Engine 165 to Squad 165

New to the Squad debate and it would be a benefit but whatever, I work for another city agency and we all know what's logical they think the opposite .... moving to the Island late-Sept/October ... what's the feasibility of at least establishing an Engine and a BC at EMS Station 22 temporarily - considering all the SIE construction like they had yesterday closing all lanes westbound at 3pm to re-arrange lanes and such. You would think with all that work they would make one complete service road the whole length of the SIE and not have a break between Slosson and Clove Road.
 
Sounds like some good ideas, Mike.  Good luck on your move to SI.
 
IRISH said:
Can any of our Sr. members remember back when Rescue 5 start responding off the island to parts of Bklyn was there any strong talk of putting a Squad in Service on the island back then for SOC cover??

You also get times when Rescue 5 is called into Manh as cover if R1 & R3 have a Water Incident leaving SI with no SOC cover

or the Train Derailment back in Dec '13 when you had 3 of the 5 Rescues in Da Bronx and all Squads nearly at one stage (Sq 252 even breaking down)
Click to expand...
I do not ever remember any talk in the past of a SQ on SI .....in 1984 when R*5 was organized there was no SOC.... there was not even Rescue Services (SOC forerunner) until 1986....prior to then Rescue's & SQ*1 were assigned to the BN they were in & no real coordination between the Units as far as training or standardization of equiptment & procedures..there was also no detailing of Members to even manpower between them but rather from the local BN Units....actually there was no Rescue training except for individual in house stuff ....there are procedures for coverage/Rescue relocations in place now....after 9-11 it was decided not to have all 5 Rescues operating @ the same incident @ the same time....however @ the BX 99 cent store Fire that killed LT Carpluk & FF Reilly at one point all 5 R's were there but when the then Chief of Ops realized it he ordered one to leave & go back in service...not sure how many operated @ the last BX train wreck......as far as SI R*5 was organized there to protect SI & the citizens should look to have it centrally located on SI & not leave the Island to go to routine jobs in BKLYN.   
 
R 5 went back into service in 1984 at E 160 with no response assignments to Brooklyn, even though the firehouse was minutes away from bridge.  E 160 firehouse was not selected with intent to respond the Rescue into Bay Ridge or Coney Island. 

A more central location for R 5 to cover SI back then might have been E 159 - but satellite was located there in 1983. Or E 165, or E 166, but you would have had to move a truck.   

The location at E 160 made their later response assignment into Brooklyn convenient (42nd and 43rd Bn), but does leave SI w/o a rescue or squad when they go to Brooklyn.  It is a very long trip for R 2 or Squad 252 to go to parts of SI if R 5 and Squad 1 are both operating in Brooklyn. 
 
In house visit to "White Lightning" Engine 165 / Tower Ladder 85, New Dorp, SI

Tower Ladder 85 is AKA "Monster Truck"

Notice both companies in this house now have brand new rigs, I believe they saw their first job together a few days ago at SI AH Box 3832.

Video is from AKB360:


http://youtu.be/ChA2I9ooQOg
 
3511 said:
From NFPA Standards - Assessing Community Vulnerability.

This may add to this interesting thread of discussion. I am not that familiar with SI and have no dog in this fight. Curious as to how these standards line up with current situation in SI. Page 4- 8 lays out definitions of different hazard areas and recommended FD response assignments.
If link below doesn't open just Google "NFPA Fire Service Deployment - Assessing Community Vulnetability"

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=HT3qU5izKsb9yQSFpIGYCg&url=http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/member%2520access/member%2520sections/metro%2520chiefs/urbanfirevulnerability.pdf&cd=1&ved=0CBwQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHTApAz-_s70NNPDtjW7iyVCsPKOw&sig2=7G9CafH0L5jVgc0CbIgwhA
Click to expand...


NFPA......written by people who've probably never been in a fire building.....

FDNY doesn't have a long history of paying a great deal of attention to them.....though occasionally forced to care....
 
NFPA. Not For Practical Application
Like JohnnyBopp said written by people who've never fought a fire
The only way they've fought it is with their keyboards
 
It is not a money issue....The officers and members of 165 already receive the 12% SOC pay differential.
 
"NFPA. Not For Practical Application 
Like JohnnyBopp said written by people who've never fought a fire 
The only way they've fought it is with their keyboards".

That's it? No further comments?

Gee, I know a lot of FDNY guys, active and retired, who make serious contributions to those NFPA standards.

And as a former volunteer ff, I probably benefited from those standards.

All I was looking for was to further Mack's honest discussion on the coverage for SI.

Guess I touched a 3d rail?
 
3511 said:
That's it? No further comments?

Gee, I know a lot of FDNY guys, active and retired, who make serious contributions to those NFPA standards.

And as a former volunteer ff, I probably benefited from those standards.

All I was looking for was to further Mack's honest discussion on the coverage for SI.

Guess I touched a 3d rail?
Click to expand...

The NFPA is indeed a bit of a 3rd rail.....

While there might be those who represent out interests on some panel, there are also those who study firefighting in a lab setting, far removed from the field.  There are also representatives of equipment manufacturers.  Look at recent rules put in place about 10 year life spans for turnout gear and helmets.  The FDNY offered to fully fund a study showing a longer lifespan.  This was shot down by the gear makers lobby to sell more stuff....

....that's all i need to hear about them.
 
They are the guys who mandated lime green fire engines aren't they? Guess that says plenty.
 
Nice pictures. Thanks Buff.

When E 165 went into service in 1960, they had a 1946 Ward LaFrance pumper with a 200 gallon booster tank.  Ladder 85 had a 1938 FWD 85 foot tiller pulled by a 1948 WLF tractor.  Brand new SI companies with a lot of boxes, long runs, many working fires and multiples - and they got 15-20 year old apparatus.   
 
Mack,

On the day 165/85 went in service, E82 was assigned a 1947 Mack 750GPM with no booster tank: L 48 had a 1938 FWD w/ 1947 WLF tractor too. Both among the busiest companies in the city at the time. E42 was still running with a 1941 Mack.

Just sayin'...
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top