antiquefirelt

This is exactly why burning a house is a violation of the open burning laws.

I'm sorry but I just can't see how a LE/Fire model can work and save money? Both jobs present incidents that require resources be dedicated to the incident, so if there are not enough resources to do both, one or the other (maybe whichever incident is second) will be neglected. If you have the resources to do both, why not "specialize" and just do one or the other and be damn good at one, not half-arsed at both? I'd like to see a system that works and works well that also saves money. I'll bet those that think it works well and many of us wouldn't agree. How about ongoing training? LE officers only learn to shoot once? Firefighters only need to pass FF1&2 then they're ready for the rest of their careers? Not hardly. It's not that I don't believe LE officers are capable as of course they surely are. It's a priorities issue and LE has some significant mandates on them to follow very specific courses of action. If the Fire Service was more like LE in this regard we couldn't complain about how there are two standards for the FS, volunteer and career.

Did the taxpayers pay for the decals thanking them? Trust me, some taxpayers here would be pissed at the irony of spending more tax dollars thanking them for something they wish they had more control over. Just saying, anyone can find controversy if they're looking for it.

God life is sorry freaking boring up here in the NE corner of the country. Here all the wives think this stuff takes place when it doesn't. Maybe these guys said, "Hell if we're going to be accused of it, why not do it!"

In this state and likely yours the open burning laws prevent burning of anything but clean unpainted wood. Most likely the person is violating the open burning law and therefore like debris fires that we extinguish on anyone's property, a house fire should be extinguished. As a mater of fact, our state is now putting far more difficult regulations on the FD using acquired structures for live fire training due to environmental concerns. These include having a certified test that no asbestos or lead paint is present and any hazardous materials have been removed.

Not on the posted subject but... If you truly believe the above list of priorities than can we assume that you never run lights and sirens to calls? If your life is first all the time, how do you explain increasing the risks to your own life and that of your crew by running Code 3? I certainly don't advocate suicidal risk taking, but this me first attitude taken to the degree that it's listed out? You'd better hope the public doesn't see this and wonder why they pay firefighters more than DPW guys.

17 year old boy drowned in the town next to mine Friday. Reportedly four boys were swimming across the lake and one turned back but never made it ashore. I'm certain like the thread name they'll all report not hearing a thing, given that exhaustion generally precedes drowning. Same thing with a 19 year old off our lighthouse last summer. All bystanders said they watched he just slip under with no noticeable distress.Sadly, no one attempted to help him and our first due arrived over 10 minutes later as this was 1/2 mile out a "breakwater" by foot. By then no one could pinpoint his location and no dive team is readily available. basically any dive team ops in our area will be recoverys due to the response time. http://knox.villagesoup.com/news/story/body-of-missing-swimmer-found-in-megunticook-lake/340849

To echo this, I'd add that regardless who's the stated IC, the highest ranking FD officer onscene will be held responsible. There's a lot of FD's trying to combine NIMS into their ICS structure and failing. ICS is a component of NIMS, but you don't need NIMS to use the ICS system most of us have used for all of our careers. I have no knowledge of this incident or Pelham FD, but I can attest that there's times when a Lt. could be the IC at any incident in our first due. It would be extremely rare that a chief officer would not respond to anything greater than a first alarm, but in theory with vacations, mandatory meetings and other commitments, it's possible. While the Lt. may opt to illicit assistance from a M/A chief per our adopted city emergency management ordinances, our officer will serve as IC.

Great pics. Sorry I missed the show this year, it's always nice to see new layouts, innovative apparatus ideas and tool mounting options. I'm surprised at the "mirror finished" doors on Sandy Hook's engine. I'd think that approaching motorists would be a hazard for personnel as driver's may "lose" their vision from the glare/reflection. Not to mention just the bouncing emergency lights and such typically found on scene would be further reflected. I do like he chevron cover tool board.

I'd note that this is far from how many proponents of PPA (Positive Pressure Attack)see this tactic being used. It like so many other tactics is about knowing and controlling the variables.

