AFS1970

Date: 11/24/14
Time: 20:12
Location: 75 Spring Valley Road (near Glendale Road)
District: Millwood
Millwood Units: 2251, 2254, E247, E248, L52, T15, U44
Ossining Units: 2331, 2332, E98, U51 FAST
Croton Units: 2082, 2083, T10
Ossining EMS: 74A1
WCDES: Battalion 17

Description: Fire on 2nd floor and attic of L-shaped private dwelling.
20:12 - Millwood, Ossining FAST, Croton T10, Battalion 17 dispatched for reported house fire.
20:13 - 2251, 2254 responding.
20:14 - 2331, 2332, 2083, T10 responding.
20:15 - 2082 responding.
20:16 - 2251 on location.
20:19 - E98, U51 responding as FAST. E247, E248 responding.
20:20 - T10 on location.
20:21 - L52 responding. 2083, T15 on location.
20:22 - IC reports flames and smoke from 2nd floor and attic.
20:23 - U44 responding.
20:24 - Ossining FAST on scene. E248 on scene.
20:28 - Command requesting an Engine to his HQ and EMS to scene. OVAC 74A1 handling.
20:29 - E247, U44 on scene. Briarcliff Engine dispatched to Millwood HQ.
20:31 - L52 on scene.
20:34 - IC requesting Con Ed Electric to scene.
20:37 - IC reports main body of fire knocked down, overhauling. 2051, 2053, E94 relocating.
20:45 - 2051, 2053, E94 standing by Millwood HQ.
20:47 - IC releasing Ossining FAST per Bat 17.

This is probably in the long run a good thing.
I agree that doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is unrealistic, unless we are going to drop that pesky rehab standard that was implemented a few years ago. You know the one that limits the time you can work without a rest period. Which probably would prevent you from doing a rapid series of tasks on a single bottle on a fire ground.
As for the ability of the instructors to do this, I would be willing to bet that most can, however we all know guys who while mostly good at what they do have made teaching their main career and have not been in a fire in years. I have a feeling that this is who will be questioned, not the younger gung ho guys who nobody doubts can do the job.
As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis?
I doubt that this standard will be applied to existing personnel, much in the same way that the CPAT was not. The concept of grandfathering is alive and well and in most cases reasonably applied in the fire service. So a single standard if possible will take years to implement, possibly 20 or more.
I don't think we need to get rid of support positions or exterior positions, although they probably need to be standardized as everyone seems to define them slightly differently. No matter the kind of department the guy who only files paperwork does not need to pass an interior standard any more than a paramedic does, as neither one is going into a burning building any time soon.

This is probably in the long run a good thing.
I agree that doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is unrealistic, unless we are going to drop that pesky rehab standard that was implemented a few years ago. You know the one that limits the time you can work without a rest period. Which probably would prevent you from doing a rapid series of tasks on a single bottle on a fire ground.
As for the ability of the instructors to do this, I would be willing to bet that most can, however we all know guys who while mostly good at what they do have made teaching their main career and have not been in a fire in years. I have a feeling that this is who will be questioned, not the younger gung ho guys who nobody doubts can do the job.
As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis?
I doubt that this standard will be applied to existing personnel, much in the same way that the CPAT was not. The concept of grandfathering is alive and well and in most cases reasonably applied in the fire service. So a single standard if possible will take years to implement, possibly 20 or more.
I don't think we need to get rid of support positions or exterior positions, although they probably need to be standardized as everyone seems to define them slightly differently. No matter the kind of department the guy who only files paperwork does not need to pass an interior standard any more than a paramedic does, as neither one is going into a burning building any time soon.

This is probably in the long run a good thing.
I agree that doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is unrealistic, unless we are going to drop that pesky rehab standard that was implemented a few years ago. You know the one that limits the time you can work without a rest period. Which probably would prevent you from doing a rapid series of tasks on a single bottle on a fire ground.
As for the ability of the instructors to do this, I would be willing to bet that most can, however we all know guys who while mostly good at what they do have made teaching their main career and have not been in a fire in years. I have a feeling that this is who will be questioned, not the younger gung ho guys who nobody doubts can do the job.
As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis?
I doubt that this standard will be applied to existing personnel, much in the same way that the CPAT was not. The concept of grandfathering is alive and well and in most cases reasonably applied in the fire service. So a single standard if possible will take years to implement, possibly 20 or more.
I don't think we need to get rid of support positions or exterior positions, although they probably need to be standardized as everyone seems to define them slightly differently. No matter the kind of department the guy who only files paperwork does not need to pass an interior standard any more than a paramedic does, as neither one is going into a burning building any time soon.

