Welcome to EMTBravo.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

mfc2257

Members
  • Content count

    1,287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

About mfc2257

  • Rank
    Forum Veteran
  • Birthday 03/12/1977

My Web Presence

  • Website URL http://

Profile Information

  • Location Winter Park, FL
  • Gender Male
  1. Yes Barry it is not an acceptable response. I've read the studies. I've pissed more people off over the years by challenging their worldview and fiefdom than I can shake a stick at. My point is that the closest piece of manned apparatus that is capable of proving some form of legitimate assistance should be dispatched regardless of crappy lines drawn in the sand. The people who need help don't see, care or understand mutual aid agreements or district lines nor do most know whether or not a volley or career rig is coming. I'd bet that 75% or more households in Portchester have no clue that the career staff was killed off. if the closest Scarsdale station was closed then the run card should have changed to reflect it and even if it meant that a two man rig from Eastchester was coming because it was the next reasonable piece then that is how it should be. In the rest of the country where dispatchers actually have discretion over response based on staffing you actually hear apparatus mark up with how many interior firefighters they have. If not sufficient the dispatcher will alert the next due while allowing the understaffed rig to continue because it provides some form of incremental benefit.
  2. Assuming that another rig with more staffing was on its way, a rig with two is still better than none. Establishing continuous water supply, throwing ladders to a known point of entrapment, extended walk around and size-up to the remaining incoming units, among many other activities can be completed by a crew of two and if nothing else, they're geared up and immediately fill out the "two in two out" requirement when the next arriving apparatus marks up.
  3. I think you're a young enthusiast that doesn't understand some of the respectful tones that should be carried in a conversation with a known member and frequent contributor to this forum who happens to be an FDNY Jake (look up the term if it's escaping you). Take a deep breath. Re-read the posts and you'll see the conclusion that everyone else has come to.
  4. Bro you realize that M'Ave is an FDNY jake that turns out of a busy station in The Bronx right? Sounds like your're trying to argue with someone who has made multiple posts in this thread about experiencing the benefit of the pilot program first hand. What's your end game here?
  5. I don't disagree. When I got out of Westchester for a few years to go to college in the '90s I saw how much smoother the fire service operated elsewhere. From rural Pennsylvania where individual small departments banded together and complemented each others resources to PG county Maryland where the same delivery model happened including county oversight with career and volunteer mixed together in one of the toughest fire/rescue environments in America, and only a stones throw from our nations Capitol.
  6. FF1 while I agree with you that any fire department should be able to provide basic services to their community, like in your example a room and contents fire, but I don't think that HAZMAT qualifies as basic. It is a specialty response not unlike high angle, swift water, confined space and collapse. I haven't lived or responded in Westchester in over a decade so I can't speak to what departments are carrying as far as HAZMAT equipment anymore, but if specialized monitoring equipment was needed and Hartsdale was the closest agency who possessed it, AND they participate in the same mutual aid agreement as the other departments in the county, then they were the most appropriate to respond. It is important to look at the suburban counties of the NY Metro area in context to how fire/rescue/EMS services are provided elsewhere in the country. There are hundreds of fire departments that don't have ladder trucks because their response area doesn't demand one. They rely on a neighboring department to provide truck company ops if they are needed. There are hundreds of departments that don't have rescues because their response area doesn't need one. They might have a basic set of tool on an engine, truck or support vehicle for a routine door pop but if a significant accident occurs the heavy squad/rescue from a neighboring department would be alerted.... The duplication of resources in the NY Metro with everyone having their own large aerial (mostly towers), a heavy rescue, etc. etc. is actually diluting the talent of firefighters in the county. There are very few northern Westchester departments during my tenure that did all things well. Bedford Hills was probably the most well rounded and did a good job of proving suppression, truck company ops, FAST, rescue and water supply. If you plopped Westchester down in PA, OH, VA, WV, TN, KY, NC, SC the number of specialty apparatus duplication would be cut significantly and you'd see a lot more fire department that just ran as engine companies with truck and rescue services coming from their larger, busier neighbors. This brings me to another of your comments that with minor modification I 100% agree with... Run cards.... Each department should supply the county with their preference for mutual aid for each foreseeable type of incident up to the 4th alarm. The dispatching agency (in this case) should indeed have full discretion as to which units are dispatched based on availability, other ongoing incidents and any other mitigating factors unknown to the department that is requesting mutual aid. It used to drive me bonkers when I'd hear chiefs on the air requesting "an engine from here, and a truck from there". They should simply have to say "strike the second alarm or give me the next due truck/engine/rescue" The reason why each department should be able to provide a list of preferences (and that should be all they are...preferences) is due to their knowledge of their district and how individual apparatus from another department would best fit. For example a box for a particular school may have geographic and structural characteristics that warrant the use of a rear mount tower over a mid mount so if possible the m/a truck dispatched should fit the department preference.
