antiquefirelt

I'm sorry, but beware the person who says they know it and don't need to learn it in class. Everyone from the 15 year old Junior FF to the Chief of Dept. in the FDNY has something to learn. Only a small portion of FLIPS is FDNY specific and that is an extra week that doesn't include the "upstaters". 200 hours of class to learn how to lead a company of 5 men/women into a fire is nothing. FDNY proby school was almost 1,000 hours in total and when I got out I was still just a proby who knew nothing about nothing. Now I'm the Johnny who knows a little about nothing. For an officer, 200 hours only scratches the surface as far as tactics and personnel management are concerned, but I think that like all course work, it gives us the tools with which to maximize the effect of our experience. This is why newly promoted Captains are sent to the Captains Development courses and likewise for Battalion Chiefs and on and on...
There is always something new you need to learn.
In the volunteer service, it would be nice if prior work experience or professional position could be factored into officer candidacy. If you're involved in the emergency services as a career, that's a little extra experience brought to the table. Perhaps someone is a personnel manager in their professional life and has a leg up on delegating responsibility and separating themselves from the rank and file.
Tying this back to the original question about career and volunteer officers in a combo dept; there doesn't need to be a separation. With a tightly regulated promotion program in the career side, the onus is on the volunteer organization to insure proper legitimacy of fire officers. Some departments do this very well by strictly enforcing a very high training standard and assigning meaningful responsibility. However, the 21 year old who joined at 18, never had a job, barely has the min. training requirements and was simply voted into an officers position is the problem. Weak standards hurt rank as a whole, because many people don't know the difference between the guy who's doing it as a career and their neighbor who's looking out for them at the sound of the alarm horns.

How much 690K?

Damn, whining about a $620K engine? Get a real problem. While many of us wouldn't want a Beta model engine, Crimson has built plenty of apparatus to be a significant contender. Having looked into them a bit for our last purchase, the only downside I ever heard of was regarding local dealers, nothing about the builder.

I'm not looking to argue either, but the more accurate statement would be that each department is going to do what it feels like doing and what it thinks is the best for it. Regardless, what works best for the department may not exactly be what works best for the citizens and the community. Just look at the Stamford threads because I think you'd have a pretty hard time arguing that whatever is going on there is truly best for the citizens and the community.

Yikes....a tiller AND a quint...
...seems like someone set out to win the most over complicated apparatus award. At some point, IMHO, we're trying to do too much with one vehicle. We're getting so complex that we get to a point where we have something that does everything, but nothing well. It carries tons of equipment, but it's too big to manage, ect. ect. There are other examples for sure. Tillers are lousy for the volunteer service, as it's difficult enough to get drivers. Now we need two? Not a good plan. Tractor trailers are too big for most urban environments. They're just too ungainly to navigate during emergency response. A tractor trailer unit might make sense for a special unit designed for limited responses or prolonged operations, but thats it. An example of another approach would be Hazmat 1 in NYC. They simply use two rigs for a response.
Lastly, Quints suck. They are little more than a band-aide that allows politicians to give us fewer pieces of equipment and short change us on manpower. They fall into the over-complicated catagory. Is it an engine? Is it a truck? From the firefighters perspective, what is your job a particular fire? From a management perspective, "who's doing what?" When you have engines and trucks coming in, the chief knows what is happening because everyone's positions are clearly defined. Most bread and butter jobs are well underway before the chief even arrives.
Okay....rant over.

I have to agree with JFLYNN, speculation will not help us. I'd even go further to say, that while all texts, programs and training are quick to point out secondary devices and warn first responders of ongoing dangers, our risk is likely still no greater than the typical American. We are informed responders, we should never be unsuspecting victims. This obviously is an across the board statement, as the dangers of this job do not start nor end with things that go boom. Those who think they know it all should leave emergency work now and stop burdeneing us with their complacency.
Causing death to emergency forces will strike no more fear into the country as a whole, than hurting civilians. We're still considered by many to have assumed heighten risks that accompany running toward emergencies when the public runs away. So while it's smart or even required to be fully aware situationally, I hesitate to consider us actual premeditated targets.

