dwcfireman

From the Westchester County DES website, C.A.D. Valid Unit Descriptions indicate that the descriptors are from NFPA 1901 - Fire Apparatus Standard.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing dwc.
Ardsley Quint 1 was Ardsley Quint 1 from the day it was delivered in 1988. Elmsford operated Quint 2, and Quad 2.
It was under Pat Kelly sometime around 2002, when trying to "simplify" things, the terms "Quint", "Brush", and other valid terms were removed from the valid apparatus listings. We were told as 60 Control dispatchers to ignore any department that doesn't refer to their apparatus definitions.
I also think there was some CAD component to it to make it eaqsier for us dispatchers, but can't remember.
When my department got the letter, I really wanted to keep it Quint 1. But I suggested "Ladder 50" for some reason I can't remember at the time, and that's why that is.
Many people on this forum have debated about Quints, what they are, how they are staffed and equipped, and training issues. One big concern among career departments is using a Quint to combine an Engine and Ladder company in order to lay off firefighters.
In a majority of departments here in Texas, they call them Quints. They are not an engine. The are not a truck.And sometimes they are a Quint, but called an Engine or Truck. They are defined by the fire department's operations.

Actually, not many fire departments that have quints call them that. Usually that term was utilized under the "Quint Concept" where departments replaced the engine and ladder truck at a station with a quint and usually another smaller piece, or if the unit was station alone by itself.
A quint in the true scene of the term means in this day and age an apparatus with a viable aerial ladder 75 to 100+ feet in length, 1000 or more gpm pump (may be as low as 750 gpm but I'm going with ISO Class A pumpers), minimum of 250 gallons of water in the tank and a minimum of 85 feet of ground ladders. A majority of what we call "quint" apparatus out there does not meet this specification. So that is the first place you need to look. A typical 75' Seagrave mean stick lacks 85 feet of ground ladders on it, any Telesquirt pumper is not a quint, ect.
So take a look at all the "quints" out there and see which fit the actual specifications for a quint. You will be surprised how many "quints" that are out their are really not! We tend to utilize the term so we know what we got coming if it is designated that way.

Since the county had plans to expand it (auditorium, more classrooms, etc.) and they were cancelled due to lack of funding...I think everyone argrees they have out grown the space. But is it due to poor planning or poor funding? Since plans were inplace 3+ years back, I'd say funding is the issue and its not going to get better anytime soon.

Good question. I believe Ardsley's ladder was deemed Quint 1, but now their new rig is classified as a Ladder Co. by the county. Maybe it's just for easier classification, i.e., they would have to re-number all the "quints" in the county as "Quint _".

Could just be that the CAD system doesn't support the term. I know in some places where quints are labelled as engines. Bottom line is...I rarely have heard anyone ask for a "quint." Know your area and the specifics as far as names go...isn't an issue.
You could ask the same as to why and it has been for decades...where ladder towers are classified as tower ladders...if we want to talk detailed semantics. For example if you have a aerial that has a pump...its a quint. But if you have a ladder tower with a pump...its a quint..but how do you address the 2 in regards to the type of aerial device it is?

On top of that technically to be fully functional as a quint it must be staffed with 2 operators...1 for the pump and 1 for the aerial along with a compliment of FFs to carry out both functions.

Is there a wrong seat on a job like that?
Yup, I was PIC.

The March 22 session at HPN is on cooperation with the Airport Operations Dept/Fire Brigade. Anyone who is interested should sign up as we can give you a great deal of knowledge on our based aircraft.

Try being that "lazy POS" sitting in a chair all day yielding phone calls. I've been there, done that, and it sucks...mainly because people like you have your head so far up your (self) that you don't even want to consider the other end of it. I agree with everyone on this thread, that is, except you.
And as far as that last comment, "cause you would have a miserable time." That is just messed up. You make yourself sound like a trouble maker, which coerces my opinion of you. You should give up the argument. You are severely outnumbered on this, and I wouldn't mind if this thread disappear from the front page.

Try being that "lazy POS" sitting in a chair all day yielding phone calls. I've been there, done that, and it sucks...mainly because people like you have your head so far up your (self) that you don't even want to consider the other end of it. I agree with everyone on this thread, that is, except you.
And as far as that last comment, "cause you would have a miserable time." That is just messed up. You make yourself sound like a trouble maker, which coerces my opinion of you. You should give up the argument. You are severely outnumbered on this, and I wouldn't mind if this thread disappear from the front page.

Dude I think you should just give up now and not say anymore...you're not making things better....

We have a saying at the airport: "Complacency is Security's Worst Nightmare." The same goes on the fire ground, and I can't agree more with this picture. When we have drills at the airport I shout for everyone to "dance" when I hear a PASS starting to go off. Like everyone has been saying, "Training, training, training!"

If you are flying this weekend, please contact your AIRLINE. Us airport ops guys have our work cut out for the next 24 hours!
Stay safe everyone.

If you are flying this weekend, please contact your AIRLINE. Us airport ops guys have our work cut out for the next 24 hours!
Stay safe everyone.

