16fire5

Unfortunatly the NFPA standards are made by way too many people who don't fight fires. Many of their standards may be well intentioned but not well thought out. In my opinion many of there well intentioned standards create their own problems. The committes are made up of many manufacturers and equipment distributers. Realize our gear is heavier and our rigs are too big because of the NFPA and the same amount of firefighters die each year going to less fires. NFPA standards benifit the manufactures more than the firefighter.

As for the original question, the answer I have is that we get called as FAST and should expect to get put to work because the caliber of FF's you get on a FAS Team is higher than a mutual aid crew. I must admit, that's why I joined my Department's FAST.

That might be a bit arrogant. The point is if your that good you should be available for Maydays. Many departments only call a FAST for mutual aid so when they run out of resources they put the fast to work this is a failure of command and illegal. You should have resources on scene available to put to work besides the FAST before the fire is under control. I would not rotate FASTs just because members get bored because the FAST has seen the the scene evolve and knows where members are operating and has done a size up. If the FAST you call can't deal with this they are not professionals find one that is.

One poster thought that for each member who enters the IDLH requires a standby. This is not true. By exact letter of the law technically only 2 members are required to standby outside. Even OSHA admitts in opinions that this is probably not adequete in real life situations. The NFPA requires 4 so I would use this as a minimum because you could see this applied by OSHA under the general duty clause and because it's a good idea.

As for the law (CFR 1910.134 AKA 2 in/2 out) when members enter a IDLH they must work in pairs and there must be 2 members outside to render assistance if necessary. One of the two outside can perfom another job but must be able to drop what they are doing if the need arises. Thats the law the standard never uses the words FAST or RIT. It does allow members to operated individually and before a safety team is in place in the cases of known life hazards.

As for real life most places use the RIT or FAST concept which when on scene definatly satisfies the law and its intent. A responding FAST does not count. As for a FAST being put to work it depends on what you mean. Many FAST or RIT allow a portion of their team to remove window bars or place ladders for eagress while being available for deployment. I see nothing wrong with this as long as your available and other FAST/RIT members monitor what is going on.

What I think Chris is referring to in his question is the all to common occurance of putting the FAST team to work doing firefighting duty before the fire is under control. I think it is a failure of command to have enough resources on scene to handle their incident. At a working fire that is not under control you should have some units on scene in reserve asside from the FAST to stretch the extra line or check for extension when the need arises.

In the City of New York the FAST is only allowed to go to work to address a MAYDAY. If that happens an additional one will be called for but in the meantime the IC must designate a FAST on scene until their arrival. This may be an engine or non commited personnel. This as most of our procedures was developed through real life lessons. Hopefully Westchester Depts. can adopt these procedures before they learn the hard way.

First off I hope no one in this thread takes anything in here personally because if you posting here (instead of about a wet down or a parade) you obviously have a strong interest in safety and your profession. That being said we all realize the impetus for this came from an incident the FDNY experienced. In the City of New York we do things differently than most places, and there are many reasons for that. We have the best manning out there and I’m thankful for that. One thing we do and stress from the moment you enter the Fire Academy is the responsibilities of the Roof Firefighter and his responsibility to get the Life Saving Rope (LSR) to the roof. We allow nothing and I mean nothing to deter him from his/her said duty and position. I remember being told that if I chose not to bring my mask to the roof that was about myself but not bringing the rope I was making a decision for all the brothers on scene.

Since the FDNY chose to equip it’s members with PSS many others demand the same equipment. Do they demand a LSR to the roof at all multiple dwelling fires? Do they have a quick evolution to rescue a trapped firefighter or civilian? In NY we in my opinion place a higher priority on the LSR and its importance than the PSS. Also the LSR has saved more firefighters and civilians than the PSS ever will. I don't see anyone call for legislation mandating this.

It appears to me that everyone missed the concept of of Risk Assessment (as required in ALL OSHA and PESH regs).

Whats the risk to ff's?

How many FF's have died in the last 20 years because they jumped, fell (due to no bailout system) or died at a window because of no way down? (My count is less than 15)

How many ff's have died from cardiac issues? (my count is over 750)

How many in responding (and no seat belt use)? (over 500)

Cancer...(unknown)

If we provide mask that dont get used when needed, seat belts that don't get used...

does a harness and bulky rope system that may never be used increase the risks? The extra weight contributing to cardiac stress? THe harness more likely to get a member entangled during a search?

A lot of people are upset that depts are not running out to get them harnesses, but is this the best way to protect our members. How many know that the gemtor or any harness made of nylon melt at 364 degrees, and could be damaged long before you ever need it? What about exposre to chemicals that are found at common incidents?

