Dinosaur

You know the consolidation of volunteer departments without the addition of any paid personnel could be a significant improvement over the completely arcane system we have now. Everyone immediately assumes that consolidation implies paid but it doesn't! How about merging 4-5 districts that serve the same town? Or the countless villages that rely heavily on each other and are smaller than a postage stamp.
Imagine a River Towns or Sound Shore or North County Fire District with several former departments under one hierarchy. Economies of scale in purchasing, reduction of apparatus numbers (and the ability to have "spares", something virtually non-existent outside the big cities), higher personnel counts, standard training, administration and operations, to name a few.
A member department with strengths in one area can help one weak in that area and so on. Officers can be vetted from a larger pool of candidates improving the quality, competition, and ultimately performance. Chiefs will oversee a bigger department giving them more experience. Budgets can be consolidated perhaps reducing the overall cost to the taxpayer.
There's a lot to be said for consolidating and it doesn't mean adding ONE paid guy.

Not going there

Well, I would suggest that geography is ever changing. This house was reported to be more remote than most. Tougher access to the operating pumper, perhaps longer distances to a tanker fill site, ect. There are tons of variables here and we have to trust the IC's decision to request X number of tankers.
As for the "system" and time of day....
I agree completely, but that's a different discusion....and a much bigger one.

Not sure how consolidation fits into this discussion. Needing eight tankers is needing 8 tankers. True that a county department would (hopefully) allocate resources in a more even fashion so areas with the need for tankers would have them. But anyway...
For those of you not familiar with tanker operations, there is a formula that determines how many tankers you will need. For example, a 2000 gallon tanker driving a three mile loop can only supply 150 gallons per minute. Sooo, if they were flowing 1200 gallons a minute, they would need...8 tankers. Or if the three miles was over crappy roads, you just might need the 8 tankers to flow even less water. Having been a water supply officer on a similar fire, until all those tankers get in the right line, and into the flow, it seems like more, more, more is the answer.

As the Operations officer at this incident I think I can shed some light on this situation. First, the property conditions that first due units encountered where deplorable. The entire property was covered in 18-20 inches of snow with one, 12 inch wide footpath barely shoveled to the front door. The initial stretch alone was extremely strenuous and taxing on the manpower.
Once interior, crews encountered extreme Colliers Mansion conditions, preventing them from making an expedient advance on the fire on the first floor. The basement, where the heaviest fire was encountered, was a whole different story. Upon making entry to the basement, crews dealt with floor to ceiling junk as well as a well seasoned pile of firewood and the contents of of a woodworking shop.
As far as the apparatus on scene; in that geographical location, due to the lack of hydrants, we were operating from our tanker district alarm assignments, which brings more tankers than manpower carrying apparatus. The time of day is tough on manpower regardless of conditions. Factor in the conditions, and your burning through fresh bodies faster than you can get them there.
In closing, I would like to personally thank all Mutual aid departments for their quick response and assistance.

Just asking because I don't understand the situation. Shouldn't the city and the PD be paying for this?

Just asking because I don't understand the situation. Shouldn't the city and the PD be paying for this?

Its not being mum. He took $20,000,000 last year and got away with it so he figured he could get away with $50,000,000 this year. That's not being mum....its speaking volumes.

BTW- There's no such thing as "Extra" units in the Fire Service.
JMO

I don't believe that any fire departments have "extra" units. They may have "more" units but the politicians make sure nobody has extra anything!

I don't believe that any fire departments have "extra" units. They may have "more" units but the politicians make sure nobody has extra anything!

I believe that I heard it was in the neighborhood of 400K but don't hold me to that. It is NOT first-hand info.

Yesterday 02-15 -2015- By noon-ish, FDNY had responded to 11 all hands fires. Add 2 more around 1315ish and Per NYCFIREWIRE, as of 1500, 15 All Hands, 3 2nd alarms. just saying and I admit I am from Elsewhere... I am not really trying to start anything, I am just trying to figure out what your trying to say , Engine 82's Big year was nearly 9,000 over the course of Many years an Average of 6,000 is pretty realistic

That is just asinine. Using that logic EMS should have gotten 600 RMA's at the MNRR train accident a couple weeks ago. Did they? Or did they just seperate those claiming injury from everyone else?
That PD has issues and the EMS agency is nuts if they put up with it.

I would tend to agree with you but I was told before I retired that our commercial EMS agency would write up everyone as a patient and have them RMA. I later found out that they billed for this. THAT changed my opinion on the subject

That was my point exactly in response to an earlier post about it not being local tax money.
Taxes are taxes and waste is waste..

The only one in our area that I can think of is North Hudson Regional Fire Department in NJ, I think that was a merger of 5 departments, all career. I remember reading some news about it when it happened, but again I don't know the internal details. It does seem to be working though.
I know they closed at least one station due to two towns having stations a few blocks from each other. I think however the staffing was only reduced by attrition to accomplish that. So while there was an overall reduction, nobody lost their jobs that I know of.

