Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 26 FirstFirst ... 916171819202122 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 380 of 507
Like Tree164Likes

Thread: Fire Attack photo

  1. #361
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Great value? How many people do I need standing outside when the fire and the people needing rescue are inside? You see we run pumps with ONE pump operator and tenders usually with just a driveronce we arrive on scene. The other member in the tender would join the engine company and do whatever assignment the IC gave them, including masking up and going interior. Generally pump operators help change bottles, or ems does. Rehab is ems. So tell me what do I need 5 or 10 or 15 exterior guys for? That's right, I don't. I need guys to relieve those working inside for bottle changes and rehab. Not lawn ornaments. I will say when guys get older and want to slow down many of them turn to driving, but they all remain scba and interior qualified, it just may not be their first choice assignment.

    With virtually no standards, and no medical qualifications, what do you really have anyways?

    So once your tanker driver goes interior, who drives the tanker? I guess I would prefer to use dedicated driver/operators who are not responsible for changing bottles, but that's just me. Funny thing is that our exterior people aren't lawn ornaments. Setting up fans. Filling and dumping tankers. Raising ladders. Footing ladders. Exterior handlines. Command functions. And we do our own rehab and medical monitering even though EMS is on scene.


    And how many people, who could be of great value, are excluded from operating ion the fireground because they have ti be interior-qualified?

    Great value? We would lose none.

    And many, many small rural VFDs would lose 50% or more of their fire departments, so yes, in this part of the state at least they have GREAT value.


    So once again the certification that you have called useless so many times is required for deployment. How ironic.

    It's required by NIMS and preferred by the state.


    Not enough resources to deploy, and frankly, no interest. As far as mutual aid, we generally bring to the table more SCBA qualified members than the host department when responding MA in our own parish, unless we are rolling into the neighboring city or my combo fire district in the next parish.

    Sure you do. For the scenario posted here you couldn't muster enugh interior people to check for extension. So which fairy tale shall we believe?

    I gave you the worst case if the fire occurs on the wrong day, and yes, that does happen now and then. I also gave you the typical scenario (first post of mine on the topic) with a response of 5. Funny thing is that is the exact response we had last week on a kitchen fire. Imagine that.


    And that tells the entire pathetic story of firefighting in your area. Acceptance of warm bodies and names on a roster to give the appearance of a fire department.

    There are places in my parish as well as all over north LA where providing bodies for fire operations is challenge. I would be willing to bet that we are not the only state where that is an issue.


    Yes you have said it, time and time again. So sorry, I will not let you lie your way out of it here.

    Useless for rookie training for rural and small community VFDs. Has value for promotional training in those departments. Not a new tune.


    So what did you do besides wring your hands and slink off? Hvw yo revamped it and re-introduced it? Have ou sought out your politicians and tried to sway them? Have yone anything besides whine about the Union firefighters? I already know the answer is no. Bit then again doing nothing is always easier isn't it? And don't say it isn't YOUR job, because it most certainly is if you are unhappy with the status quo. Otherwise you are a hypocrite.

    I have no influence at the state level. never thought to become a player on the state level and quite honestly have no desire either. there are folks that like being on that stage and I'm perfectly happy to leave that kind of stuff to them. To the best of my knowledge, there isn't a whole lot of interest in the volunteer fire service statewide to bring up the discussion of a minimum standard again. And quite frankly, I have no reason to believe that it would garner anymore political support than it did the last time, especially if the volunteer fire service isn't heavily behind it.


    Never said I didn't see advantages, and that may be one, but I see more disadvantages and funding issues with having it implemented especially given LSU Fire training's budget situation.

    More excuses and no real soluions other than to bury your head in the sand and change nothing.

    Again, not my role to be concerned about what happens on the state stage. As far as possibly supporting it, at this time I simply see no way that LSU Fire training would have the funding to initiate a new program. It would require instructors for train-the-train programs, admin support and instructors to deliver testing, and the staff, and the funding, simply isn't available for that. They have been laying off and not replacing staff that has left, so they are struggling to just deliver what they already have in place. There is no point is starting anew program such as this, even if the volunteer fire service was behind it, if there is no funding or staff to deliver it.

    LSU Fire Training is undergoing somewhat of a reorganization. They simply aren't in a place right now where something of this size could be pulled off.


    See this is where you are hysterical. Now you may not even support the plan you supported. What if it was simply a standard and you still taught it in house with a state supervised written and practical test at the end of the course? I know...you won't support that either.