We looked at all of these issues a year before this law and experimented with a number of different "systems" and felt the best way to protect or members was a smaller, light and simple system.

We have been lucky to have not needed it yet, but I can count dozens of members who I know have had cardiac events on our job.

I'm sure a number of posters will not like what I've written, but again

Whats the real risk to ff's?

Exactly.

The rope and caribener should do most suburban departments fine. Is cost an issue definatly the FDNY system is very expensive and I myself am on my 3rd bag because the wear and tear. But more importantly I see the issue as training you buy these systems are you going to train on them enough? I know I have iniated weekly training (as opposed to bi-montly) in my volunteer department and it's not extremely popular. And in my opinion the time could be spent on something much more important like training to avoid these situations. Training in recognizing conditions and risk management and others. Should we now equip all members with spare air? More firefighters die from asphixiation.

1. Train on the baics a lot.

2. Keep oriented.

3. Only go above the fire without a line for a known life hazard. I know many of you will disagree with me on this but unless you have a real experienced crew this is probably the right way to go.

4. Consider using VES when going above then the ladder is there for you.

If you can't get your members to comply with facial hair requirements how will you get them to train enough?

Looks like a hairy job with some good aerial and ground ladder work saved a lot of lives. Unfortunatly the short staffing and long hose stretches allows those fires to get such headway and auto expose. Just look at Hooboken last night.

in the 80's my grandfather worked for the City of Peekskill and drove a ward lafrance out of the washington engine co#2 station.

That was an American LaFrance. North Highlands in Putnam still has one or two in service. And Rombout in Dutchess had one or two.

And how can we have a Ward thread without a mention of the most famous one of all. Engine 51.

Lots of great posts here from posters who seem to have the right intentions= what's right for the citizens we serve. Not whats right for the union or viability of the volunteer organization. I once again will take issue with posters who believe there is a call volume that is necessary to have a paid staff. Paid staff should be based on need and yes ability to pay. But with that I argue that the ability to pay is present in many places and wasted spending could be diverted to where its needed. I also in my experience find no benifit to a LOSAP and other incentives used to entice or retain volunteers. Has it really increased departments' ability to get rigs out or has it become a nice gesture to those who served us in the past. I agree that its probably a combination of those suggestions made that is the answer. Consolidation, combinations departments, and shared staffing are worth exploring. What benifit do the taxpayers get from multimillion dollar firehouses with a half dozzen rigs costing hundreds of thousands of dollars that are unable to respond?

Roof's Open I can't agree with you more. I don't think they've been humbled yet and thats the difference. Being in a bad situation when you thought you knew alot humbles you. I'm all for learning from the mistakes of others but the tone of the comments about a veteran professional fire officer make me sick. The fact is when they are responding to this post and yours I'll be in Scranton paying my respects.

RIP Brother

RIP

In the City of New York these are the rules.

Firefighters working on the engine companies operate at the CFR-D level regardless of certification. If you know what your doing and take charge of patient care no one will stop you.

At any scene the ranking operations officer is the IC and the highest level of care is responsible for patient care e.g. EMS deputy chief and FD Lieutenant on scene FD Lieutenant is the IC.

It may seem odd to some but it works very well.

A comment on the Housemen....NO distrcit I know of has ever hired a houseman for the reason of solving the problem of not getting firefighters out on alarms. Like many of you have stated in posts what good is a 60 y/o f/f driving the ladder alone.....or 1 or 2 on an Engine alone. The Housemen were hired for just that, to maintain the station(s) and do the day to day business of the Fire Departments. Many are volunteer f/f's in the same department or elsewhere in nassau or suffolk The Departments have decided since they have the guys woprking and if they are interior class A firefighters to let some respond to alarms. Whats wrong with that? Again in my Department of close to 200 and 7 stations we are speaking of 3 people. It does not make a difference if they go or not. Some departments only let the housemen leave if its a working fire, and some are not allowed to go to calls at all. If the figure is right of the 1,200 I wonder how many are retired older guys working for the department, Class B firefighters not interior class, and just plain ordinary Joe's not firefighters working in those positions.

Stop the nonsence the hoseman idea is used to get the apparatus out. How big is the town of Hempstead you can't tell me that that town couldn't provide a townwide fully paid fire district. What I'm getting at is Hempstead is the largest population town in the US and densely populated.

Any place that requires FF1 or EMT for these jobs should be stopped by County Civil Service or Personnel Departments because it is clearly violating civil service law.

Call volume should not have a big bearing on hiring. Ability to respond to calls should be the deciding factor. Recently I heard a Putnam Department fail to get out on a gas odor call. It was a week night with no other calls at the time and a mutual aid department handled the call. This department recieves almost half a million dollars a year under contract. If you ask me that is a breach of contract. The taxpayers are getting nothing for what they are paying. If you must double the taxes for career firefighters at least you can gaurantee response of qualified personnel.