I appreciate your concern, and your obvious pride in being an AMerican and a member of emergency services. However, in my opinion a lot of what you have written is mere speculation and it is much too early to do that with the limited info we have at this time. To me, this seems like a very amateurish attempt and at this point who knows who tried to pull it off and what their intentions were?
In my opinion the individuals responsible for this incident will only be succesful if we let it have any effect on our daily lives or preoccupy our thoughts. Yes, we should pay attention to what happened and be vigilant and prepare ourselves for what may happen, but put it all in proper context, don't speculate, and don't make it out to be any worse than it actually was.

It's hard to tell what you're saying here, but I think you are generally supporting the medics actions as going above and beyond typical duties. I'd agree it should not be downplayed as no big deal as any firefighter would do the same. We could only hope that was true while knowing sadly far fewer would have acted so selflessly. I think maybe your wording sounded almost over the top and sarcastic.
So if you are actually supporting this mans actions I'd suggest the following: I would not call what this firefighter did a "stunt" and I would say that with the training and knowledge others here attribute to this man, I'd say that it was not "total disregard for his own life", but a calculated risk/benefit analysis requiring quick actions with significantly increased risks to his personal safety to save another's life .
And not to take anything away from this selfless act but a Presidential Medal of Freedom? I wouldn't want anything from a man who won the Nobel Prize for not being George W. Bush. I think the respect and praise of his Brother's is far more fitting. maybe a nod at the Firehouse Magazine Heroism Awards?

Interesting that they'd need a different law? Doesn't MA have a seatbelt law for all vehicles like the rest of us? If there's a seatbelt exemption, could it not be removed? This is why there no common sense left in government, because we'll wait until it's absolutely the law, when we actually know we should just do it anyway.
I mean no disrespect to any FD but if you can't get 80%+ compliance with seatbelts you have a leadership problem. Either the leadership doesn't care enough about the issue, when they should or they lack the ability to ensure compliance with the rules.

I have read your reply, sorry i am going to disagree on a couple of points. A firefighter isnt as good as the tools he has on his back or in his hands it is the tool on his shoulders. This member who did this act of entering the structure, I would hope, as a firefighter, used all his training in evaluating the situation, judged the risk vs benefit, and did what his firefighting background allowed him to do. Turnout gear doesnt make you a firefighter, it is whats inside that makes you a firefighter. This member of the fire service / ems did a hell of a job. And thats what separates us from the rest of the world.
GOOD JOB AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING A POSITIVE STORY ABOUT EMERGENCY SERVICES.

To be absolutely clear our senior men are those firefighters with the most time on our FD and holding no rank. There's one per shift and without a doubt the previous posters have really spoken to the best traits a senior man can have. But like so many other jobs, our senior men have positions have lost some position power due to the reduced age and time on of the total crew. Years ago, we had numerous guys with 20 plus years OTJ, now not one career person has over 17 years in this department! The seniormost firefighter has just ten years. These guys still do a good job, but the lack of fires and the heavily weight of EMS has sidelined a lot of tradition.
Our senior men are basically responsible for teaching the new guys everything they can in-house, while the proby is still married to the LT outside the bricks. If there is any question about how something is supposed to be, the senior man is the first stop. In our case in the absence of the shift Lt., the senior man (not the seniormost man) completes the daily log, otherwise it's left to the A/C to complete.
In my specific case, my senior man is ex-military which has a huge benefit, because he truly understands what it's like to do your job well, even when you don't like the task. He's great to keep the bitching to a low roar with a quick look or "STFU"! In a day where so many new people know so little about real work, a senior man who motivates the crew is a big plus. And of course you'll not see the term "senior man" in any written policy or guidelines. The position is one born out of tradtion and respect and has no contractual benefits, though the actual merits are palpable.