    See above .. LSU simply isn't capable of supporting that type of program right now. They tried that exact formula for 1403 class a couple of years ago, and it didn't work. Not enough interest in the volunteer community. problems delivering the Train-the-trainer classes and problems in having enough instructors for testing and staying on budget.

    As far a still supporting it, maybe, though I have doubts about mandated testing.

    Even a program like that could have some significant impacts on rural VFDs and thier ability to respond.


    When you reach for the bottom that is all you ever get. As I said we struggled for years with mediocre people and when we raised the training stndards we lost some people but gained far more. We have had a full or almost full roster on my #1 POC FD for well over decade now and training requirements just took another bump up.

    Would have the effect here of reducing volunteers. People here just don't want to give up their outdoor time and would balk at additional training requirements.

    Of course they do...do you send the maintenance men or just vollies?

    We try to send just qualified volunteers if possible so that there will be minimum effect on the shift schedule and general day to day operations. When need be, we will send some of the paid staff, but that is only if we have to.

    Fact is most volunteer/POC FDs in my tech collage district ALREADY MANDATE FF1 and some MANDATE FF2. Funny thing is they don't struggle for members and no Union anywhere had a damn thing to do with it. Some are now requirinf Certified Fire Apparatus Driver Operator and Certified Officer 1 for promotion. Yes Bobby being a driver is a promotion not where they hide people that won't or never would go interior.

    I don't know of a VFD, or even a combo department, that requires FFI for it's volunteer personnel. Simply not done in this area. Encouraged? Yes, but not required.

    As I said, my combo department requires it for promotion, and my VFD is headed in that direction, which I have no issues at all with as it does provide good general knowledge.

    Entry Level Firefighter 1 & 2 is a generic rookie firefighter training program taught through the state technical college system. It teaches basic hose evolutions, hose loads, SCBA usage, ladders, forcible entry, overhaul, fire behavior, fire attack, and has a live fire training exercise component. It is essentially a VERY basic rookie school. The advantage is it is STANDARDIZED so every starts the same.

    That's the problem .. it's generic. My rookies don't have any need to know about building types that are not in our district, tools that we don't carry, windows and doors we likely will never be required to force open and operations that we will likely never carry out. The rookies in my combo department need to know a hell of a lot more about tanker ops and brush fires than FFI provides, and they also need to know about vehicle extrication, foam and refinery operations before they take FFII. the same can be said about my volunteer department and some skills they need to know which are not covered in FFI. My rookies don't need generic training ... They need very specific training on our specific operations, buildings, tools and equipment.

    This we will never agree on. So let's just not discuss it anymore.

    Again, I'm training my members for my department, not the neighboring department or a department across the state should they move.



    Like what? Hose? Nozzles? Ladders? Axes? Pike poles? Fire? SCBA? What will they never see? Come on tell me? WHAT OF THOSE BASIC SKILLS WILL THEY NEVER SEE? Here is where you argument is completely and totally baseless and you just look like an argumentative azz.

    Sure, some of that stuff can be pulled, and is pulled from FFI and used in my rookie classes. Safety. Fire behavior. Applicable parts of building construction. But the other stuff .... They need to be taught what is applicable to our departments. As an example my combo department uses no smoothbores at all. not applicable to rookies. They need to be taught what tools, equipment and techniques they will use tomorrow in our operations. That's all they need to know at this point in their career.



    We disagree, because you idea of competence for some FDs is exterior defensive only firefighters. That simply is not acceptable here and I don't think it is as accepted there as you believe. Just wait til gramma is hanging out the window and your exterior heroes can't rescue her and she burns to death right in front of the public's eye...Yeah, they will understand. Especially gramma's family's attorney.

    We will never agree on this either. there are and always will be departments where defensive operations is the standard. That is all they have the resources and training for, Grandma or no Grandma.

    And if that is the best they can do, that's fine with me.



    Yes, stuff happens, your ever so glib "La la la people die and I don't care" attitude. Why are you even in the fire service if you don't give a flying F**K about the citizens? Yes, I have had people die at calls, both fire and ems, and sometimes there is nothing you can do to change the outcome, but other times aggressive, FAST action can save lives. Your model of look for all the reasons not to go inside is NOT normal, it is NOT the model of the fire service. It is your method of never getting a boo boo and the citizens pay the ultimate price in the end. Proper, quick efficient size-up saves lives and property. Which is why I became a firefighter in the first place. Why don't you just get a camera stand on the curb and be a fire buff? At least then you wouldn't be in the way at scenes or in the way of prgress.