I cannot disagree with your tactic of attacking the fire. It's a proven valid tactic that has worked for nearly ever. We of course employed this routinely as a matter of course until about 10 years ago. Having read many experienced authors on the topic we decided to review our basic residential plan and make the change. Some of the pitfalls we'd encountered in the past were officers always trying to go from unburned to burned and this delayed water on the fire due to extended stretches and more difficult routes to stretch. The amount of fire at the front door, the relative size and compartmentalization of the occupancy both are factors that would have to be considered. In the case on the video, I think we'd have tried to KO the fire at the door if we did not recognize this a basement fire to start (hope so?). I want to clarify that we do require our officers complete a 360 degree size-up whenever possible or as close as can be completed. The issue is not that we find another way in, as inside the front door of most of our residential occupancies leads to the main egress path of the occupants and stairwells. Rather the walk around is to gain a full grasp on the situation, which is not to say we wouldn't find something to vary from the standard plan, but it would be a variation none-the-less. For us, an understaffed first alarm FD, getting the initial line in place between the stairs (read chimney) and the fire is huge. This first line very often will not be backed up soon enough and the guys making the search will often do so relying on that line to protect the upper floors. As with anything, there's no "always" or "never's", but our basic tactical plan for residential occupancies is very clear with little room for interpretation of the tactic. On the other hand if the initial officer finds circumstances that lead him to attack from another opening, that of course is his option. After the fire the first question will be "what is our basic residential tactic?" Once he answers this question, proving he did know the expected course of action, he is free to explain why it was not the best option at this particular incident. I've only seen this bite an officer once, where the officer could not explain the proper tactic from the SOG. His choice was valid, but the problem was not failing to follow the "front door tactic" but rather failing to know it. I'd certainly question attempting PPA/PPV from the opposite side of the house as the attack line. This of course is secondary to using PPV above the fire which can lead to rapid unanticipated fire, smoke and heat travel. In a poorly vented basement the PPV could hold the heat smoke and fire down in the lower level having the exact opposite effect that we're trying for. Another scenario allows the Venturi effect to draw the fire up into the above space in locations not anticipated.

I truly beleive there are some fundamental differences in the places who successfully use PPV vs. those who can't make it work safely and discard it's use. Obviously both sides have good points, the real issues are the "indications" and contraindications". Without a doubt PPV works and works well in many controlled fireground settings. I say controlled in that we know some basics: where the fire is, the building construction (where the fire is going), the path between the injection point and the exhaust point, and the relative area of any victims. My FD tried for years to implement PPA/PPV with poor results. Short of some minor training points, I observed a two things that make me feel this may not be as valid a tactic in the Northeast as it is the Southeast or Southwest. 1. Here in the Northeast we have a larger percentage of old housing stock. More woodframe balloon construction, which unless it remains well intact should be a contra indication of PPA. Also basements/cellars are more prevalent and fires below the level of attack should be another contraindication. We seem to have an inordinate number of frame houses converted into multiple dwellings causing numerous ways to block the injection/exhaust pathway leading to pressurization of unanticipated areas. 2. Climate control. The places that see longer hotter summers have central AC or whole house HVAC, while in the northeast many folks only need the A/C a few weeks a year and resort to window opening/closing to cool their homes/units. This leads to buildings where we can't control the exhaust openings to properly utilize the PPA/PPV for superheated smoke and fire for longer periods (spring/summer/fall season). In the winter many old homes are closed up by closing all the doors or even using insulation board to close of whole second/third floors. Again, this blocks the anticipated injection/exhaust pathway. Look at the bigger proponents of PPA and you'll see Salt Lake City, some Florida FD's, many Cali FD's and many more. Ask yourself how old their housing/building stock is compared to yours. The video provided shows them breaking some of the "rules of PPV" as well as some basic rules some of us beleive in. My FD subscribes to the residential front door attack. Unlike these folks and WRaftery's FD, we actaully would have chosen the front door 99% of the time. Rather than "push the fire from the unburned to the burned" we choose to make the attack through the point which quickest gets the line between the occupants and/or stairs and the fire. With a few notable exceptions (Shotgun Shacks in TX and single wide trailers) we follow this basic plan of attack. The unburned to burned is in our eyes, a hold over from the days of 1.5" lines where we literally pushed the fire using fog streams and lower flows. Today we bring the correct weapon to the fight and extinguish the fire at the seat, rather than push it at all. I realize this is not how many FD's have been taught or practice, but it works well for us and we find we can get a line into position much faster most of the time. Finding an alternative entrance generally requires more homes, more turns, more time and often fails to secure the interior stairs. So to tie this back to PPA/PPV our fan would almost always be at the front door, but alas we (mostly) only use it after the knock.

