Squad 41 First Due Area

'one company was disbanded and another was newly established...'  '  "Re-deployed" as in, for example, the closure of one engine in Manhattan ...
it would appear that there was no net loss (or gain) in personnel citywide.'

With No Net Loss of Units or the Number of Personnel, What then, was the Point, Exactly, of all this elaborate Re-deployment and Designation ?

It seems, a typical, bumbling and complicated NYC Bureaucratic Scheme , executed in a manner intended to create the illusion of productive management.  ::)  :p
 
If the objective was to close Engine companies, then they could say that they did so.  Maybe unsaid was that other companies were formed in the same area.  Technically that is called reallocation of resources.  Otherwise, it's known as shuffling the deck.
 
Many FDNY history summaries describe squad origins with the manpower units established during WW1, WW2, the early 1950s and the War Years. These companies responded in converted hose wagons, vans and later with pumpers and performed engine or truck duties to compensate for manpower reductions due to the wars, reduction of work hour schedule (1950s) and the tremendous increase of fires in the War Years. 

Some squad-related questions or points: 

1. There do not seem to be any squad-type units established during World War I even though history summaries indicate they existed.  Were there any squads organized in the 1917-1920 period?

2.  Were the combined engine companies (early FDNY expansion era) and combined fire companies (1970s budget problems) - one company with both engine and ladder apparatus - similar to the squads?

3.  Were the quads (extended WLF pumper with truck company ladders and tools) companies of the 1950s which were assigned to more rural companies (Queens and SI), another version of squads?  Note- both engine companies and ladder companies were assigned quad apparatus.

4.  Ladder 78 operated as Rescue 5 in the late 1940s to early 1960s. One company with both truck and rescue apparatus and assignments.

 
Also, as I remember, FDNY Squads 18, 61, 252, 270 and 288 were formed from those engine companies in an effort to increase the ability to be Haz Mat trained. At the time it was felt there was a threat of a chemical attack, prior to 9/11. After a large multi unit drill involving several agencies, it was felt that more members of the FDNY needed to be trained to deal with this terrorist threat. Under the command of the late Chief Ray Downey, (RIP 9/11), these new Squad companies were developed.

  Already in existence was Squad 1 in Brooklyn and what was originally referred to as "Enhanced Engine 41" in the Bronx. However, I don't believe Haz Mat training was a big part of their duties at the time. I think at least as far as "41" went, it was more for extrication or assigned to working fires where extra manning or truck work was needed.

  That's as I remember it, but maybe some members here can verify or correct this.
 
Mack,

Great questions. Some answers. ..

1. No squads were organized or placed in service during WWI. The WWII Squads were formed in anticipation of aerial bombing from the German Luftwaffe. (There is an incident of an attempt to do that but that is another story.) The WWII squad's were simply designed to provide increased man power where needed in the event enemy bombers attacked NYC. (Relay hose wagons were part of this plan to get water as well where the attack caused fires.)  The idea was copied from the London Fire Brigade's operations during the Blitz of London. The FDNY had sent a contingent to London to study those operations. There was no such threat of aerial bombardment during WWI. (Port protection from sabotage was the concern then.)

2.The combination companies allowed the Department to provide both engine and truck coverage without having to build 2 firehouses for 2 distinct companies. In those days,  engine were engines, trucks were trucks. Each had their own mission and commander and were not co-located. It was the application of the military principle of unity of command.  There could not be 2 commanders under the same roof.

In the outlying areas, a ladder rig was placed with the engine but still under the command of a single captain, with 3 extra firemen assigned. Usually they responded together but often, if there was a single truck company on the assignment card, just the pumper/hose tender went. The ladder section, now under the command of the house lieutenant, remained behind to cover the area.

BTW, there was never an official designation for a "Combination Engine Company". The term was used informally, if at all. Example: the fire company in Woodlawn in the Bronx had both a steamer and a ladder truck but was officially Engine Company 69. Same with 48, 50, 62, ...68...75...79...etc.

3. No again. The quads were simply an attempt to update the combination company idea. Example: Engine Company 96. When organized, L19 moved from its separate quarters on Forrest Avenue to the new house on Bruckner Blvd with 96. After a few years the Department realized there was no need for an aerial ladder in  Clawson Point/Soundview as there was no building anywhere above 30 feet. L19 packed up and moved to E50, where there certainly was that need. A city service ladder and a few extra men went into 96. It was  3 piece company, pumper, hose wagon, and ladder. (My dad worked there after WWII.) In 1951, with the purchase of the Quads, the house did the same job with just one rig. Big $$$ savings. (The quads did not last long as the areas all built up.)