    Fact, is i don't disagree with you one bit. I would love to be able to know that I could go offensive all the time at my VFD. I would love to know that I would have the reasonable response time, manpower, experience and training all the time. But I don't. And never will. When everything comes together, if there is viable life and property to save, I'll have at it. But that occurs only some of the time, and that's the reality, so i accept that the fact that committing members when I don't have what I need will not change the outcome, and only puts them at greater risk of suffering a "boo-boo" that may keep them from work and providing for their families.

    We have already made progress at my VFD, but it takes time. We will never likely get to the level of my combo department, simply because of funding, career staffing and the volunteer pool. And that is perfectly OK.


    And I know that there are departments with fewer resources and manpower, and a lesser level of training and experience than mine. And yes, I understand their situations.

    Why NEVER? Is there a time warp there? Is it a looped time continuum there that refuses to allow change? Is it against Louisiana law for fire protection to improve? Is there a local conspiracy to burn down the town? WHY CAN'T POSITIVE CHANGE EVER OCCUR? You see this is where you sound like a complete numbskull and an enabler for believing that change simply will never occur. It may never occur while you are in the area since you keep patting them on the head and saying "yeah you guys suck, but it's okay, you don't need to ever change."

    Money. Funding. Volunteer base. Demographics. ya, I know, excuses. When you can expand the taxbase for these departments, they can fund change. When you can change the demographics so that the rural areas are not becoming increasingly older, you can have the volunteers for change. When there is more funding for LSU to deliver training, you can have much better training support.

    We have made changes at my VFD. Slightly increased training requirements. have increased the number of members with voluntary FFI. have changed the attack philosphy to deliver more water to the fire faster with an initial exterior stream. have seen alight budget increase and upgraded our tool inventory. Yes, changes have been made, but we are still, and likely always will be hampered by manpower and response times, and that realistically can't be greatly changed.

    You see, change often can't occur if the factors that are causing the problems don't change. And that is, and likely always will be the case throughout rural northern LA.


    Yet for this scenario you couldn't muster enough guys to knock down a garage fire and check inside the house for extension. Remind me again which version of the fairy tale to believe?

    See previous answer. First scenario I discussed was 5, which is typical. And yes, we can get only 1 or 2.


    In these economic times, when you **** and moan about the lack of financial support for your volly FDs you have no problem with the citizens of the city paying to come out and fight your fires with no reimbursement from the volly FDs. God man you are the epitomy of the word hypocrite.

    Funny thing is, the Chief of the neighboring city suggested that they be added to our first alarm.

    By the way, we drain thier resources 4 or 5 times a year. That is the sum total of all of our structure fires, smoke investigations and fire alarms. Ya, we're real bloodsuckers.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.


  2. #362
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    If you really don't want to believe that unionized firefighters support FFI to make it more difficult to volunteer in the hope that some all volunteer departments will add career members or combo departments will go all career, so be it.

    I'm not hat naive.
    I agree, you're not that naive. You're simply that ignorant and biased when it comes to anything union related.

    While there may be some that support a mandated minimum training standard like FF1 as you assert, they would represent a very small portion of the career fire service. Most career firefighters in large metro departments probably don't even give it much of a thought because 1) their co-workers are trained to at least that standard, even if they don't issue the official certification and 2) they will rarely, if ever work with volunteer departments and have no interest in conquering them either.

    For the career firefighters in smaller career departments and combo departments the support for a minimum training standard like FF1 is predominately about wanting to be assured that the people they may end up working along side are trained to a common standard and capable of doing the job.

    In my department, we had only full-time personnel up until about 8 years ago. A lot of the guys in the past were trained on the job, partially because we were large enough to do that, but not big enough to run a true fire academy on our own. About 12 years ago, the large metro department near us extended to us the opportunity to send new hires to their fire academy when they ran classes for their new recruits. We sent several new hires with no experience there for training with positive results.

    About 8 years ago, we added part-time firefighters to our department for the first time in our history. When this happened, the position of part-time firefighter became our entry-level position. As a small department, we need our new firefighters to be able to hit the ground running pretty much from day one. When you initial respond with only a handful of people to a fire, you simply can't safely "teach" someone with no experience how to do the job.