I'm less tolerant I guess, but if you have nothing to hide, then you submit to one of the test options granted. If not, your license is revoked. This is basically an admission of guilt as you're given a choice to prove you're sober and choose not to. SO the difference is the jail time served for a guilty conviction of DUI? Nonetheless the suspect has little choice, if they wish to keep their driver's license, but to submit to a test. I choose not to be nor allow our people to be the tester. Pretty simple, you're on the "bad guy" end of the system as the tester in the eyes of the suspect, a position EMS personnel should not be in. You want to play cop, go be one.

Is failure to consent an automatic charge?

The article notes in this case the total compensation average is $229K!. The "salary" as put into the article includes base, overtime and incentives like holiday pay and sick time buy back (or similar).

So life as a firefighter making $175K a year is pretty good?

I wondered how they came up with $3 million for a single truck co. until I saw the wages. Clearly the cost of living must be pretty high there, but average FF compensation of $172K? That's going to be a tough sell. The article fails to explain the travel distance/time for the contracted truck service. Most readers will not likely see the whole picture without being given the information. What will this do to the ISO rating of the city? How will it effect larger commercial properties insurance rates? How long before vertical ventilation can actually be facilitated? Rescues over ground ladder heights?

If you think you can get 15-20 years out of anything new now a days, you'll be sadly mistaken. Not to mention the changes in EMS equipment and box safety over that kind of time frame. I cannot agree more on the FORD's though, our's are absolutely the worst with non-stop issues.

Did they not close the Ephrata plant last May (2009)? Last I'd read FDNY and Ferrara officials were seen looking at the Ephrata plant a couple of months ago.

So much for hope!

No data, as I noted I can see far greater potential issues than those rising from medical necessity cases. As EMS providers we're not charged with helping every other member of society that the patient puts at risk. Or maybe LE should be able to call us to give Versed to combative perps who are kick the crap out o the cruisers? In fact I'm not sure you can call the alleged drunk driver a patient unless he/she has been injured in an MVA? Anyway, I really have no issue with dept's doing what they feel is best for their community, but I personally think this will blur the lies between care provider and law enforcement adjunct. Having seen many drunk drivers try all sorts of antics to get out of the charge, I think we'd be adding to the list of potential avenues for them to explore. As I said, no issue here, our personnel are banned from performing these tasks while acting in any capacity of our dept. and the local PD's know this.

I can tell you first hand that many a drunken a-hole remembers the EMS providers that have treated them before. Maybe due to the relatively small population by comparison in the suburbs of NYC this is far less a concern. On the second case, most medics we employ are very aggressive, as part of the admin side of the FD, we must rein people in and ensure their decisions are in the best interest of 1)the patient, 2) the city and 3) the individual provider. Starting line or stick, "because I can" is a real problem with many medics and one that policy makers and legal counsel dread. Let's not pretend medics don't put large bores in drunks while babying grandma. How about green medics sticking everyone they can find a remote protocol to cover as they feel their oats? Bad sticks are very rare, but so are the patients that don't want you to stick them. While many don't like IVs or needles, most understand the necessity of their treatment and accept we're helping them. Drawing blood for DUI's is not helping the person being stuck. People are very creative in how they fight prosecution, I'd not want ot be the medic dragged into court, nor the department who employees the same.

Oh I'd love to be charged with that! First it would have to be a lawful order by an officer, which I'm doubting most would do.

I beleive they shut down their PA operations and seem to be selling off everything that isn't need at the new plant in SC.

Maine EMT-Intermediate level and above (medics) are taught to draw blood directly without the IV stick.This is the case for thse blood draws here. But I agree teach cops, it's not difficult and it's their case.Another reason to avoid this is the opening of liability every time you penetrate a person's skin. Unlike starting an IV, injecting protocol drugs or making a blood glucose stick which are EMS necessities, the subject in this case is not happy you're doing this and are more likely to try and allege improper practice, poor technique, unsanitary procedure or anything else their lawyer can sue you for.