From the standpoint of an officer in a small department I can tell you that it is often difficult to change the past. In a small FD, everyone knows you, your past successes and more importantly-failures or weaknesses. While most people cannot actually change who they are, some can excel when they get a new start. Sometimes this is at promotion time. I've seen guys who spent to much time as firefighters become bored and subsequently less motivated, who when promoted excelled at the new challenge. Others have been passed over for the same reason. It would be nice to be able to lift a guy upon promotion and place him in a new environment.
At the time of my first promotions testing process, I had already passed on one due to being just barely eligible on time. I had seen many officers and knew what I liked and didn't like in an officer and was determined to use that to mold myself as an officer. Of course seeing and doing are worlds apart. I had to learn many lessons the hard way-by screwing them up! The stuff we study for on testing day is by far the easiest part of the job. I'd go to incidents all day every day, even complete the paperwork, but dealing with people and personalties is by far the most difficult part. Dealing with divorcing firefighters, one who are cheated on, those in bankruptcy, or those who are bored with their job or life are the real challenges in firehouse life.
Treat people how you'd want to be treated. Most of our guys are adults (legally 100%) and should be treated as such. There are more than 5 ways to do almost anything, yet some officers feel the need to micromanage every task to have it done their way. I'd much rather set an expectation level and have the crew accomplish their tasks safely and efficiently. How they get to the end result means far less as long as it was safe and within a reasonable time frame. It's like making sausage, you love the end result but really don't want to see how its made!
As a boss of bosses it's a little different. You're responsible for the leadership of a much greater number of people and tasks and you must rely on subordinates to run these tasks. I tell all Lt's under me that I expect them to be advocates for their people. They must enforce our rules, but should always be looking out for their personnel first. I expect some push back from these guys on some things, it shows they're advocating. I also expect they know when to say when and how to move on and bring the crew along too.
With regard to leadership, I've always liked the model that goes like this:
Tell them the task, clearly explain your expectations, give them the tools and latitude to get the task done, and then get out of the way. If they fail, look at where you failed. Did I set the expectations clearly enough? Did they have adequate tools for the job? Was this within the scope of their abilities? Only if you can answer yes to all three of these should beyond yourself for answers. And in the end, hold yourself more accountable then your people. Similarly a success is their success, not yours. Don't worry your leaders will see you passing the praise as easy as they see you stealing the glory, selflessness benefits everyone, selfishness rarely serves anyone well.

Testing for promotions would go a long way toward breaking down the career/volunteer barrier. Appointments and popular votes are a black eye in the volunteer fire service. Not all the officers promoted this way are bad, by any stretch, but it does leave a question as to the competency of the person. In our FD, when I started we had 8 call officers who had been promoted through appointments, no testing, yet they held rank over firefighters and lieutenants who had tested for their jobs. The first call division (POC) positions tested for, still only tested FF II skills and knowledge. The tests for career lieutenants require a significant amount of study in leadership concepts, tactics, building construction and of course proving your previous FF knowledge has not been lost.

From the standpoint of an officer in a small department I can tell you that it is often difficult to change the past. In a small FD, everyone knows you, your past successes and more importantly-failures or weaknesses. While most people cannot actually change who they are, some can excel when they get a new start. Sometimes this is at promotion time. I've seen guys who spent to much time as firefighters become bored and subsequently less motivated, who when promoted excelled at the new challenge. Others have been passed over for the same reason. It would be nice to be able to lift a guy upon promotion and place him in a new environment.
At the time of my first promotions testing process, I had already passed on one due to being just barely eligible on time. I had seen many officers and knew what I liked and didn't like in an officer and was determined to use that to mold myself as an officer. Of course seeing and doing are worlds apart. I had to learn many lessons the hard way-by screwing them up! The stuff we study for on testing day is by far the easiest part of the job. I'd go to incidents all day every day, even complete the paperwork, but dealing with people and personalties is by far the most difficult part. Dealing with divorcing firefighters, one who are cheated on, those in bankruptcy, or those who are bored with their job or life are the real challenges in firehouse life.
Treat people how you'd want to be treated. Most of our guys are adults (legally 100%) and should be treated as such. There are more than 5 ways to do almost anything, yet some officers feel the need to micromanage every task to have it done their way. I'd much rather set an expectation level and have the crew accomplish their tasks safely and efficiently. How they get to the end result means far less as long as it was safe and within a reasonable time frame. It's like making sausage, you love the end result but really don't want to see how its made!
As a boss of bosses it's a little different. You're responsible for the leadership of a much greater number of people and tasks and you must rely on subordinates to run these tasks. I tell all Lt's under me that I expect them to be advocates for their people. They must enforce our rules, but should always be looking out for their personnel first. I expect some push back from these guys on some things, it shows they're advocating. I also expect they know when to say when and how to move on and bring the crew along too.
With regard to leadership, I've always liked the model that goes like this:
Tell them the task, clearly explain your expectations, give them the tools and latitude to get the task done, and then get out of the way. If they fail, look at where you failed. Did I set the expectations clearly enough? Did they have adequate tools for the job? Was this within the scope of their abilities? Only if you can answer yes to all three of these should beyond yourself for answers. And in the end, hold yourself more accountable then your people. Similarly a success is their success, not yours. Don't worry your leaders will see you passing the praise as easy as they see you stealing the glory, selflessness benefits everyone, selfishness rarely serves anyone well.