The CFC's of the 19 70's were another way of applying this idea during the City's fiscal crisis.

4. FDNY Rescue Companies have always had the dual role as ladder companies. Kinda' like the US Army Combat Engineers, who double as infantrymen.  Rescues today still respond 1st due where they are closer than any truck company.

In summary, the combined companies specifically provided ladder trucks. The squads, from WWII through the War Years of the 70's, only provided extra manpower where needed. Today's squads go far beyond either of those in their capabilities.

But yeah, in some cases today, they are just extra firefighters where needed. ..but they skeddadle before the hose is repacked.


 
nfd2004 said:
Also, as I remember, FDNY Squads 18, 61, 252, 270 and 288 were formed from those engine companies in an effort to increase the ability to be Haz Mat trained. At the time it was felt there was a threat of a chemical attack, prior to 9/11. After a large multi unit drill involving several agencies, it was felt that more members of the FDNY needed to be trained to deal with this terrorist threat. Under the command of the late Chief Ray Downey, (RIP 9/11), these new Squad companies were developed.

  Already in existence was Squad 1 in Brooklyn and what was originally referred to as "Enhanced Engine 41" in the Bronx. However, I don't believe Haz Mat training was a big part of their duties at the time. I think at least as far as "41" went, it was more for extrication or assigned to working fires where extra manning or truck work was needed.

  That's as I remember it, but maybe some members here can verify or correct this.
Click to expand...
Prior to the forming of the Squads in1998, the only members trained in Level A suits were in Haz Mat 1, only 7 or 8 FDNY members per tour for the whole city.
 
To those military vets in this crowd,  you may remember the following mnemonics:

NBC (Nuclear/Biological/Chemical) ops...

Which became...

CBR (Chemical/Biological/Radiological) ops....

Which became. ..

MOPP  (can't remember that one, only doing 6 hour artillery operations in that damn MOPP space suit....

No way you would EVER find me in a HAZMAT or Squad today.

Very tough duty for those firefighters.  God Bless 'em.


 
Many FDNY history summaries describe squad origins with the manpower units established during WW1, WW2, the early 1950s and the War Years. These companies responded in converted hose wagons, vans and later with pumpers and performed engine or truck duties to compensate for manpower reductions due to the wars, reduction of work hour schedule (1950s) and the tremendous increase of fires in the War Years. 

Some squad-related questions or points: 

There do not seem to be any squad-type units established during World War I even though history summaries indicate they existed.  Were there any squads organized in the 1917-1920 period?

During WWI and through the 1920?s , FDNY was still expanding into formerly volunteer stations, mostly in Queens .  They were also transitioning from horse drawn to motorized apparatus.  Many second sections were closed and Queens hose companies became regular engine companies.

There were no FD squads but there were early motorized ?hose type? wagons that had bench seats for about 10 people.  These were the original NYPD squads.  Some precincts had barracks for ?squads? of officers deployed together to respond rapidly to civil disturbances in large numbers.  This is where police ?squad car? or ?squad wagon? originated.

The Fire Patrol also responded with manpower in similar squad wagons.  In their turnout gear, patrolios would be indistinguishable from firefighters to the general public.

These may have been the squads in the summaries of that time.

Were the combined engine companies (early FDNY expansion era) and combined fire companies (1970s budget problems) - one company with both engine and ladder apparatus - similar to the squads?

As 3511 said, some engine companies were assigned a ladder as a third rig.  (Engine and hose wagon were the other two rigs.)  One larger sized crew under one officer operated together.

The 1974-1977 Combination Fire Companie?s were more remotely located engine and ladder companies located in the same house that were staffed by one crew.  CFC 121 on City Island was formed from Engine 70 and Ladder 53; CFC 131 in Tottenville was formed from Engine 151 and Ladder 76, and CFC 151 in the Springfield Gardens area was formed from Engine 311 and Ladder 158.    All three CFC?s operated an engine and a  towerladder.

Were the quads (extended WLF pumper with truck company ladders and tools) companies of the 1950s which were assigned to more rural companies (Queens and SI), another version of squads?  Note- both engine companies and ladder companies were assigned quad apparatus.

