Alpinerunner

I will tell you that the group of young officers who stepped down are some of the finest firefighters I've ever known. They are kind individuals and diligent FF's who train hard so that when the big one arrives they are ready to give 110%. Their conflict with other members of authority in the department has played itself out many times across the fire service where hard working young members who have lots of experience from outside their home department are looked upon as a threat. They respectfully stood their ground and when the "old line" wouldn't budge, they resigned as a group so that there wouldn't be a toxic environment amongst the ranks.
These guys were the next generation of fine leaders for a small department that has always distinguished itself amongst its larger peers. Although I'm no longer living in NY, had I not chosen to move to Florida 6 years ago, I would most likely be chief of department today and would love to have each of these guys on my team of officers. Its the departments loss.

Some googling tells me that a Tower-ladder has a structural boom and an non-structural ladder on the boom (optional), while a ladder-tower has a structural ladder with a bucket/platform at the end.

A tid-bit I gleaned from the Lohud piece was one of the B'Ville officers had started with the NYPD. Another with the MVPD. That's what originally made me so angry about what the city of White Plains did to these cops and firefighters. When a cop transfers from one place with job security, under the assumption that the new employer understands what that employee is giving up to come over to job, it is the height of irresponsibility for that municipality to then turn around and lay-off the employee.
Lay-offs can literally destroy lives. If a municipality is going to take on an employee in civil service, they should damn well know how and what their financial health is going to be going forward. Otherwise, don't hire in the first place! I'm sure the officer would have gladly held onto his position in the NYPD if there was any indication from White Plains that maybe they wouldn't be able to fund his position in a couple of years. White Plains should have made it clear to their new hires, especially the transferee's, that the chance of lay-offs loomed in the near future. Then if a person decides to take that chance; well at least they know what they're getting into.
I still say SHAME on White Plains, and that city has an obligation to all laid off cops & FFs to follow up with support services to help get all of them placed or rehired. Until then, I hope the mayor and city council carry it heavily on their consciences, and they don't sleep at night.

I know you tried to explain this statement in a subsequent post, but you're missing FFEMT150's point competely.
He is not saying that the volunteers signed up to volunteer, but now want paychecks. He is saying there aren't enough people in the community that want to volunteer, so it becomes impossible for the EXISTING volunteers to make all the calls... hense the need for career EMTs.
Career members aren't expected to make all of the calls in their district, and neither are volunteers. A volunteers system's strength is in numbers. A career FF (and probably EMT) usually makes 25% of the total calls in their district. I know many volunteers that make 40-60% of the total calls in their district in an effort to pick up the slack from the lack of NUMBERS of volunteers.

Don't you think you are going a little overboard here? They identified the problem, tried several options in attempts to rectify the problem, and have come up with this solution. Almost every place in this area has gone through growing pains. What do you think people were saying back in the 1850's when there was talk of a paid fire department in NYC? Some were for it, some were against it. Except for preplanned cities and towns down south and out west, almost every place has gone from volunteer to some sort of combination to paid. What are the taxpayers willing to support? That is the question. Everyone can ponificate about what is best and who should be doing what but it all boils down to what are the taxpayers willing to support. All taxpayers want the lowest taxes but the highest level of service. All the taxpayer wants to see is a shiny rig show up with flashing lights when they call 911. And they don't give a hoot about anyone else's call to 911. If you ever want to witness someone having a coronary, just show them on paper whar they will have to pay for an appropriatetly staffed fire department 24/7/365.

There was no little face picture that was vomiting, so you'll just have to imagine that's what I'm running to do right now......
Not for one second did anyone look at this with a level head. Nope, we're just going to give the family 7 mil and name a street after this guy. So now we name streets after political and sports hero's, firemen and cops who suffer LODD and apparently, guys who try to run over cops and get shot in self defense.....
If only 5 bullets had been fired, and this guy was still dead, would we be having this discussion? I know NOTHING about police training, but I know how easy it is to fire a handgun and I know they carry a lot of bullets. If I was almost hit by a car intentionally, or saw my partner almost hit by a car intentionally at 4am in a lousy neighborhood, I'd shoot a lot. If the result of this whole lawsuit is some additional training for cops, fine, whatever the politicians need to make them feel better. However, to pay the family of a man who was killed in this manner sets BAD precedent.
Everyone loves to forget that this was a guy who was out at a sleazy strip-club, suspected to be a drug spot, in a high crime area only HOURS before he was supposed to get married. (what kind of lifestyle is that anyway?) He was in an altercation witnessed by cops and there was some scuttle about a gun. They got in a car and tried to hit the cop who attempted to stop them. I guess that action isn't supposed to have any consequences?
The deck is stacked against the cops everyday. I work in the most economically depressed area in NYC with high crime and I watch what the cops are up against everyday. They are the enemy to many everywhere they go and that's a tough position to be up against. Do we really need to neuter the cops ability to enforce law and keep order?