  7. Its twin was L163 in Woodside. FDNY only had 2.
  8. I love seeing pics of the old ALF rearmount TL14. Pictures of that thing are about as rare as unicorns.
  9. I agree with nfd2004. If the Lisbon has never had a truck, then the department isn't accustomed to conducting truck company operations. Even though their firefighters may have training in truck company ops, simply doing driver training and familiarizing themselves with the rig isn't sufficient to place a new truck company in service. If they were an existing truck company just getting a new-to-them rig, it would go in service much faster. In this case, they need to revise their SOP/SOG's. Evaluate their response order of apparatus. Train their crews on how truck company operations will be incorporated into their firefighting tactics. Evaluate how this rig will fit into their mutual aid obligations and how they will interact with whomever used to provide truck company ops for them. Will they run a dual response for the first few months with their existing truck company provider while they work out their operations. And finally but not limited to, getting out into their first and eventual second due and setting the thing up at various structures to see how it deploys at various types of structures before they have to do it for real.
  10. It doesn't take long to have it look that nice. When I was Captain in Millwood our beds looked like that and for all I know they still do. The key is to leave about 2 feet open at the front of the hose bed as a coffin for the couplings to lay in. Each time you come to a coupling while packing the hose, you pull it all the way forward to the coffin at the front. This creates a twofold benefit. The folds at the back of the hose bed are nice and neat (especially if you use a rubber mallet to set the fold each time, but who's doing that at 3am on the side of the road?) but also, the hose lays out better when you're in a hurry. No couplings to grab each other on the hosebed. I'm not saying my way is the right way, but it worked for us and kept things looking tidy.
  11. I think we're misinterpreting the word "cooler" here.... Air cooled Harley FLH-P's are inherently hot bikes to ride in stop/go and low speed traffic. The water cooled BMW is just that... cooler. I've have had the pleasure to ride an FLH-P as well as multiple BMW's including a civilian version of the R1200. Each bike has its ups and downs. If doing a lot of highway riding I'd much prefer the Harley. If working in an urban environment I'd prefer the BMW for its nimble capabilities.
  12. I lusted after that truck for the longest time. I was too deep in restoring by '57 B Model from my college department that I bought. The rig from Millwood was the first rig I ever went to a fire in. At the time of construction, was one of the most modern pieces of fire apparatus ever built. Enclosed cab for 5 FF's, early version of pre-piped foam, 1500 gallon tank on tandem axles. It is one of two tandem axle factory B models ever built (others were built off of Mack chassis by other apparatus outfitters). The other went to a company just outside Pittsburgh. This rig was re powered from a 707c to a N/A diesel (which I have always believed to be a Mack unit but not 100% sure), power steering was added (it wasn't very effective), auto trans replaced the 5 speed crash box (the rig should have always been spec'd with a 5speed main and at least a two or three speed aux box) and air brakes were added. Even with the diesel the rig was a pig, but it served Millwood very will until 1995 when T-15 was purchased. My first job on this rig (and one of its last) was a fire in Yorktown's southern box on Adams Ridge Road running as a tanker. The following year it shuttled a few loads of water 1994 I believe at a big fire in Croton's box on Bethea drive. That was about it for the rig though. It was incredibly slow even with the diesel motor. You could potentially jog up Allapartus Road faster than this thing could go. It was also limited as a tanker because it didn't have a dump valve and the TTP valve to pump the load off was only 1.5inch. Nonetheless, this is my absolute favorite piece of firefighting history and quite possibly the most handsome fire truck ever produced. I'm not sure who owns it now, but the restoration that they performed appears to be of the quality that I had planned for it if I ever got a hold of it (and subsequently what I did on my '57 from college.) My '57
  13. With regard to 2% money there are absolutely guidelines on how the money can be spent. In fact, there is even a difference between how "new" and "old" 2% money can be spent.
  14. Not only is the money gone and the SCBA's not paid for, depending on how the grant was administered and the terms of the grant (I didn't read the whole article), the government may want their money back. Wouldnt be the first time.