The designation of apparatus is based on capabilities.  There are hose wagons, pumpers (engines), tankers, ladders, and aerials.  A unit with a hose bed, pump, and tank is a triple combination.  With ground ladders added, it is a quad.  With an aerial device, it is a quint.  Triples are always engines.  Quads were assigned as either engines or ladders.  Quints made a few rare appearances in FDNY, but nationwide they tend to be assigned to ladder companies while telesquirts tend to be assigned to engines.

The term ?squad? originates in the military and describes a task unit with 8 to 15 people assigned.  In the early 1900?s NYPD, it was a rapid response manpower unit to assist field patrol units when lots of additional people were necessary quickly.  Squad apparatus were primarily for manpower transportation with minimal personal tools or other capabilities.  This continued through the FDNY squads of the 50?s and 60?s.  In the late 60?s and into the 70?s, squads began to operate with pumpers.  Note also that in the 80?s, engines with non-functioning pumps were identified as squads by the dispatchers.

Combinations, quads, and CFC?s were not comparable to squads, as used. 

Ladder 78 operated as Rescue 5 in the late 1940s to early 1960s. One company with both truck and rescue apparatus and assignments.

Ladder 78 and Rescue 5 was a dual role company with one crew.  Unlike the more common dual role engine and ladder combination companies, L78/R5 was dual role ladder and rescue company.  As 3511 said, Rescues may respond 1st due where they are closer than any truck company but unlike L78/R5, they do not have a ladder apparatus.

Today?s squads have distinct capabilities as well as providing 1st due engine services.  They operate engines with more equipment storage capabilities along with a second haz mat apparatus with additional equipment.  In that sense, they are more like combination companies.  (Engine & Haz Mat)  Note also that all seven squads are in single engine houses.

The deployment of today?s squads is more influenced by where their services are most frequently needed, the availability of adjacent engine companies, and the need to keep certain engine houses open that may have been otherwise targeted for closure, rather than strictly by response time.

See also:  http://nycfire.net/forums/index.php/topic,28396.msg95371.html#msg95371
 
Engine 19 - 355 W. 25th St., Chelsea - Disbanded Jan. 1, 1947 (Close to E3 and E1)
Engine 20 - 243 Lafayette St., SoHo - Disbanded Jan. 1, 1947 (Close to E13 and E55)
Engine 25 - 342 E. 5th St., Alphabet City - Disbanded Jan. 1, 1947 (Close to E28 and E33)
Engine 29 - 160 Chambers St., Tribeca - Disbanded Jan. 1, 1947 (Close to E7 and E27)

There was one additional engine company disbanded on Jan. 1 , 1947 to add to 'fdny1075k's list.

Engine 4 - 119 Maiden Ln ? Disbanded Jan. 1, 1947 (Close to E10 and E32)

On any specific date, when one company is disbanded and one company is created, it is only an assumption that one was used to form the other.  (Although pretty reasonable, it is still just an assumption.  i.e.  On 11/22/1972 Engine 208 was disbanded and Engine 167 was formed.)  Sometimes a Department Order may confirm the assumption, sometimes not.)

On January 1, 1947, five engine companies were disbanded and Ladder 159 was organized.  Which disbanded company was used for the new Ladder company?  Hard to say, if any or if such was the case at all.)

 
Thanks, fdhistorian, for all this information; very interesting!  Do you know if there was any reaction from the unions, the media, politicians or the general public when these companies were disbanded?  Engine 19 at 355 W. 25th Street, for example, was located in a neighborhood of densely-packed tenements which were razed in the late 1950's and early '60's and replaced by Penn South.  They also would have been first due for some of the Chelsea piers (the real, working piers as opposed to what's there today; the Chelsea piers were once the busiest piers in the busiest port in the world.), and maybe second due at Penn Station and the Pennsylvania Hotel, both high-profile, high-traffic locations.  I don't think there was as much public outcry back then as there is today when houses are closed.  Thanks in advance.
 
That?s an excellent question, manhattan.  In reading articles about department activities many decades ago, it seems as if the unions, the media, the politicians, and the general public were much more trusting or accepting of the workings of government.  Or it could simply be that reactions to government actions were not considered as part of the news.  Media reporting was mostly objective ? ?The facts, Ma?am, just the facts.?  A station or company closure was reported as a factual occurrence and reporters did not seek out public opinion.  The editorial page was still distinct from the front page.

What changed?  In the late 60?s, beginning with the Watts riots, firefighters and fire apparatus became targets of violence.  Sociologists called it a ?disconnect? with the community, as if it was the Fire Department?s fault that drew the bricks and bottles.  One approach towards a solution was to encourage a sense of community, hence, the ?neighborhood firehouse.?  Don?t mess with the firemen ? they belong to your neighborhood.

