16fire5

You can not be around our city and be involved with emergency services without knowing or having worked with these guys.

Did all or some return to full duty?

Some mentioned were big posters on here, often very critical of others, and very outspoken about what is right and wrong. Where are they now

Obviously intelligent enough not to post in a public forum about the alleged incident.

Isn't LFD obligated to respond as a signatory of the mutual aid plan? If there was a county wide paid or combination department and there was a large 4th alarm going on there would be empty stations throughout the county (hopefully done in a systematic way). I'm not saying consolidation would not be good it would but anyone who thinks a consolidated department would staff all the apparatus or stations that exist at this point to the current levels is fooling themselves.

I think it's less that they can call the truck a tanker and more that it makes it easier to differentiate apparatus on the radio. In Rockland, engines are numbered by the pump size. For example Thiells has 26-1500, which is an engine with a 1500 gpm pump. However, when a department has multiple engines with the same size pump, they just add 1 to the previous engine, i.e. Thiells second engine is 26-1501. Now if you're a chief of a department with multiple engines with the same size pump, and you're trying to keep track of of apparatus on the radio, it's probably pretty easy to mix up between 26-1500, 26-1501, or 26-1502, and theoretically, that could go on for as many engines as you had. Therefore, most departments in Rockland designate an engine a tanker whether or not it is a tanker, because 26-tanker is not likely gonna get confused as 26-150x unit. At least that's how I always understood it.

So maybe you just need a more simplistic numbering system. The whole ladder size pump size numbering system is stupid in my opinion. I have heard people tell me well you know how long the ladder is or how big the pump is. When you hear them call mutual aid they don't ask for a pump or ladder size-they ask for an apparatus type. Rockland's numbering system is unique but it's in no way pragmatic. I believe in the most simple method possible. Fire Department + Type + number. Works fine in lots of areas of the country and no need for a decoder ring to figure anything out. Plenty of places type apparatus and inspect them which keeps departments from miss-classifying them.

They are also trying to make basement apartments legal again, it's like they forgot why these things were put in place. Then they will be shocked and horrified and blame the FD when fire fatalities go up.

Basement apartments are legal in most municipalities and by most codes as long as they have and exterior exit and proper size windows. Cellar apartments not legal in any case to my knowledge.

I don't think two companies are typically called. In this case a daytime fire and by the IA we see the requesting department only got our half their rigs.

Shouldn't it already be this way? Isn't this common sense? If it isn't how about DOH's policy 12-06.

"The plan or agreement must also be designed to utilize the EMS agency having

the appropriate resources with the shortest response time to the scene of the call.

For the purposes of this section, response time is defined as time of dispatch to

time on scene. "

If someone in your family needs an ambulance wouldn't you want it that way?

I dont think comsolidation would matter in this case. The number of appratus needed, especially with regard to tankers would be the same. Manpower as well.

A single department would have 1 set of SOPs. The initial alarm would get a standard alarm assignment. Maybe for this area 3 engines 1 truck and 3 tankers on the reported fire. When all the responding chiefs are members of the same department they would get assigned necessary roles as they reported in (basement division, division 1, safety, water supply).

A key to success is getting enough help there when it can make a difference. Too often the volunteer fire service in this area waits for a confirmed fire to call for adequate resources or runs out of resources on the scene and then puts the FAST to work and then calls for more help. In my opinion if you have a real working fire you should have at least one company standing behind you ready for assignment in addition to the fast. My opinion is that ability to forecast the incident needs and call for additional alarms early on comes with experience that is lacking for most volunteer ICs since they get kicked out every 2 years so everyone can have a turn as chief. As a young company officer I often though wow do we really need the second alarm that the chief just gave? We did. One of my first days as a Captain a well respected deputy chief visited me to give a little advice when i worked as an acting battalion chief. His advice was if the though of giving a second alarm even entered my mind he wanted me to give it.

As for this incident the factors involved seemed like a loser from the get go (basement fire and Colliers conditions) pulling the plug was the right move here and probably prevented injuries or worse.

