neck of the woods, (i.e. NY, CT) the level of redundancy borders on the absurd and that this is a costly and unnecessary waste. But on the flip side there is also no doubt that volunteers are far less costly than an all paid service, even with all that waste. To that point, I would contend that this would be so even if stations were consolidated and staffed by paid FFs and property/insurance losses were reduced by having that staff able to effect more positive outcomes sooner (although there's no empirical evidence to support that claim to the best of my knowledge). There is also no doubt that a paid service would provide a higher degree of protection in terms of trained personnel and the availability of that personnel, but as I stated earlier that too comes with a trade off, as less stations means longer response times in getting those trained personnel to incidents. Bottom line here is that volunteers will almost always be cheaper (and that's not even counting the transitional costs of shifting from a volunteer to paid service) and since they are, Mr. John Q. Public will happily live with having them as his sole source of fire protection. He doesn't think he'll ever need the fire department in the first place so he see no need to pay more for it then he already does, and besides, that's how it's always been. And if God forbid he does have a fire, well then...when Blubbery Barney and One tooth Willie (as some see volunteers) show up in their big red shiny parade piece firetruck and squirt water in his window, he's ok with that because his friends and neighbors came to his aid in his time of need and he's got home owner's insurance.
Career FFs will never fully replace volunteers, nor could they. The cost is just too prohibitive and thus there is no political will to make it so. Unfortunately for far too long the volunteer fire service in general has lived off that fact and refused to take steps to provide the best possible protection to those we serve. Like most of the rest of America it seems settling for mediocrity instead of striving for excellence is the new normal.
​And one last point that although it's been said before it bears repeating. Many of our predecessors on both sides of the paid / volly divide worked tirelessly to make our service better for us and our communities. When we spend more time infighting or pushing this or that agenda then we do serving, I think we are all doing a great disservice to those who came before us and those who will come after. We are all in this together and we could accomplish so much more, for those we serve and for ourselves, by building each other up than we do by trying to tear each other down..and that is something we should all strive for, because in the end there's nobody looking out for us but us.

There's no doubt that in our collective neck of the woods, (i.e. NY, CT) the level of redundancy borders on the absurd and that this is a costly and unnecessary waste. But on the flip side there is also no doubt that volunteers are far less costly than an all paid service, even with all that waste. To that point, I would contend that this would be so even if stations were consolidated and staffed by paid FFs and property/insurance losses were reduced by having that staff able to effect more positive outcomes sooner (although there's no empirical evidence to support that claim to the best of my knowledge). There is also no doubt that a paid service would provide a higher degree of protection in terms of trained personnel and the availability of that personnel, but as I stated earlier that too comes with a trade off, as less stations means longer response times in getting those trained personnel to incidents. Bottom line here is that volunteers will almost always be cheaper (and that's not even counting the transitional costs of shifting from a volunteer to paid service) and since they are, Mr. John Q. Public will happily live with having them as his sole source of fire protection. He doesn't think he'll ever need the fire department in the first place so he see no need to pay more for it then he already does, and besides, that's how it's always been. And if God forbid he does have a fire, well then...when Blubbery Barney and One tooth Willie (as some see volunteers) show up in their big red shiny parade piece firetruck and squirt water in his window, he's ok with that because his friends and neighbors came to his aid in his time of need and he's got home owner's insurance.
Career FFs will never fully replace volunteers, nor could they. The cost is just too prohibitive and thus there is no political will to make it so. Unfortunately for far too long the volunteer fire service in general has lived off that fact and refused to take steps to provide the best possible protection to those we serve. Like most of the rest of America it seems settling for mediocrity instead of striving for excellence is the new normal.
​And one last point that although it's been said before it bears repeating. Many of our predecessors on both sides of the paid / volly divide worked tirelessly to make our service better for us and our communities. When we spend more time infighting or pushing this or that agenda then we do serving, I think we are all doing a great disservice to those who came before us and those who will come after. We are all in this together and we could accomplish so much more, for those we serve and for ourselves, by building each other up than we do by trying to tear each other down..and that is something we should all strive for, because in the end there's nobody looking out for us but us.

I don't think there is a perfect model for a fire department.