If you are flying this weekend, please contact your AIRLINE. Us airport ops guys have our work cut out for the next 24 hours!
Stay safe everyone.

Photos TR54
Chief 2341 Requested more water to the scene !!

For a call of an inbound aircraft with smoke in the cockpit:
ARFF Unit: "Aircraft ###, confirm smoke in the cockpit."
Aircraft: "### Confirming smoke in the cockpit."
ARFF Unit: "Roger, awaiting your arrival."
**30 seconds later**
Aircraft: "Disregard, we turned it off."

For a call of an inbound aircraft with smoke in the cockpit:
ARFF Unit: "Aircraft ###, confirm smoke in the cockpit."
Aircraft: "### Confirming smoke in the cockpit."
ARFF Unit: "Roger, awaiting your arrival."
**30 seconds later**
Aircraft: "Disregard, we turned it off."

When I used to volunteer upstate I got pulled over by a sheriff deputy while responding to an apartment fire with people trapped:
Officer (as he approaches my window): "I hear you got a scanner in there."
Me: "It's my pager."
Officer: "What are you doing?"
Me: "I'm going to a fire."
Officer: "Where is the fire?"
Me (pointing to the orange glow in the sky): "There."

When I used to volunteer upstate I got pulled over by a sheriff deputy while responding to an apartment fire with people trapped:
Officer (as he approaches my window): "I hear you got a scanner in there."
Me: "It's my pager."
Officer: "What are you doing?"
Me: "I'm going to a fire."
Officer: "Where is the fire?"
Me (pointing to the orange glow in the sky): "There."

When I used to volunteer upstate I got pulled over by a sheriff deputy while responding to an apartment fire with people trapped:
Officer (as he approaches my window): "I hear you got a scanner in there."
Me: "It's my pager."
Officer: "What are you doing?"
Me: "I'm going to a fire."
Officer: "Where is the fire?"
Me (pointing to the orange glow in the sky): "There."

For a call of an inbound aircraft with smoke in the cockpit:
ARFF Unit: "Aircraft ###, confirm smoke in the cockpit."
Aircraft: "### Confirming smoke in the cockpit."
ARFF Unit: "Roger, awaiting your arrival."
**30 seconds later**
Aircraft: "Disregard, we turned it off."

I really hate to be the "negative Nancy" here, and I know I'm going to get flak for this, but someone's got to say it:
I do agree with everyone that this is great technology, especially for us firefighters who are IN SHAPE and have the ENDURANCE to continue working with a longer lasting bottle. With this I bring my point: This new, improved bottle is great for the firefighter who is in top physical condition, but a death trap for the firefighter who has had a few too many hot fudge sundaes in his life. My argument lies in the fact that the number one killer of firefighters is heart attacks. Most of us are out of shape. Period. A lot of us smoke, a lot of us drink; many of us are lazy, over worked, over stressed, etc. You get the point. Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that a smaller profile and a lighter pack that this new technology brings is great for us, However, for the "general" firefighter, this could make things worse. It doesn't matter how much clean air you can stick in a bottle. With today's 4.5 bottles there are some people who can make it last 40 minutes (firefighters who vigorously work out) and there are people who suck a bottle down in 15 minutes. Focusing on the latter half of the previous sentence, those who suck down a 30 minute bottle in 15 minutes, with the advantage of the 5.5 bottle and more air availability, are able to work longer in a fire. The down side of this is that these firefighters are now going to overwork themselves and put them in a situation where there life is at danger, not from the fire, but from themselves.
Please do not take this on an attack on obese or out-of-shape firefighters. Nor am I attacking ay flaws that SCOTT may have overseen in their technological advances. I solely bring this up as a discussion point in the matter of firefighter safety.

I really hate to be the "negative Nancy" here, and I know I'm going to get flak for this, but someone's got to say it:
I do agree with everyone that this is great technology, especially for us firefighters who are IN SHAPE and have the ENDURANCE to continue working with a longer lasting bottle. With this I bring my point: This new, improved bottle is great for the firefighter who is in top physical condition, but a death trap for the firefighter who has had a few too many hot fudge sundaes in his life. My argument lies in the fact that the number one killer of firefighters is heart attacks. Most of us are out of shape. Period. A lot of us smoke, a lot of us drink; many of us are lazy, over worked, over stressed, etc. You get the point. Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that a smaller profile and a lighter pack that this new technology brings is great for us, However, for the "general" firefighter, this could make things worse. It doesn't matter how much clean air you can stick in a bottle. With today's 4.5 bottles there are some people who can make it last 40 minutes (firefighters who vigorously work out) and there are people who suck a bottle down in 15 minutes. Focusing on the latter half of the previous sentence, those who suck down a 30 minute bottle in 15 minutes, with the advantage of the 5.5 bottle and more air availability, are able to work longer in a fire. The down side of this is that these firefighters are now going to overwork themselves and put them in a situation where there life is at danger, not from the fire, but from themselves.
Please do not take this on an attack on obese or out-of-shape firefighters. Nor am I attacking ay flaws that SCOTT may have overseen in their technological advances. I solely bring this up as a discussion point in the matter of firefighter safety.