As for the wind driven fires noted by some-experience has taught us that no matter how much gpm you are flowing in the hallway you won't accomplish anything since you can't make the seat of the fire. 2 2 1/2's in a hallway have failed to make headway while less than 200 gpm on the fire does the trick. While sometimes our interior crews finally make the fire apartment it's usually after a great amount of time 30+ minutes and the fire has ran out of fuel and usually some of the first few firefighters end up with burns.

I'm not a fan of automatic nozzles either but there are some great constant gallon nozzles out there now that can give you the same flows as a smooth bore at 50 psi. Also if you flow them next to each other on straight streams you can't tell the difference after 30 feet. I'm happy with the smooth bore myself especially for standpipes but I don't have issue with using constant gallon nozzles at structure fires.

As for our lightweight hose the leaking was not limited to the coupling area actually most of the hose tested weeped the entire length and close examination revealed cuts to the integral jacket and delamination.

How much hose do most departments bring inside? We bring 3 50' lengths but next arriving companies are coming up with more.

Some outfits have gone to 2in. hose with 2 1/2 in coupling. Interesting concept less friction loss and no need for reducers at valve. However the most important feature is the 15/16 straight tip nozzle,

Since flow is related to the tip make sure you are not short changing yourself.

1 3/4" hose use a 15/16" tip and get around 180gpm.

2" hose use a 1" tip and get around 210 gpm

2 1/2" hose use a 1 1/8" tip and get around 250 gpm

Might want to color code the tips because it's easy to put the wrong one on and it go unnoticed.

The formulas we use are so antiquated that they really don't tell us what we need to know. The NFPA did a research study on this a few years ago and they found the coefficients we use are too high. They also found out what seems pretty logical that these values vary between not only manufacturers but even different model lines. You could read the whole report and your head might explode. The best advice I have is to get some inline flow meters and test your actual set-ups then use your P-touch label maker and put them over the discharge as a starting point for the shifts when your least capable chauffeur has the wheel.

http://www.nfpa.org/research/fire-protection-research-foundation/reports-and-proceedings/for-emergency-responders/fireground-operations/determination-of-fire-hose-friction-loss-characteristics

One thing I would now advocate which is different to what I was taught and did is to don your facepiece on the ground ascend the ladder and then take the window. The old way of taking the window with the ladder then ascending the ladder then donning your facepiece is just extra time allowing the fire to grow. Once inside the first thing you should do is to get the door to the room closed. These things will buy you more time for your search. VEIS is a good tactic especially in a situation like VBFD faced here. Seems like VB has their act together thanks for sharing.

Some enforcement of the 50 PSI and Fog Stream only rules that appear on most flyers could eliminate such problems. It is when people stop being responsible that bad things happen which give such events the bad rep that they have.

It's unfortunate that some people think such events are a waste of time, etc., and they are certainly entitled to their opinions. But, the "all work, no play" mentality is not good for morale or retaining members, either. Gotta have a little fun and be sociable once in a while, just do it safely.

These events have been the cause of many, many injuries which is why many places have gone to dry downs which I believe are a party celebrating the apparatus without the water fight. I recently sat and witnessed one while fire police closed a portion of a federally funded highway (I highly doubt they had a permit) and the week before witnessed numerous units responding to another one in a commercial area and was unable to convince my daughter that it really wasn't an emergency. I know a chief that did everything possible to make an event safe and still ended up with injuries and he and the former fire coordinator of Orange implored departments to stop the practice but it fell on deaf ears. It's only a matter of time before an apparatus lurches forward and runs someone over at one of these events.

I like the idea of the blessing and I'll probably do that when I get my next rig. Hopefully the atheists don't get me in trouble.

Imagine how many paramedics could be put in service for the cost of 10-12 cops? Wow!

Unless those paramedics would take over policing in the unincorporated portion of the Town of Ossining I don't see the point.

How about two and the consultant. I know it's too practical and everyone wants to go on a "free" trip.

This has been a legislative "priority" for at least 25 years.

It has been proposed in EVERY legislative session over this time and Speaker Silver has never let it out of committee, and as long as it does not make it to the floor it will never be voted on.