A lot of great discussions going on. One thing to consider when discussing front door vs. back door is that we never see the rear door in this video so it's hard to make a judgement call on that. In terms of pushing the fire from the unburned side vs. getting to it quickly, I would think that knowing that a fire doubles every minute, and thinking that how much fire are you going to "push" with water, I would go for the quick attack. However, I haven't worked enough fires to speak on that with authority... but it's something I will pay attention to more in the future.
I think the PPV issue is pretty much settled. It is primarily for overcooked food, Oil burner out of adjustment, or afer overhaul has been completed and confirmed by the thermal camera.
As far as using NPV vs PPV, I would think that wherever PPV should NOT be used, NPV should NOT be used either. If the danger is introducing air into a flamable environment, both are equally dangerous. You have to look at a house as a Control Volume. Flow in = flow out. Houses are not air tight. If PPV is dangerous because it's forcing air into the house, then air is going out somewhere. You can't really pressurize a house to any notable degree, but you do create air flow. Even if a house is closed up everywhere besides the fan door (the issue when PROPER ventilation hasn't happened), air goes out the cracks and eves of a house. Using the same logic, when you turn the same fan around and use negative pressure, you're sucking in air from all these cracks and eves and you're creating a fresh air flow EQUAL to the PPV setup, and therefor it's equally as dangerous.
Edit: Just watched the video that efdcapt115 posted. I didn't not expect those guys to come out alive. That was amazing. I can personally and honestly say that these videos have scared the S out of me and I'm glad I found them because I had not payed much attention to this issue prior, nor do I remember it being covered in FF1/2.

I posted a video in the videoshare forum about using PPV at the wrong time. VES PPV Link I got some PM replies because it appears you can't reply in that forum. It's a very educational video and I thought we could have a constructive conversation about when to use what type of ventilation. I always thought you use natural vertical and horizontal ventilation (when possible) during fire extinguishment and forced positive or negative after extinguishment.
My first question is when and why would you used forced negative vs. positive ventilation? Pros/cons?

I posted a video in the videoshare forum about using PPV at the wrong time. VES PPV Link I got some PM replies because it appears you can't reply in that forum. It's a very educational video and I thought we could have a constructive conversation about when to use what type of ventilation. I always thought you use natural vertical and horizontal ventilation (when possible) during fire extinguishment and forced positive or negative after extinguishment.
My first question is when and why would you used forced negative vs. positive ventilation? Pros/cons?

Wow, I love how everyone dismisses a younger member's claims. Like not one of the veteran guys have seen an organization acting like a current members only club? Come on. Personally, I have witnessed and or heard of this happening often and regardless of the original poster's issues, it needs to stop. In a time where work weeks are increasing in hours and jobs are harder to find, volunteers are harder and harder to come by. Every organization that even thinks of asking for someone to sacrifice their time should be doing everything they can to allow volunteers to give their time, not throw up antiquated and prideful barriers. I understand response times, but if a member can get there in a good time, who cares wheres he's coming from?? If my organization relied on members who lived in there area, guess what we would have three members, all the rest come from outside the area, and some from signifigant distances. If companies are worried about response times, make members coming from a longer distance stand full tours in house so their response time won't be an issue, and as a matter of fact the response time of the company would be better b/c there's memebers at the house. Everyone always complains about volunteers killing xyz service...how about current administrations????

I would think that dispatch would know to send the appropriate initial responses for a structure fire. It was called in as a struct fire. If this was an alarm activation and the member got on scene first and realized it was actually a structure fire, then yes, fill out the box, call for more M/A, etc.
The fact that this is a small DETACHED garage makes a big difference. If it were attached to a house, yes, send everybody.

Interesting topic. I think as much as you hear about cops being the first to report a fire, I think it has to still be less than 1% of all fires. You probably hear about it because it's a good story, and most of the regular means of discovering a fire aren't reported. The probability (number of cops vs. civilians and alarm systems) just isn't on their side.
However, I would be interested to hear what cops are taught about fires. The first thing that comes to mind that they could/should be able to do is do a 360, talk to neighbors and find out if the building is occupied. They should be able to relay to the first due engine where the fire is in the structure and if there are occupants. Beyond that, I don't know what else they could do.
That FIT-5 Pro is very cool... but at $1000, it's doubtful that it could be supplied in enough quantity to be effective (ie. be in a majority of cruisers)

Almost always, regardless of how the company is structured, is seems like volunteer officers control volunteer firefighters and career officers control volunteer officers and firefighters.
The important thing is to stay curteous on scene. As a volunteer Lieu, would gladly accept a command from a career firefighter on scene if it made sense. When I'm working with a career Lieu or above, I always consult with him about the direction to take. In combination departments, the career FFs and officer would naturally work together because they ride together and arrive together. When the vollies get to the scene they meet up with their officer and do what needs to be done.
This only becomes a big issue if someone on either side is a hot head. I find it very important to get a second opinion whenever possible because someone else may see/know something you didn't.