Monty

Date: 1/21/14
Time: Approx 18:30

Incident Type: Structure Fire 10-75
Location: 4 Regina Ave Google Maps

District: Lake Mohegan
Units: Lake Mohegan, Peekskill FAST, Putnam Valley Rescue (Air Cascade), Lake Mohegan VAC, Peekskill EMS Rehab. Yorktown engine to Standby Station 1, Montrose TL-8 Standby Montrose HQ, Mahopac Falls.

Description:

18:32 Yorktown relocate to LM Sta 1

18:35 Montrose TL-8 relocate to LM HQ

18:45 Sizeup 30x40 building, unable to gain entry. 1 l/s/o, 2nd line benig stretched.

20:00 Cmd placing under control. Releasing Peekskill FAST. Holding Mahopac Falls.

Date: 1/18/14
Time: 13:25

Incident Type: Fire - chimney
Location: 224 Smith Ridge Rd

District: Vista
Units: Car 2451, Wilton E1, South Salem E 167, E 168, Ridgefield Tanker

Description: Structure fire call while operating at 17 Tommys Lane structure fire

20 x 40 Building, smoke visible.

Chimney fire reported under control.

13:36 IC (2451) reports has sufficient apparatus on scene.

13:37 Address corrected to 224 Smith Ridge Rd

13:37 E168 Return to South Salem HQ to standby

Date: 1/18/14
Time: Approx 12:30
Incident Type: Working Fire
Location: 17 Tommys Lane Google Maps
District: Vista
Units: Vista, South Salem, Goldens Bridge Tanker, Bedford Hills (?) FAST, Ridgefield Tanker, New Caanan Ladder, Wilton Engine to HQ.

Description:
Smoke from second floor
10-75 Requested
12:54 Cmd reports fire knocked down. Checking for Extension
12:55 Requesting C&O. Eng 167, Tanker 3 on location.
12:58 Tanker 43 on location.

13:02 TL-57 (FAST) on location.

13:03 Wilton engine out at HQ

13:05 Tanker 1 on location

13:11 Tanker 1 redirected to standby at Vista HQ. Releasing Ridgefields Tanker

13:19 Pound Ridge & New Caanan units released

13:26 TL-57 redirect with Wilton E-1 and Tanker 1 to reported structure fire 228 Smith Ridge Rd

Just got this link http://waterford.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/waterford-firefighters-rescue-dog-from-ice

Jordan Village's Engine 11 responded with a crew of two career firefighters and one volunteer firefighter. Waterford Police Officers assisted in final preparation and deployment of two rescue swimmers.

The two rescue swimmers entered the frigid water wearing rescue suits designed to keep out the wet and the cold. Both swimmers were tethered with a safety line as they waded out to the canine, breaking the thin ice as they went.

We staff 3 front line rigs - all have two suits, PFDs, 'noodles' and multiple lines as well as other equipment. We also have a qualified FD/PD dive team with cold water capabilities. Certainly we're not as equipped as the City of Yonkers - but for a small suburban town, I'd say yes we are trained and equipped for initial first response and to get resources on the road for developing situations.

I'm also talking about standing water - ponds and lakes. Not running water which is a whole different situation. Incidentally, the dive team is trained in swift warer rescue too.

You have suits etc...but do you have training to perform a rescue without injuring yourselves. 2suits? Not enough. Maybe to run out onto the ice but what happens when their is a need for someone else to come get you?

We have 12 suits on 3 trained companies, 12 more at our Special Operations Division, as well as Ocean ID boats designed for water rescue, including ice emergencies.
Just wondering .....

Maybe I am just wrong - it's often the case

But, I don't believe there are very many departments in NY, (at least Westchester area) that have the capability to go out on the ice. On the other hand, most of the departments in Connecticut seem to have ice rescue capability. My department has 2 suits (see below), noodle, rope bags, life vests (and some other items) on our 3 front line apparatus.

This past weekend I heard a page for one of the departments (Montrose maybe) ice rescue team being put on standby. In this case, I'm not sure anything more came of it. How much time is it going to take to get them where they're needed?

I would think for a still body of water (ie not a river), that with some basic training, proper PPE, this is a low risk, medium frequency type of event that more departments should be able to do.


You have suits etc...but do you have training to perform a rescue without injuring yourselves. 2suits? Not enough. Maybe to run out onto the ice but what happens when their is a need for someone else to come get you?