Also every year I have heard people making a big deal of..."Here is the legislation we need".....but clearly most are not aware that this has been going on

I have never understood this. To the best of my knowledge NY is the only state in that prohibits fire departments from billing for EMS. I never will understand it. There are plenty examples where ems was broken off the fire department because of billing. I understand it's on FASNY's agenda but I would think the association of fire districts should make it their sole purpose to get it done. The only reason Silver is able to suppress it is no one talks or hears about it. If it was in the news being pushed by all the stakeholders (I even think we could get volunteers and career to agree on this one) it might be force into a vote. If every time a state level politician bumped into their local fire chief or commissioner it was mentioned how this handicaps fire departments/districts and plenty of local articles by fire districts complaining how an antiquated law is financially stressing the district it would have a shot. With the tax cap pressures this should be even more important to us these days.

Well no, FDNY came to Scott after 9/11 and demanded a system be developed around the electronics of the PASS device. It took 8 years (2010) for FDNY to adopt it and it was a part of the upgrade to the paks and an additional 18 months for them to get the hand held receivers. Long after other major cities had been using this technology. FYI, The training suggests that system could cut the time to finding a downed firefighter by 50% if used properly. A little more then borderline in my opinion.

Stay safe.

We've drilled with it a lot and while it's a tool that could help I think in most cases it's help will be marginal. In a wide open large area like a warehouse it will be of great use. In compartmented residential and commercial structures it does not seem to be of much help.

My only question is did they let it go on too long? If this video was used for training would instructors recommend taking more swift action? I would say the longer it goes on the greater the chance of all kinds of bad things happening.

Unfortunately current events have police being vilified for the SI incident. It's probably encouraging people to resist.

I'd just hate to see LEO getting hurt because the court of public opinion can't stomach what proper use of force looks like.

There are also fads depending on who is reading what book at the time. We had a senior dispatcher with no field experience yell at a junio dispatcher who had been a member of 2 local departments and 1 out of town department because he didn't ask the color of the smoke that a caller was reporting. Also on a call with a report of a fire with children in side she yelled that the ages of the children were imnportant. The junior dispatcher asked why, did they rescue 4 years olds diferently from 5 year olds? But both of these theories were because of incomplete information given to dispatchers so they would be consistent with field units.

You are hitting the nail on the head with this one. If we step back the real goal has to be to get the troops on the road to the correct address with the proper information fast. Some of the lines of questioning for both fire and ems are getting so complex that it's delaying dispatch. There are examples all around but yesterday I started reading Houston's report on the tragic fire they had last spring that killed 4 firefighters and injured many others. Their timeline showed 12:05:19 as the call received time for the first of the 17 911 calls for the fire. They voice dispatched the call at 12:07:55. 2 minutes and 36 seconds is too long. Most standards allow for a minute and dispatch centers who have made a concerted effort to address this and using the available technology are getting under that minute.

I would imagine the higher call volume can be attributed to your Mayor and the PSA's the city has done in regards to the building explosion. The Harlem Explosion was 100% preventable since it was reported well after each resident of the building smelled the gas odor. After the incident I've seen PSA's saying if you smell something call 911 or call con Ed. If you believe it is gas call 911.

From the public eye the jump in call volume is understandable. If your government and emergency service agencies tell you how dangerous gas is and you see an apartment building blow up on TV I would probably call 911 too if I thought I smelled gas. I don't think Con Ed is just sending FD's so they aren't as swamped I think there have been a lot of calls that are categorized as serious in nature and they have the fire department respond in as well. The FD has lights and sirens and can mitigate an incident with proper training. Con Ed can sit in traffic for a half hour and hope the leak isn't filling up a building before they get there.

Is it annoying how many calls we go on for gas emergencies? Yes, of course! But if it means it gives a peace of mind to the public we serve and helps minimize the probability for gas explosions then it is worthwhile. Better safe then sorry.

The PSAs are without a doubt part of the increased calls.