From the standpoint of an officer in a small department I can tell you that it is often difficult to change the past. In a small FD, everyone knows you, your past successes and more importantly-failures or weaknesses. While most people cannot actually change who they are, some can excel when they get a new start. Sometimes this is at promotion time. I've seen guys who spent to much time as firefighters become bored and subsequently less motivated, who when promoted excelled at the new challenge. Others have been passed over for the same reason. It would be nice to be able to lift a guy upon promotion and place him in a new environment.
At the time of my first promotions testing process, I had already passed on one due to being just barely eligible on time. I had seen many officers and knew what I liked and didn't like in an officer and was determined to use that to mold myself as an officer. Of course seeing and doing are worlds apart. I had to learn many lessons the hard way-by screwing them up! The stuff we study for on testing day is by far the easiest part of the job. I'd go to incidents all day every day, even complete the paperwork, but dealing with people and personalties is by far the most difficult part. Dealing with divorcing firefighters, one who are cheated on, those in bankruptcy, or those who are bored with their job or life are the real challenges in firehouse life.
Treat people how you'd want to be treated. Most of our guys are adults (legally 100%) and should be treated as such. There are more than 5 ways to do almost anything, yet some officers feel the need to micromanage every task to have it done their way. I'd much rather set an expectation level and have the crew accomplish their tasks safely and efficiently. How they get to the end result means far less as long as it was safe and within a reasonable time frame. It's like making sausage, you love the end result but really don't want to see how its made!
As a boss of bosses it's a little different. You're responsible for the leadership of a much greater number of people and tasks and you must rely on subordinates to run these tasks. I tell all Lt's under me that I expect them to be advocates for their people. They must enforce our rules, but should always be looking out for their personnel first. I expect some push back from these guys on some things, it shows they're advocating. I also expect they know when to say when and how to move on and bring the crew along too.
With regard to leadership, I've always liked the model that goes like this:
Tell them the task, clearly explain your expectations, give them the tools and latitude to get the task done, and then get out of the way. If they fail, look at where you failed. Did I set the expectations clearly enough? Did they have adequate tools for the job? Was this within the scope of their abilities? Only if you can answer yes to all three of these should beyond yourself for answers. And in the end, hold yourself more accountable then your people. Similarly a success is their success, not yours. Don't worry your leaders will see you passing the praise as easy as they see you stealing the glory, selflessness benefits everyone, selfishness rarely serves anyone well.

From the standpoint of an officer in a small department I can tell you that it is often difficult to change the past. In a small FD, everyone knows you, your past successes and more importantly-failures or weaknesses. While most people cannot actually change who they are, some can excel when they get a new start. Sometimes this is at promotion time. I've seen guys who spent to much time as firefighters become bored and subsequently less motivated, who when promoted excelled at the new challenge. Others have been passed over for the same reason. It would be nice to be able to lift a guy upon promotion and place him in a new environment.
At the time of my first promotions testing process, I had already passed on one due to being just barely eligible on time. I had seen many officers and knew what I liked and didn't like in an officer and was determined to use that to mold myself as an officer. Of course seeing and doing are worlds apart. I had to learn many lessons the hard way-by screwing them up! The stuff we study for on testing day is by far the easiest part of the job. I'd go to incidents all day every day, even complete the paperwork, but dealing with people and personalties is by far the most difficult part. Dealing with divorcing firefighters, one who are cheated on, those in bankruptcy, or those who are bored with their job or life are the real challenges in firehouse life.
Treat people how you'd want to be treated. Most of our guys are adults (legally 100%) and should be treated as such. There are more than 5 ways to do almost anything, yet some officers feel the need to micromanage every task to have it done their way. I'd much rather set an expectation level and have the crew accomplish their tasks safely and efficiently. How they get to the end result means far less as long as it was safe and within a reasonable time frame. It's like making sausage, you love the end result but really don't want to see how its made!
As a boss of bosses it's a little different. You're responsible for the leadership of a much greater number of people and tasks and you must rely on subordinates to run these tasks. I tell all Lt's under me that I expect them to be advocates for their people. They must enforce our rules, but should always be looking out for their personnel first. I expect some push back from these guys on some things, it shows they're advocating. I also expect they know when to say when and how to move on and bring the crew along too.
With regard to leadership, I've always liked the model that goes like this:
Tell them the task, clearly explain your expectations, give them the tools and latitude to get the task done, and then get out of the way. If they fail, look at where you failed. Did I set the expectations clearly enough? Did they have adequate tools for the job? Was this within the scope of their abilities? Only if you can answer yes to all three of these should beyond yourself for answers. And in the end, hold yourself more accountable then your people. Similarly a success is their success, not yours. Don't worry your leaders will see you passing the praise as easy as they see you stealing the glory, selflessness benefits everyone, selfishness rarely serves anyone well.