We have 12 suits on 3 trained companies, 12 more at our Special Operations Division, as well as Ocean ID boats designed for water rescue, including ice emergencies.
Just wondering .....

Good info here. There are more departments with this capability than I was aware of. Although I know my volunteeer department doesn't have an entry capability to any water / ice incident. We do have the reach and throw capabilities. I'm pretty sure that none of our immediate neighboring departments do either. In our case YHFD would seem to be the obvious call - and they've been called plenty of times for other incidents, so there certainly wouldn't be an issue with that.

I can't speak to why the departments in your area don't have the equipment, but ice rescue is a form of technical rescue and many departments aren't adequately equipped and trained for technical rescue.

Ice rescue can easily be a high risk event, but with the proper training, equipment and adequate personnel that risk can be minimized, just like firefighting. To do it properly requires more than just "basic training".

Anything we do can be high risk - getting off apparatus. At my academy, we had a lesson on this - because there have been fatalities. Yes, it is a technical rescue discipline. I see that there are one day NFPA compliant courses for Ice Rescue Technician. I wouldn't put that in the same category of risk as Trench Rescue for example.

Certainly, proper equipment is needed - and like anything in this business it's not cheap.

So, as lax as NY training standards are, is this a case where Ice Rescue teams are better trained in NY than elsewhere? Or is it just that Ice Rescue doesn't happen often enough that it is a high priority in all the things we do need to be trained in.

Maybe I am just wrong - it's often the case

But, I don't believe there are very many departments in NY, (at least Westchester area) that have the capability to go out on the ice. On the other hand, most of the departments in Connecticut seem to have ice rescue capability. My department has 2 suits (see below), noodle, rope bags, life vests (and some other items) on our 3 front line apparatus.

This past weekend I heard a page for one of the departments (Montrose maybe) ice rescue team being put on standby. In this case, I'm not sure anything more came of it. How much time is it going to take to get them where they're needed?

I would think for a still body of water (ie not a river), that with some basic training, proper PPE, this is a low risk, medium frequency type of event that more departments should be able to do.

Just wondering .....

Date: 11/10/13
Time: 18:15 (approx)

Incident Type: House fire
Location: 719 Linda Ave

District: Thornwood
Units: Thornwood, Hawthorne Ladder & Engine, Valhalla FAST, Chappaqua Cascade, Pleasantville Engine for cover company
Fireground 8, Trunk 11
Description:

2(?) story wood frame house. Chimney fire extended in to the walls.

18:24 Cancel Chappaqua Cascade

18:26 Fire reported knocked down. Continuing to open up.

Some thoughts on what helped me end up landing a job in CT:

• As others have said - always have a CPAT that is less than a year old.
• If you are an EMT, get reciprocity from CT
• Get National FF1 Certification (other levels don't hurt either)
• Get a CDL or the Ct Q-Endorsement
• Visit CTFIRE-EMS.com

I found that while most jobs don't have a residency requirement - when you get far enough in the process, they may use it against you,or put it another way it may give another candidate an advantage over you. Also, if the application states something is CT required, eg a 'CT Driving Licence', still apply. What have you got to lose - apart from the application fee? Or at least reach out to the Dept / HR Dept.

Good luck!

I'm in too. Tough part is which charity to pick. Got to be a fire related one.

Heading north on 9A we saw Croton FD lined up on the shoulder facing NB. Wife and I thought that was a bit unusual. A little further on we saw more lights. State trooper out front, then it looked like a flag draped piece of steel draped in the US flag followed by several fire apparatus.

Very impressive - my wife said it gave her the chills.

There's another thread on cross band repeaters. Many of those frequencies are repeating the 46.26 low band channel. You should be able to get one or more of those to work for you.

So, it seems Stamford has been awarded a SAFER grant. How does that play in to the situation? Interesting quote from the press release:

awarded this grant to hire and retain more volunteer as well as career firefighters," said Senator Joe Lieberman

I hope Stamford does more with the grant than Danbury & Westport.

Definitely putting words in to Cogs mouth - but my take on what I read is .. In an ideal world he'd like the charter revision proposal changed to have a commission made up of people from various organizations. If he can't get that then the current proposal for the charter revision is better than the current situation.

