Banksville Fire 1/31/10 / Tanker response

[helicopper 1,050]

One last point, which I'll put in a separate paragraph in case Seth and the boys feel the need to edit it out. Read your last paragraph. "...you are easily upset...", "...you very uncomfortable...", "You are blaming..." and "...puts you in a small minority". Let' keep the discussion about the issue, and not a personal attack the minute someone disagrees with you.

Why don't we all knock off the snipes at each other and focus on the issues. In context, the above was in reference to your doing the exact same thing so let's all practice what we preach. If you don't like the topic, don't read the thread!

We all live in glass houses and the public, media, elected officials are peering in with magnifying glasses these days. It is naive to think that we aren't going to be held accountable and as I've said in the past, we need to consider these and many other questions and have answers so that when we're asked in a more formal venue than this forum we have answers and don't just respond with rhetoric or look like deer in headlights.

[jack10562 414]

I believe the whole point of these discussions is to shine a light on emergency response times as a whole, not to insinuate that a particular department or district has issues or systemic failures.

These run data need to be scrutinized in order to determine and/or prove that it's working, something needs improvement, or, it's broken and is in need of fixing.

It can become uncomfortable to have your own department or a neighboring department under the microscope.

It's not personal.

[truck45 1]

The initial post was about response times, but I don't think anyone has actually offered any useful solutions to the issue.

Instead of talking about this topic to death, why not offer up some ways to address response times and fix it.

[fireguy43 35]

I believe the whole point of these discussions is to shine a light on emergency response times as a whole, not to insinuate that a particular department or district has issues or systemic failures.

These run data need to be scrutinized in order to determine and/or prove that it's working, something needs improvement, or, it's broken and is in need of fixing.

It can become uncomfortable to have your own department or a neighboring department under the microscope.

It's not personal.

I agree with you Jack. My point is that the discussion should include factual information, not inferences from IA threads where, no offense to anyone on here, the information may not be 100% accurate. The Banksville situation is the classic example. A whole line of questioning about response time and when the tanker got out vs when Mutual Aid was called, etc.. A subsequent post, who said that they got the dispatch information directly from the Banksville Chief, had vastly different times for the same incident when compared to the IA. I'm not criticizing the IA writer at all, I am criticizing the rush to judgement based on incorrect information. It is fair game to ask the tough questions, but formulate the questions based on fact, that's all. I'm not sure that there is a whole lot of fact checking going on before the questions start.

[Bnechis 3,961]

The initial post was about response times, but I don't think anyone has actually offered any useful solutions to the issue.

Instead of talking about this topic to death, why not offer up some ways to address response times and fix it.

Prior to talking it to death on EMTBravo, any ongoing issues with response time was just the dirty little secret in the closet. If nobody knows about it and nobody brings it forward than nobody will ever fix it.

More than 10x the number of people who post here have already read this thread. If the right person does, it may change everything.

Ways have been offered, Lots of people want to pretend all is well.

[cman473 56]

Another point to consider now is a tanker is NOT what it used to be. Many tankers from 10-15 years ago were a simple commercial 2 man cab, made to be on the road quickly whereas some of the newer tankers that you see on the road now are that of manpower and equipment capable. Case in point, the 2 tankers in my own department are Class A Engines, 1 is a 8 Man Cab and the Other is a 5 man cab. Both have a full array of firefighting equipment from thermal Imaging Cameras to Vent Saws...and everything in between. One is 2500 gallons and the other is 3000 Gallons.

Our SOG's require for a tanker to respond mutual aid that it has a qualified driver and a minimum of 4 (four) Interior Qualified personnel. Most of the time we fill the cab. Its a win win situation for both the driver of the apparatus and the company requesting you. Many dispatches for tankers now come with the request of manpower. We believe the "manpower" should come on the apparatus and not in a blue light parade. Just my 2 cents.

[spin_the_wheel 460]

Is there a close station in CT that can come in on an automatic m/a when structure fires are received in this distant part of the Banksville district?

Would it help building a 1 bay substation, or simply a garage in the area to house a single tanker?

[fireguy43 35]

Perhaps you missed this topic and I'll admit I didn't see you ask for such information in the other thread you mention.

Michaelian Institute Research on Consolidation of Services

thank you Chris..... I asked during a post on the Croton Falls fire about two weeks ago. Now I have something to work with- once I read all of it!

[IzzyEng4 427]

Is there a close station in CT that can come in on an automatic m/a when structure fires are received in this distant part of the Banksville district?

Would it help building a 1 bay substation, or simply a garage in the area to house a single tanker?

I believe Greenwich Round Hill Company 6 and Long Ridge in Stamford are the closest to that area, however I am not sure or that familiar with the area. Both run tankers if I'm not mistaken.