I've been a volunteer and career firefighter too. I often work along side of volunteers. I agree that we should be more united and respectful than we are.
From my experience and perspective, the volunteers oftentimes are more of an obstacle in getting to that place than the career folks. I often hear claims about how we're all doing the same job, have the same training, etc., but the fact is we aren't and we don't. Unfortunately, when you try to discuss this, the only thing too many on the volunteer side seem to take from it is that career guys are great and volunteers suck rather than understanding that career guys can be "better" by virtue of those differences in training and experience, but that doesn't mean that the volunteers are automatically inadequate. It's a lot like comparing pro athletes to college/high school athletes. The pros are typically better, which one would expect, but a lot of the non-pro athletes are pretty darn good, if not just as good in some cases. And in some cases, their best just isn't good enough.
We hear claims about how fires don't care if you're career or volunteer or that the person who's house is on fire doesn't care if you're career or volunteer, but who yells the most about training mandates or being held to any sort of standard? Who thinks it's perfectly ok to give a person a few dozen hours of basic introductory training (or none at all) and then turn that new person loose to respond and actively participate on calls? Who thinks it's appropriate to make a teenager with little actual experience a line officer?
IMO, these are the things that are at the very heart of the animosity between career and volunteer from the career side. Too many in the volunteer ranks want to be viewed as equal to the career guys without putting in the work necessary to truly be equal. Yes, there are places where truly providing services on the same level are not realistic (rural areas for one) and they do the best they can under tough circumstances, but there are others where the departments are just not being honest with themselves or their communities regarding the level of service they can realistically provide as a department or as an individual.
It's also frustrating to see comments about how career guys only care about the paycheck and don't have the pride in the job because we don't work fundraisers to pay the bills or in some cases don't live in the community that we work in. While there are career guys that are like that, the majority aren't and you'll find people like that in any career and you know there are plenty of volunteers that are all about the t-shirts and image rather than the work and service to the community.
Like you said, career and volunteer share a lot in common.
Personally, I try to be respectful of the volunteers in my area, but it's very hard at times to view some of them as peers when they do some of the stuff that they do and that includes burning down buildings that should not have burned to the extent that they did.

I don't think it's all scare tactics, cancer is some serious sh!t. That said while having two sets of gear would be great and necessary the bottom line here is who's going to pay that tab? I have a feeling that no municipality or fire district is just going to happily pony up another $2500 minimum per firefighter. I find this to be another case of sounding great (and completely valid) on paper but next to impossible to put into practice.

Well now there's a dose of reality for ya, btw AMEN FirN...and I'm a smoker

Well now there's a dose of reality for ya, btw AMEN FirN...and I'm a smoker

I don't think it's all scare tactics, cancer is some serious sh!t. That said while having two sets of gear would be great and necessary the bottom line here is who's going to pay that tab? I have a feeling that no municipality or fire district is just going to happily pony up another $2500 minimum per firefighter. I find this to be another case of sounding great (and completely valid) on paper but next to impossible to put into practice.

This is the only way to make it work, but as with all change there's always a trade off. Some areas would benefit with paid crews available 24/7 right down the street, other would suffer from the longer wait for anyone to show up at all as stations are consolidated to gain savings. Most county systems work and save money because they are combination in one form or another, but the ones that work best require 24/7 staffing utilizing both career and volunteer personnel to ensure there's always crews on duty in house.

I don't think it's all scare tactics, cancer is some serious sh!t. That said while having two sets of gear would be great and necessary the bottom line here is who's going to pay that tab? I have a feeling that no municipality or fire district is just going to happily pony up another $2500 minimum per firefighter. I find this to be another case of sounding great (and completely valid) on paper but next to impossible to put into practice.

In 2016, more so than at any other time in most of our lifetimes thus far, Democrats are going to vote Democrat and Republicans are going to vote Republican. The country hasn't been this polarized and divided in quite some time. Fact is there's nothing any candidate can do to swing voters of the opposite party, the line are too firmly drawn. The middle ground, like the middle class, is disappearing as rhetoric replaces reason and ignorance overwhelms intelligence....and that's bad for the politicos and bad for us.

In 2016, more so than at any other time in most of our lifetimes thus far, Democrats are going to vote Democrat and Republicans are going to vote Republican. The country hasn't been this polarized and divided in quite some time. Fact is there's nothing any candidate can do to swing voters of the opposite party, the line are too firmly drawn. The middle ground, like the middle class, is disappearing as rhetoric replaces reason and ignorance overwhelms intelligence....and that's bad for the politicos and bad for us.

Thanks Danny boy...good job.