Privately owned insurance companies will gain the 12 percent; that's capitalism at its best; so your theory of Marxism just went out the window. Fining people is nothing new in this country; you break the law, whether you agree with it or not, you pay the penalty.
Why would we want to do that? The other "clown" got us into the current war(s) (actually its a police-action, articles of war were never drafted nor passed) that we're in right now, hurt working American's with his labor policies (that may be news to some of you union brothers and sisters in both the private and public sectors) and his constant gaff's helped to make America the laughing stock of the world. The current "clown"--as you call him-- is at least trying save Americans as opposed to killing more of our men and women (and untold thousands of civilians) in unjust wars.

Does this mean they can turn away illegal alliens and arrest them and send them to there homeland so the people that pay the taxes can use the hospital ? It seems that there is no good reason to be a good citizen anymore, the more honest you are the more it costs you. When will it stop ?

Not to toss a negative into an otherwise positive thread, but I feel this warrants a word of caution. I'd be highly skeptical of using a dog leash or anything "clipped" to another person. If something happens to the partner with the loop like falling into a hole the FF with the clipped on end will not be able to release it. Similarly if there was a localized collapse between the two of you. A similar tactic can be to use a piece of webbing/line that each of you holds the end of. I'd be very careful clipping anything that could not be immediately released, under emergency conditions. At 5-6 ft. I think I 'd prefer to verbally communicate, as anything of any weight, even a coffee table or kitchen chair, will slow you up as you are forced to come together and figure out how to pass. There are times when "buddy lines" should be used and others where they can be trouble.

An accountability as a system, whoever's system you are using is not perfect. However, accountability as an ATTITUDE should be as close to perfect as humanly possible. What I mean by an attitude is this: you call yourselves brothers. You came to the incident with that brother. It's your duty as his brother to watch out for him and know where he is all the time. and he is suppposed to do the same.
No tags, IC boards, signup sheets, or federal labor law will ever be as close to perfect as that bond between brothers.
That's accountability.

Due to semantics or lack of detailed questioning we maybe aren't talking about the same "whole picture" accountability that you and Barry note. Without a doubt, the tags, which are inanimate objects do not make for a system, it takes training, personal responsibility, discipline and leadership for true accountability to be realized.
A few of us have shown the equipment and basic premise of our accountability systems. It should go without saying, though I know full well it isn't across the board, that knowing where your personnel are is a huge part of actual accountability. Freelancing is not the fault of an accountability system, not knowing who's assigned to what task is not a failure of the accountability system, they're both failures of the incident command system.
Please forgive the lack of 100% buy in to NIMS for all incidents. The use of ICS is automatic on every incident and has been long before NIMS. Regardless of who is responsible for resources at a Type III or greater incident, 98% of our runs do not involve a planning section, so the RUL will not be specifically designated. But as with any ICS/NIMS system, the structure is modular and based on span of control, will grow as needed with those positions needed filled. I doubt any of us are really thinking the RUL in the planning section will every be directly responsible for know who is in what corner of a building at any moment. A safety officer or call him, accountability officer will. As with anything in ICS, if it falls under your area of responsibility and you don't delegate it, it's yours.
As for Barry's scenario: if we overlay the normal ICS structure and responsibilities onto a well implemented tag system, and ensure the dept has instilled discipline at all levels, then you can have a decent total accountability system. We don't rely on tags to keep track of where people are, this is the function of each company officer, assigned sector officers (now group/division)and the IC. There are electronic systems that provide more information, but we still will need a back-up to the electronics as we see failures every day that have life altering implications (see Toyota) I've yet to see an electronic solution to freelancing or ensuring members follow the rules, though since I'm going out to dig up my dog's underground fence for yet another repair, I'm starting to hatch an idea! PASS?PAR systems with elecrtic behavior modification!

