firstdue

It's in service as of 16:00 today

Wow! Is it in service yet? Looks amazing! Does it only have the Q2B, or another siren?

Somers:
Fire calls - 542
EMS calls - 1,688

Pound Ridge - 292

Dobbs Ferry - 362

Somers:
Fire calls - 542
EMS calls - 1,688

Yorktown - 602

Elmsford:
Fire calls - 642
EMS calls - 513

Yorktown - 602

Elmsford:
Fire calls - 642
EMS calls - 513

Somers:
Fire calls - 542
EMS calls - 1,688

Dobbs Ferry - 362

Pound Ridge - 292

First, no hoseline because the Truck company arrived first and no Engine was on scene yet in the video. Secondly, as "M' Ave" pointed out they took a dash inside, save your air for when you need it. I don't have a issue with what they did (as far as masks) if they felt they were good to go in then so be it whats it matter to the rest of us? Personal choice.

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

I glanced over it. Nothing I have not heard before at a conferance. I would say "fire is best suppressed from the outside in" is a pretty well rounded general idea of the content in the article.
They mention a lot of tactics in this article. I can agree with some, but not all of the points.
What do imagine a heavy volume of fire is to you? Contents? Fully involved room? 2 rooms? Through the roof?
Im sure you've been around the block and nobody has to tell you...You would be surprised what an 13/4" with a smooth bore and a set between your legs could do. Hell, a lot of Departments are going to 2" with smoothbore for even more GPM and unnoticeable maneuverability differences...
I feel a lot of peoples idea of "heavy fire load"are off in proportion due to the lack lack of fires today all together. Im waiting for the chief to call the 2nd alarm for a smoking cigarette butt on the sidewalk.
Im not saying the tactics in this video are the right ones...but it goes to show you a little aggression can do a lot.
Im a firm believer in quick response, making the stretch, and getting to the fire room.

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

Research also shows that a nozzle firemn' inside a fire room is like an adrenaline junkie, pig in s*** causing a chemical reaction in the brain of hapiness and accomplishment when the job is done.
Lets admit, we are all stubborn firemn' and this is the real reason none of us will ever agree with these "studies". Thank you for taking the time to find out fire is best suppressed from the outside in but im going to stick with what I was taught 9 years ago. I will also be teaching my kids the same.
(here come the safety nazi's with the firefighter fatality reports...right abouuuuut....
NOW. [by the way im healthy and not heart attack prone.] )
Watch this first: "TRUE VALUES OF A FIREMAN"
Part 1-
Part 2-

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

As I said I'm not sold on "hitting it from the yard" concept, but you know what, if a tactic works for you then it works for you...and that's great. But what it comes down to is what everything we do on the fireground comes down to...training. If a department has chosen to embrace this method of fire attack than they must follow through with training all their personnel thoroughly on the ins and outs of utilizing it. It was mentioned earlier about hitting the fire for a quick shot of about 30 or so seconds to "reset" the fire and cool the interior. Well everyone that may lay their hands on that nozzle has to know exactly what that means. Having been to a few fires over the years I've learned a thing or two and one of the most common mistakes I see often, in town and out, paid and volunteer, is members having a tool or line in their hands and using it simply because they do..."oh look there's fire coming out of that window..well I have a line here so I'll just hit it quick to knock it down for the guys inside"..as those interior members get lobsterized.
Training is the bedrock on which all of our tactics should rest and when incorporating something "new" that training should take on even more significance until that foundation is firm...at least IMHO.

I'm not a proponent of the "transitional attack", but that doesn't mean it doesn't have it's place. This tactic, like all tactics, has it's use, but one thing I find disturbing is that some have now begun to advocate using this method for attacking just about every fire...and no matter what the justification, that my friends is a very dangerous mindset to get into. We don't, nor can we, operate in a one size fits all or "magic bullet" mentality, at least not if we want to maintain what is at the core of our mission..saving lives....civilian lives. We have the training, they do not. We have the equipment, they do not. We have the experience, they do not. And lastly, they are the reason we are here...it is our duty to put "them" before "us" when they are in trouble...after all, that's why they called us.
Ray has it right, so much so that it bears repeating....
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

FDNY does not regularly do this. The FDNY prides itself on aggressive interior attack.
As far as the discussion goes, making conditions more tenable sounds great except, 75% of fire victims die from smoke inhalation. Flowing water through a window to make conditions more "tenable" for firefighters to enter won't save victims. Getting them out of the building will. Since when does a firefighter put the rescue of a civilian at the bottom of the list? The training of firefighters is about developing skills. Firefighters are taught to put out fires from the interior advancing through a structure a certain way. These are just the basics and the basics take time and is not something that is taught in 5 minutes. Firefighters who have battled fires from the inside learn from experience and repetition how to do it better and more effective which allows firefighters to have the skill levels to extinguish fires from inside. When a firefighter shoots a stream through a window all of the skill development is over. There is no skill level to that and only lowers our skills and is a fire service failure. Another example of fire service failure is that we still have firefighters who cannot operate a 2.5 inch line due to poor technique and education.
"A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY
http://www.firehouse.com/blog/10631380/transitional-attack-is-whack

I do agree that this tactic has it's place. With that said i am not a proponent of it. As FFPCogs and BBBMF stated, the scary part is that there are departments out there that are using this tactic at every fire they go to and are in fact not going interior and are standing outside shooting water through a window. You can not look at this as a one size fits all. IMO, you can push fire despite what is suggested with these studies. I also think that when we debate about this there are too many variables involved. Is the structure so involved that hitting it from the exterior for a few seconds necessary just to enter? Or are we talking about a one or two room fire and are hitting it from outside just because it is too hot that you don't want to enter or whatever the excuse may be? If its the latter, you should think about doing something else because being a fireman isn't for you.