That worked well ? so well that when a station or company was closed or re-deployed, some neighborhoods rose up to defend ?their firehouse.?  The media had also transitioned from reporting facts to reporting feelings.  ?How do you feel about your neighborhood firehouse being closed??  What exactly were they expecting people to say?  ?Not in my back yard!?  Protests and demonstrations make great news stories.

In the first half of the 1900?s, company closures were still largely due to technology.  Horse drawn apparatus was replaced by motorized equipment and old, small stations were consolidated into larger, more centralized buildings.  The public recognized those changes as progress.  Closures due to firefighter workweek hour reductions were often balanced by hiring additional firefighters or by union support of larger company crews.  It wasn?t until closures were caused primarily by budgetary shortfalls that the public started becoming vocal about their concerns.

The most recent company closures following the stock market decline in 2008 have been protested with whimpers compared to outrage.  City fathers now present the issue as a choice ? close the firehouse or we can raise your taxes.  Makes people think twice before protesting.

These are just my opinions based on historical research of departments around the country.  No doubt there are many other reasons why sometimes the community cares about the local firehouse and other times they do not.
 
"fdhistorian", thank you for that report. What you say is very true.

I can remember when one of the Engine Companies was closed in Brooklyn. The people fought that closure and that firehouse in Brooklyn became known as "The Peoples Firehouse". The citizens in that neighborhood actually "chained themselves together" inside that firehouse, along with the on duty members.  As a result of their action, that firehouse and company was kept open.

  As I remember, their response was limited to a first alarm assignment area. They would not leave that area. That company became known as FDNYs Squad 1 of the "Peoples Firehouse". I remember reading articles about it in magazines like Firehouse. It became a world wide known firehouse because of what the citizens did in order to keep it open.

  Sometime later there was talk of closing then Engine 41. But in an effort to keep that firehouse open, Engine 41 became what was called "Enhanced Engine 41", with additional duties similar to a Rescue Company covering the South Bronx and Harlem. It was assigned on working fires, extrication, etc throughout that area. As I understand it, our site member "68jk09" was one of the first Lts and site member "69mets" was one of the first members to organize that company into what today is called "Squad 41".

  I hope I've given the facts correctly. I'm sure I've only scratched the surface of what went on and I hope I presented it correctly from what I know.
 
World War II - NYFP:

The NYFP provided extended support to FDNY during WWII to assist with manpower shortages die to FDNY members entering military service.  They provided manpower support and had an operational understanding with FDNY.  I believe NYFP units operated during WWII directly under the control of FDNY at working fires and multiples.  They responded with multiple NYFP companies to provide additional support and overhaul capabilities.

Quads: 

Engine and ladder companies which were supplied quint apparatus definitely resembled a more advanced squad concept than the actual squad companies of the 1950s era which responded in vans and Metro trucks.  The WWII and 1950s squads were manpower units which preformed either engine or truck duties at fires - but did not have apparatus and equipment to work with.  They could not operate independently.  The engine and truck companies in the 1950s who were assigned quad apparatus (there were about 5 or 6 WLF quads) performed either engine or truck duties and had appropriate apparatus, pump, hose and tools to do so.  If Engine 152 arrived 1st due, members could perform ladder duties and continue to do so when truck companies arrived or switch over to engine duties.  Ladder 76 could stretch a line and perform independently as an engine company duties, especially during brush fire season. 


Rescue 5:

Rescue 5 in the 1950s was a combination company - Ladder 78 truck company or  Rescue 5.  They were either/or, and were assigned a tiller ladder truck and a converted WLF hose wagon.  The members enclosed the apparatus to resemble the other rescue companies.  Ladder 78 had had an officer and 7 or 8 FFs assigned and responded with either, not both, rigs.  They would operate as a truck if assigned as a ladder company or as the rescue if assigned as Rescue 5. 


Combos:

The combined fire companies of the 1970s had full engine and truck crews and responded with both engine and truck apparatus but eliminated an officer.  They had 4 captains assigned to respective firehouses to replace the 2 captains and 6 lieutenants previously assigned when they were respective engines and trucks.  They were very inflexible.  An engine-only special call for a minor trash or grass fire required full response of combined engine and truck vehicles and crews.  It also presented problems for a truck-only special call or multiple alarm assignment,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top