Can you give us the reference you are using for this information? Who "mandated" the function for the use of the METU?
It seems to me that Westchester made a calculated choice to opt out of using the vehicle for a variety of assignments the way other UASI partners are. YPD has been using theirs with great success and I'm sure if there was a mandate prohibiting that they wouldn't be able to do it.
FDNY can use the vehicles for MCI and other things (see policy attached). It may just be less efficient in the city where ambulances are far more abundant than here in Westchester.
To think that a vehicle that can transport two dozen people (or more) sits idly by while ambulances have to be summoned from around the county just doesn't make any sense. With the airport, railroads, high-rises, and other significant hazards in the county to limit the resource to only nursing home evacuations is unwise. Especially when you consider how fragmented and inadequate the EMS system is in the county. It is almost as if the county just wants the toys but not the responsibility of using them.
When has a nursing home in Westchester County ever had to be evacuated? How about in the UASI territory?
I heard the same thing. FD/PD/EMS operating at a serious MVA on the parkway "witnessed" the train accident.

Much of what you wrote I agree with, but a few items....
1) "how well a major MCI can be handled." - Nothing against any of the responders because it sounds like they did a fine job, but there were about a dozen patients transported and that is not a "major" MCI. what if the train had derailed? what if it had tipped over? From an MCI stand point this was a very minor event that could have been catastrophic.
2) "where is there boundary?" (60 Control) - While I do not always agree with WHAT their boundaries are, the chiefs all know WHERE they are.
3) "It isn't realistic calling departments from literally miles away to go to the scene or standby when you have resources closer by." - Sometimes it is. Again stripping every resource in an area makes no sense, but also sometimes departments that are farther away can get there faster because, they get out quicker, or they can respond via highways vs back roads or because they are staffed.

Since when is discussing the lack of standards or a cohesive system "petty bickering"?

You hit the nail squarely on the head. We spend a lot of money (how it is paid for is irrelevant) on shinny equipment that is paraded out by a local politician that shows how he/she cares for his/her constituents. After the dog and pony show, said modern wonder sits rotting somewhere and may not be ever used again. But we can say we are prepared for the next big one. Grant money should be used in a way that maximizes its return. If a vehicle is needed, make it so it has multi functions. Grants for upgraded turnout gear- fine.

Even if the primary use is to evacuate hospitals and nursing homes, I see no reasons why they could not also be pressed into service in a MCI for treatment. In the past we have used school buses or transit buses to transport large numbers of people. I am old enough to remember when every U.S. Mail truck was convertible to an Ambulance and all had the "CD" logo on them because they were Civil Defense resources. How is it superior to put an EMT on a school bus than on an METU?

Can you give us the reference you are using for this information? Who "mandated" the function for the use of the METU?
It seems to me that Westchester made a calculated choice to opt out of using the vehicle for a variety of assignments the way other UASI partners are. YPD has been using theirs with great success and I'm sure if there was a mandate prohibiting that they wouldn't be able to do it.
FDNY can use the vehicles for MCI and other things (see policy attached). It may just be less efficient in the city where ambulances are far more abundant than here in Westchester.
To think that a vehicle that can transport two dozen people (or more) sits idly by while ambulances have to be summoned from around the county just doesn't make any sense. With the airport, railroads, high-rises, and other significant hazards in the county to limit the resource to only nursing home evacuations is unwise. Especially when you consider how fragmented and inadequate the EMS system is in the county. It is almost as if the county just wants the toys but not the responsibility of using them.
When has a nursing home in Westchester County ever had to be evacuated? How about in the UASI territory?
I heard the same thing. FD/PD/EMS operating at a serious MVA on the parkway "witnessed" the train accident.

I haven't been to a lot of train accidents but if you factor in the car being demolished and gas tank rupturing, sparks from the wreck and train braking and electricity from 3rd rail it's no surprise that there was a fireball.

Can you give us the reference you are using for this information? Who "mandated" the function for the use of the METU?
It seems to me that Westchester made a calculated choice to opt out of using the vehicle for a variety of assignments the way other UASI partners are. YPD has been using theirs with great success and I'm sure if there was a mandate prohibiting that they wouldn't be able to do it.
FDNY can use the vehicles for MCI and other things (see policy attached). It may just be less efficient in the city where ambulances are far more abundant than here in Westchester.
To think that a vehicle that can transport two dozen people (or more) sits idly by while ambulances have to be summoned from around the county just doesn't make any sense. With the airport, railroads, high-rises, and other significant hazards in the county to limit the resource to only nursing home evacuations is unwise. Especially when you consider how fragmented and inadequate the EMS system is in the county. It is almost as if the county just wants the toys but not the responsibility of using them.
When has a nursing home in Westchester County ever had to be evacuated? How about in the UASI territory?
I heard the same thing. FD/PD/EMS operating at a serious MVA on the parkway "witnessed" the train accident.