This is probably in the long run a good thing.
I agree that doing a series of tasks in short order on a single bottle of air is unrealistic, unless we are going to drop that pesky rehab standard that was implemented a few years ago. You know the one that limits the time you can work without a rest period. Which probably would prevent you from doing a rapid series of tasks on a single bottle on a fire ground.
As for the ability of the instructors to do this, I would be willing to bet that most can, however we all know guys who while mostly good at what they do have made teaching their main career and have not been in a fire in years. I have a feeling that this is who will be questioned, not the younger gung ho guys who nobody doubts can do the job.
As for a single standard, that is good in theory but has some problems in practice. The ability of someone in a career department to spend more time training is a reality that we have to face. The ability of a department to order someone to attend an academy on a full time basis is simply not there in a volunteer department or even some smaller career departments. a 14 week academy is over 500 hours, when I took FF1 is was about 120, the same for FF2 which together equal about half of that time. So how long would it take to run that full time standard on a part time basis?
I doubt that this standard will be applied to existing personnel, much in the same way that the CPAT was not. The concept of grandfathering is alive and well and in most cases reasonably applied in the fire service. So a single standard if possible will take years to implement, possibly 20 or more.
I don't think we need to get rid of support positions or exterior positions, although they probably need to be standardized as everyone seems to define them slightly differently. No matter the kind of department the guy who only files paperwork does not need to pass an interior standard any more than a paramedic does, as neither one is going into a burning building any time soon.

1) While building codes are more stringent, 80% of the buildings in lower Westchester were built before these codes came into being.
2) Only those with sprinklers are more fire resistant. light weight construction is clearly not equal to traditional construction.
3) I wonder if he actually said this on the oil? My experience with quotes in the media is they rarely are what the person actually said. and sometimes they are completely made up.

.it is an addition if it was not required and now is. AAgain not fighting the need I am simply saying that 1 cylindar to do all that in succession itome seems a bit much. And to the memberwho said we need 1 standard for all firefighters in lieu of interior and exterior thats nuts. Every FD and PD has people on full time desk duty. There is a job for everyone in this service.

Not really, falling off the roof is only a two foot drop at this point... Haha

In NYC, the FDNY rarely gets to do this, because the traffic units will have it on the hook and off to the yard, long before the FD gets a call.

Wouldn't something like this be useful at the hydrant when it's blocked? We already put 5" elbows on our front bumpers (front suction); why can't we use an elbow as part of a hydrant connection?

Another fantastic example of the self-importance and blame projection of modern society: "I don't have to follow the rules. Its the city's fault I had to block lifesaving safety equipment."

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

I'm wondering if there are any departments out there that specify that the products they want to purchase (even if it's as small as an ax), have to be "Made in America" ?
Is sourcing a product made by a domestic company over one made in China acceptable?
Do you go to your vendors and let them know you only want products "Made in the USA"?
Are we being fair to taxpayers by doing this, since a Made in the USA product may cost more money, but it helps the economy elsewhere in our nation.
I know, my point isn't well written, I'm tired...hopefully some of you guys will pick up on this.

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

Working the midnight shift in dispatch, I can tell you how easy this is to happen. There is clearly a need for some sort of SOP/SOG that requires communications with all field units, especially single man units like safety officers and fire marshals. In this day and age when we have cell phones in addition to radios and many vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking it should be fairly easy to check on someone. If I call someone on the radio and they do not answer, then call them on the phone. I would rather wake someone up over and over again than miss a injured or dead MOS. That being said, some of these units have traditionally not bothered to clear verbally when leaving a scene and that has to stop also.
I would suggest that a few things be put into place.
1) all units must report when they are clear from a scene wither by voice (recorded radio or phone) or by data (MDT/computer).
2) all single man units must be checked for status every 20 minutes, just like a MARC time for IDLH operations. However incidental communications can count for this and reset the clock.
3) If a unit fails to check in or contact can not be made at appropriate interval, attempt to contact by other means. If you can't get them by radio try the phone. Send a message to the MDT, try any and every method you have.
4) If all contact methods fail, then a unit from some agency needs to go to the last know location to make face to face contact. This could be sending a police car to check on a fire marshal or if necessary send a suppression unit back to the scene.
Eventually like with all regulations updating status will become commonplace and the alternate communications methods will be needed less and less except in true emergencies. However I personally don't care how many people it takes to make make sure everybody goes home.

To all the veterans out there,

THANK YOU for having the courage, fortitude and dedication to put on the uniform of our military and protect all Americans

THANK YOU for your service in times of war and times of peace

THANK YOU for making the world a better and safer place through your service

THANK YOU for the freedoms I and my family enjoy today because of YOU!!