Yes, it looks like FD's practice that PAR can only be done on the lawn or in the street. Our process would be to conduct a PAR via the radio with all crews. As BNechis said, we count on firefighters remaining on task when a MAYDAY is received. All of the reasons we have crews inside are actually magnified when a member is in trouble, and definitely not readily abandoned. We still must ventilate to facilitate fire control, visibility and relieve untenable conditions. We must control the fire to limit the damage to the building and improve conditions for any citizen-victims, as well as our member with the MAYDAY. This is why we have RIT/FAST, so we can keep operations moving forward while also providing for the assistance or rescue of our own. This doesn't preclude members in the immediate area from coming to a members aid, but it should be with the knowledge and approval of the IC.
This brings up a good training point. Most often we see PAR being conducted in conjunction with an evacuation drill. Maybe this sort of instills the wrong message. Maybe running a PAR in the middle of a standard live fire training would change this underlining belief that we need to be outside to conduct a PAR?

That's a decent question. It's easy to Monday morning quarterback based on my own area, but I'd have little chance at knowing all the little details of Hartsdale, that a fire officer has to use to make these decisions. I'd say I wouldn't want to delay getting water on the fire 99% of the time. If this was going defensive from minute 1? Maybe the delay would be worth it. Again, from my limited view on Google Earth, I'd look at positioning the first due engine near or in the driveway to allow a 50-75' section of street out front for a 100ft. aerial. That doesn't account for laying an LDH line in to augment a poor hydrant out front. Trust me, on any given day we all have to make decisions and live with them. Sometimes they truly are the best for the situation at hand, other times we realize later some of the alternatives we hadn't considered or accounted enough for. That's why this business is not a science, but not quite all an artform either.One of the points here is that officers have to make snap decisions based on the conditions they see in a very short time, with not even half of the information they wished they had, and accounting for what they already know. Often this falls back to what's worked or not worked in similar situation in the past. The fewer experiences to fall back on, the harder the decision.
Again, I'm not trying to find fault with this job, merely peaking into how we as the American Fire Service do things, similar or differently regions to region, state to state, town to town.
On the roof sheathing, I was interested in that we have relatively few slate roofs. But in a former life, I was a carpenter and we built one McMansion with a slate roof. The slate roof company required that we skip sheath the roof. We also did this with wood shingles and it would stand to reason that after breaking a few slates off the fire would rapidly open the vent hole for you!

Two tag system. Tag has Rockland FD on one side, your name on the other.
First tag is placed on either the apparatus you ride in on or for off duty and call members coming to second alarm+ incidents, they tag the attack engine or tower ladder. This tag shows you're on the fireground. If your on a hydrant engine, your tag is there.
Second tag is placed on a traffic cone at the point of entry to the building. This cone is placed by either the first in officer or the Safety Officer if the cone had not been placed (slight hole in the system. If you enter any door without a cone, you have a third tag which is larger, Orange and says "TAG IN" on it. It features a loop of cord and a draw-tite on one end and a metal key loop on the other. This allows it to be hung on door knobs, ladders, porch railings, etc and leaves the metal key loop to clip onto.
We've found the key to making it work, is doing it all the time. Alarms, MVA's, you name it, we need to tag the truck and place the cone if going inside. Without doing it routinely, we fail to do it when it's real! I must admit, this is one of our biggest weaknesses.
This system replaced a common one I see, which is after a fireground catastrophe, you send a member back to the station to see who's gear is one the wall, and figure they're likely OK!

If my "Google-Foo" and HS geometry doesn't fail me, it looks like a 95-100 aerial anywhere on the street beyond "the tree" would have allowed for access to the peak of the roof. I know it seems easy to say on the computer from miles away, but I like to see a large empty spot where a ladder should be regardless if you own one or have one on your first due assignment. It's just good practice to always be thinking "I need to leave room for a ladder". So, not to pick apart any one, we should all look at the pictures and think could this happen to us if our first due ladder was OOS or delayed? I know one of our crews blocked out a mutual aid ladder just last week, while ours was OOS, excrement happens. I also know it will not happen again on that shift!
And I agree a TL on late roofs would be a real benefit. I'm not a big fan of venting from a stick as I rarely see a decent hole unless the pitch allows the roofman to be on the surface itself. Was this roof fully sheathed or skip sheathed?