I'm not sure I agree Harlem was preventable since the only call for the leak was 22 minutes before the explosion. If Con Ed passed that call on the fire department would have arrived before the explosion but would not been able to prevent it since the leak was in the service in the street. It's very rare that an FD unit would shut off a curb valve and we don't have the ability to shut off a street valve.

My understanding of the change is as follows. Con Ed previously had a matrix that if they had a crew available to send to a reported gas leak they responded alone. They now request the FD all the time since in most cases we will arrive first and have metering equipment and the ability to mitigate to a certain extent.

Negative. The protocol went into effect about 2 years ago after a major incident in Queens that occurred on Oct. 26 2009.

In that incident a gas leak in the street followed pipes into multiple homes and built up till it was in the explosive range and found an ignition source.

In the city of New York Con Ed is now sending us to more reported leaks they receive since the Harlem Explosion. Based on the city hall hearings after Harlem they had between 30 and 50 thousand reported gas leaks that they did not pass on to us last year that I believe they are now giving us every one. While our responses are way up I think the number of actual leaks is probably steady. Many of the calls that are part of the spike are turning out to be odors other than natural gas. It would not be surprising to me if an analysis of gas leaks responses revels they are on the rise. While the utilities do attempt to replace the infrastructure there remains a lot of old pipes in the ground and winters here are tough.

How about coming into the 21st century and getting rid of all the unnecessary things places have in their dispatch and keeping it short and sweet. That way when there's a storm or tons of alarms you can still manage dispatching like professionals.

"60 control to XXX" Why do we need to say "60 Control to"? All the other stuff "all home units/monitors"

How about

Tones then "XXX respond to 222 Main Street between Leaf and Tree Streets for a indoor odor of smoke apartment 2B on the second floor"

If your dispatchers can't do it don't worry they have a computer that can.

From a QA/QI standpoint do they track scene time? When it takes them 20+ minutes from when the patient is provided to them to depart the scene they in many ways remove their benefit. Remember what Stat 213 just said the research shows (getting the patient to a trauma center fast is of great benifit). It didn't say they had to get them there by helicopter. The helicopter on paper seems like a great idea but I think from a realistic standpoint it's not getting patients to the trauma faster then rapid transport would. Aside from stabilizing an airway what ALS skills are really proven to improve trauma patient outcome? Haven't we known all along that putting a patient on a board, stopping hemorrhage, and giving O2 and putting them in the bus is the way to go? Why do we still see paramedics wasting time on scene starting IVs? I honestly put it in the same category as cutting the roof after the fires knocked down. They're just things people wanna do and brag about doing afterwards regardless if they were warranted at the time.

Many Fireground fatalities, both civilian and FF also occur due to complacency, lack of interest, lowering the standards, etc.etc.etc.. Not just a lack of working smoke detectors. Again many times we are our own worst enemy!!!! Unfortunately the Fire Service has lost "Tradition"!

I'm pretty sure we are on the same page. 75% of those who die in fires don't have working smoke detectors so although that's not that glamorous it should be a push. When we see fire departments frazzled with a simple working fire we know they are not going to be able to handle a fire with people trapped. I'm sure if you have experienced both you know the difference. If you are calm cool and collected on the fireground on a normal basis which is helped by training you will have the best shot at addressing life hazards. If a normal working fire is a cluster you probably won't be able to up your game when the real pressure is on.

I would offer that if you can have the bird on the scene when the patient is packaged and ready for transport, there can be benefits, even with relatively short flight times, over ground transport. If there is any appreciable wait for the bird when the patient is ready to go, the value drops off rapidly. But it's the more distant situations that really prove the value of air transport.

My experience is even when the helicopter is waiting for the patient they spend quite a while in the back of the bus and then moving the patient to the helicopter. I'm sure the flight paramedics and/or nurses feel the things they do are necessary but if they require 20 minutes then that has to factor into the equation.

My point is many people have cited extended extrication time as a reason to call but if the helicopter crew is going to spend almost a half hour prior to departing to get the patient to the point that they are comfortable with them in the back of the helicopter then the distance from the hospital that they become of benefit is further.

SteveC's example of the Adirondacks is exactly where they seem to be of the best use.