God Bless America, Land of the free...because of the brave who have, do and will serve her

Seth, opinion only:
AHA just teaches high quality compressions and rate along with ventilation and defibrillation (acknowledging the 2015 AHA changes are about to hit the street) even for rescuer level.
REMSCO protocols just specify the need for CPR and, much the same as AHA, just rate and quality, defib cycles, etc.
Neither has anything to say about how one gets the patient into a position where "ideal" CPR, defib, and other measures plus transport can be performed. In my view, it's the kind of thing that could be adopted and practiced at the local agency level. Nothing in the procedure appears to be contrary to AHA or REMSCO protocol. It actually calls for and requires continuous, high quality, uninterrupted CPR.
I showed the video at our monthly ambulance squad meeting this evening. There was a lot of enthusiasm and interest from all the folks present, including our local fire chief.

I give the LeLand Fire Department a lot of credit for having members who realized after one of their members had gone down on a scene that doffing gear from a downed firefighter can be a tremendously hard thing to do. The 10-step method they devised seems to accomplish doffing gear and providing immediate care while minimizing how many people would be drawn away from the other tasks at hand on a fire scene and actually looks great and very easy to accomplish. I can't wait to ambush some unsuspecting firefighters who wander by the firehouse on a slow day to practice the method on a mannequin and see the plusses and minuses. Immediate compressions (if he does not need it, I'm sure the firefighter might let you know quickly enough) and it is through gear at first, so no additional damage, plus it has you remove the helmet and mask fairly quickly to see how responsive or not the FF is and provides clear access to airway in case there is vomit in the mask or air gone and mask sucked to face, etc. The video shows the procedure can be technically done by 4 firefighters, and once the FF is removed from pack and coat, the EMS people can swarm over him and take further measures.
Always wondered how we would be able to get gear off quickly enough. Luckily, have never had to find out... May even work to get gear off collapsed heat exhaustion FF much more quickly than the lengthy time it usually takes to strip them down - minus the compressions, of course .
Worth looking into, at any rate. Kudos to them for thinking outside the box. Gets cramped and stuffy in there sometimes.

Are there any departments locally that are implementing this into their training and protocols?

Source: www.FireFighterCloseCalls.com

Since I am no expert and am not on the job please correct me if I am wrong or attack this the wrong way.
In Special Operations you have your 5 Rescues, 7 Squads, and HazMat (Of course additional miscellaneous units). Benefit of a Squad is they fit the role of a Rescue, HazMat, Engine, and or Ladder depending on the box assignment allowing for better versatility and better support in response. In addition to these companies you have SSL (Squad Support Ladders as well as some Squad/Hazmat Support engines (ie. Engine 44). Having these support units allows for a faster specialized response and better coverage of special operations in the city. To add another HazMat you would get another big box racing to jobs that in many circumstances will be mitigated by these support companies. Geographically it just wouldn't make that much sense.
Don't get me wrong I am not downplaying the importance of the HazMat or their need. I don't believe their work can be totally fielded out to suppression companies or other areas of SOC (Squad) but why add another specialized piece to an organization that seems to operate very well with the versatility and variety of other SOC units? A second Hazmat would seem to be redundant. According to FDNY Stats HazMat 1 took in 922 runs in comparison to 2,553 by Rescue 1 or 3,986 by Squad 18. I would imagine adding another Rescue or Squad before another HazMat.

If you're smart, a little buffy and into the job, please take this if it comes to you. A great dispatcher is invaluable to us in the field and we need more.

Highway robbery at it's finest. It's a shame that purchasing agencies are either unaware of this practice or willing to waste tax dollas just because they like a certain manufacturer.
I got experience this first hand, where my department loved the demo, and the commissioners decided to buy said demo unit. Alas, it wasn't the same once the vehicle was retrofitted for NYS emissions. Complete loss of power through the drive train and we could barely make it up a hill with the accelerator floored. Then more money has to be poured into the vehicle to refit it to the needs of the department. It seems like a total waste to me because, in this case anyway, the powers at hand didn't do te proper research. I also know of another department (elsewhere in the countyry) that bought a demo tanker, and it turned out to be too heavy for certain roads and bridges. Turns out that the advertised GVW from the dealer did not include the weight of water in the tank. The tanker thus had to be towed a few times out roads that crumbled beneath it. Another example of not doing the research.

If you do not quantify what is equal and or list what specific features of the quantum you will/will not accept anything else like its unique fold out steps. then no one else can win the bid.
Of more importance the moment you list a name, all the other vendors back off, because they are not willing to throw money away, when you have made it clear you will be buying a Pierce.
I have seen on a number of these types of bids where the vendor will show up at the bid deadline with 2 sealed bids. If no one else bids, they will at the last minute before bid closing they will put in the higher bid. I have seen this be as much as $60,000 extra.