Assuming he can vote from overseas ..... my guess - and it's obviously only that, is that he would vote for the current proposal.

the district spent more than $60,000 for questionable expenses, including a $1,875 purchase of a diamond ring for a retiring chief.

Wonder if that would get you a shoton Pawn Stars

Is there any hope of the 'New Content' automatically going to the last read item? It's bit of a pain to click on a popular thread, wait for the page to load, then click on the option to go to first unread and wait for the page to load again.

Interesting piece on the history of the Department and Washington H&L http://ossining.patch.com/articles/x-bde48dec

Some years ago a President came to Albany (Clinton?). The 'authorities' decided they needed a tower ladder to complement the airport FD. Instead of going to the department whose district (most of) the airport is in - they went to the City of Albany FD. Rumor was that it was easier for the secret service to vet the city firefighters than the volunteer department.

I haven't seen it personally, but I'm led to believe that Civil Service regulations state something to effect that the list will be established as quickly as possible. Not very specific - but you'd think 2 years exceeds that requirement

I heard from a couple of sources that they didn't want to certify the list because that starts the clock running on the 2 year length of the list.

What I didn't realize until recently was that there are minimum manning levels in the SFRD contract. Not only those on duty per group / shift but also assigned to a group. The Local has started a grievance process regarding this, and other matters but that obviously takes time to come to a resolution. In addition, as mentioned here, a group of us that took the test are considering what options we have to move things along.

Someone asked me to update the IA on the Peekskill fire, however, I've tried from a couple of different computers and don't get the Edit button. When I submitted the report I was able to edit but now I can't.

Is there a time window that the post is editable? Or some other quirk?

Posting a shout is not an issue, it's the editing of the shout that the issue lies. When you click on the button to edit the shout, a text box pops up with your shout in it. Once I edit the shout with whatever content was removed or added and click on the "edit shout" box to complete the task, nothing happens. The clear button doesn't work either in it so I have to delete the shout altogether and re-post with the edited version.

Had this happen to me too, FWIW.

A couple of links that I was sent on tonight's fire: http://www.thedailyp...treet-peekskill - has a couple of cool pictures and from http://t.co/HyUhG4wE

I noticed in a USFA press release that there is a new version of Traffic Incident Management Systems. I've only skimmed through it so far, but it looks very informative.

http://www.usfa.fema...ions/fa_330.pdf

Interesting piece on one of our favorite topics - lighting. It also references a 2008 study from SAE http://www.sae.org/s...inglamp0810.pdf

Some of the take aways are that emergency lighting provides two functions, requesting the right of way and warnings to motorists. It suggests that less lights should be used in the second case.

It also suggests having different intensities for day and night.

Not too surprisingly, it seems that blue is better at night, but quite good during the day too.

As warnings to motorists, less can be more - ie fewer lights can be more effective than lots of lights. This also makes it easier to see personnel on the road.

On a divided highway - only have lights facing oncoming traffic.

Sometimes, if we were just parked up on the road, we'd just use the 4 way flashers. However we now have a policy in place that we always use emergency lighting on scene - unless ordered otherwise. I wonder if things like this will slowly change the 'normal' way of operating / fitting out rigs. Time will tell ...

Date: 4/14/12

Time: 19:15

Location: 1409 Main Street

Frequency: 453.225 / FG 8 / Fire 10

Units Operating: Peekskill, Mohegan FAST, TL8, U12, American Red Cross

Weather Conditions: Warm, Dry

Description Of Incident:

Reporters: monty

19:28 Request Buchanan Cascade and Montrose Ladder on Standby in Montrose quarters

19:30 FAST team enroute

19:30 Coned Gas & Electric requested.

19:30 Montrose Ladder to relocate to TL45 quarters

19:34 Continental Village one engine to Station5 1195 Crompound Rd

19:35 Verplanck replocate one engine to Station 6 Wasington St

19:37 U12 - Buchanan cascade enroute.

C&O Zone 4 requested.

20:02 C&O on scene

I'm sure that if you don't follow the rules of the grant then you will be liable for any monies paid and used inappropriately. Whether that goes to the extreme of re-possessing apparatus I'm sure you'd need a lot of lawyers.

Inicdentally, I'm pretty sure with SAFER they don't pay you up front. You have to submit claims (quarterly?) and then the feds reimburse you after that. If you were submitting fraudulent claims, then that is another nasty kettle of fish.