Using the ladder to take windows is just another good tool to have in your toolbox. It can be benificial in instances where it would be a tough place to vent like the attic of a PD the South Jamacia trucks are real good at this thing. Also for brownstones the chauffeur can take the top floor windows and then accend the aerial to search. This is good becuase it gives the room a chance to vent and potential light up while the chauffeur climbs up, this way he gets a chance to make a decision whether it is safe to make entry. Lets face it the windows of today are a lot more difficult to vent,and its not uncommon to have the halligan on the rope bounce off the window these days. The rules the FDNY imposes are raise the tip to the top pane and then lower it to break both panes and the sash, never use lateral movement. Like the previous poster stated the FDNY is now using replacable tips which should be noted because you should not use the upper replacable section (top 7' on the new seagraves) as a tie off point.

Just a reminder Counties can not run fire departments in NYS neither can towns for that matter. But a district could be formed to encompass the areas talked about but I'm sure referendums and probably legislation would be required. It's daunting but probably the way of the future. What always strikes me is the ammount of apparatus some departments have with no ability to staff all of it at any given time. Just look to areas like PA where a company will have 1 engine and tanker and have a box system set up for alarms. This is probably the way to go for the fully volunteer departments.

16 years in the fire service (it's 17 now) with 5 different departments (pretty sure that number won't change)

16 years in the fire service (it's 17 now) with 5 different departments (pretty sure that number won't change)

They're transporting a MOS CPR in progress to Hudson Valley.

I agree that for the tax base is probably too much but I must defend them on what they have and their run volume. They are right off NY 17 and are on the highway all the time which is probably a burden for such a small community. Departments should look at the examples of departments that built affordable structures.

I know ther are a lot of law enfrocement in here---how manny of you volunteer as cops?? not the same?? why not?? if i had free police protection my taxes would be down---

that alone shouldl shut this topic off

Yeah Right I am going to VOLUNTEER MY TIME TO BE A POLICE OFFICER. But there is AUXILLARY P.O's. I could never understand that. More for crowd control and traffic but people still do it for FREE.

I guess I just sit in my OVERPRICED POLICE DEPT and LISTEN TO ALL THE VOLUNTEER CALLS. I BET THAT EACH PAID FF DEPT IN WESTCHESTER MAKES MORE MONEY THAN I DO A YEAR. Other than MT VERMON. TO SIT IN A FIREHOUSE AND LIFT WEIGHTS AND EAT GREAT MEALS AND WATCH TV WHAT A GREAT LIFE. Oh some of you might even go out to EARN YOU MONEY SOMETIMES.

Back to the issue at hand.

That post should go and so should the poster.

Please stop the nonsense here. The bill has nothing to do with volunteers. It is not anti volunteer. It is about helping the brothers in right to work states. I checked the NVFC and FASNY sites they don't even mention anything about this bill. If it was so dangerous to volunteers I think they would be all over it. The guy who wrote the article has his own motives.

This thread is so off topic its funny but that was the intention of that right wing nut who wrote that article. This bill really has NOTHING to do with off duty guys volunteering and shutting down volunteer departments. It has EVERYTHING to do with forcing the employeer of cops and firefighters to sit at the table with the unions representing the brave men and women who do those jobs.

We are very spoiled in the north east when it comes to labor and unions. That is not the case everywhere in this country and that is the point of this bill. In most parts of the south the municipalities refuse to even recognize the union and won't even sit at the table with them to negotiate safety issuse let alone salaries. In those states dues can't be deducted from pay checks and unions have little legal standing. Any IAFF members if you bother to read the paper (now magazine) you get in the mail should know this has been a priority of the international for years. The magazine is constantly full of tales from these states where union officials are fired and have to fight to get their jobs back for standing up for the health and safety of membership. Here in the north east we have it great we have union shops and binding arbitration.

Please brothers don't be hoodwinked by the man who wrote that article he cares very little if any for us. Its those like him that oppose any standard or law that attempts to make the dangerous job we do safer. This law is good and will help our brothers in the south make their work place safer by forcing the employer to recognize the union and meet with them. Thats all they don't even gain binding arbitration out of the law so even with the passage of this law they will still have a long way to go to achieve the thing we have here in NY.

Rest Easy Brothers

NYS law is vauge on this and if anything I think it goes with PD. No where does it say that if there are patients in the vehicle FD is in charge. Many people try to say the FD is in charge if there is a fire or threat of a fire, but mostly this is a stretch. Quoting the law to a cop on the scene will get you no where especially when you are wrong. Like others have said it's best to have this worked out ahead of time.