    As you know, sending part-time employees to a 12+ week long full-time fire academy in not very feasible. When we (the union) set up the rules & requirements regarding part-time firefighters in conjunction with the City officials, we insisted on applicants being FF1 certified in order to test. It was the entry-level certification recognized by the state for firefighting (even though not mandatory). We also knew that this requirement would yield new co-workers with a known minimum level of training, some experience and for the most part weed out the yard breathers and lawn jockeys among the numerous volunteers in our region that really wouldn't be of much operational value to us. So far it's worked out exactly like we suspected it would.

    Aside from that, we support it because we routinely work with some of the VFDs. When they come to help us, we want people that can do the job. When we go to help them, we want our people to be working along side firefighters trained to a known standard and not simply what they think is "good enough".

    I look at it this way. Anybody that gets on the truck when it goes out the door should be state certified for whatever role they play in the grand scheme of things. Cops have to be state certified. EMS has to be state certified. Fire should be too! If jobs are "created" because not enough volunteer personnel can achieve certification, so be it. However, it's not a reason why I support mandatory certification.

  3. #363
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    9,975

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireMedic049 View Post
    Cops have to be state certified.
    Exactamundo. Even those who are reserve LEOs have to meet the same standards as professionals when it comes to certs and keeping their POST certs current. All done on their own time. In addition to that, they must perform a MINIMUM of 16 hours of service per month. That means actually doing something. Failure to meet any of those requirements and they are politely thanked for their service and released from the program.

    Believing that VFDs and their members are different is just a rationalization for them to avoid actually doing the work required.

    LAFE is typical of that mindset.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  4. #364
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by conrad427 View Post
    Just out of curiosity, how do you get FF1 in some of your guy's areas? In my area you go to the state fire school and take the class. It takes 80 to 100 hours and $1400 dollars not including room and board which is another $600. The problem I have is that if you don't pass one of the skills tests the first time you don't get to try again, you have to pay the $1400 and take the class over again. The class is not really designed to certify to the FF1 level, it is designed to provide at least some level of training because My state has no minimum level of training.
    In my state, FF1 itself is a challenge certification. It is a written and practical test offered periodically at approved locations and costs around $100 or so.

    The primary prerequisite for testing is a 160ish hour 4-module class called "Essentials of Firefighting" which is basically the accepted entry-level training state-wide. The class is fairly readily available and offered at little to no cost. There are a few other recognized alternatives, but they are mainly formal fire academy recruit training programs.

  5. #365
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireMedic049 View Post
    I agree, you're not that naive. You're simply that ignorant and biased when it comes to anything union related.

    While there may be some that support a mandated minimum training standard like FF1 as you assert, they would represent a very small portion of the career fire service. Most career firefighters in large metro departments probably don't even give it much of a thought because 1) their co-workers are trained to at least that standard, even if they don't issue the official certification and 2) they will rarely, if ever work with volunteer departments and have no interest in conquering them either.

    For the career firefighters in smaller career departments and combo departments the support for a minimum training standard like FF1 is predominately about wanting to be assured that the people they may end up working along side are trained to a common standard and capable of doing the job.

    In my department, we had only full-time personnel up until about 8 years ago. A lot of the guys in the past were trained on the job, partially because we were large enough to do that, but not big enough to run a true fire academy on our own. About 12 years ago, the large metro department near us extended to us the opportunity to send new hires to their fire academy when they ran classes for their new recruits. We sent several new hires with no experience there for training with positive results.

    About 8 years ago, we added part-time firefighters to our department for the first time in our history. When this happened, the position of part-time firefighter became our entry-level position. As a small department, we need our new firefighters to be able to hit the ground running pretty much from day one. When you initial respond with only a handful of people to a fire, you simply can't safely "teach" someone with no experience how to do the job.

    As you know, sending part-time employees to a 12+ week long full-time fire academy in not very feasible. When we (the union) set up the rules & requirements regarding part-time firefighters in conjunction with the City officials, we insisted on applicants being FF1 certified in order to test. It was the entry-level certification recognized by the state for firefighting (even though not mandatory). We also knew that this requirement would yield new co-workers with a known minimum level of training, some experience and for the most part weed out the yard breathers and lawn jockeys among the numerous volunteers in our region that really wouldn't be of much operational value to us. So far it's worked out exactly like we suspected it would.

    Aside from that, we support it because we routinely work with some of the VFDs. When they come to help us, we want people that can do the job. When we go to help them, we want our people to be working along side firefighters trained to a known standard and not simply what they think is "good enough".

    I look at it this way. Anybody that gets on the truck when it goes out the door should be state certified for whatever role they play in the grand scheme of things. Cops have to be state certified. EMS has to be state certified. Fire should be too! If jobs are "created" because not enough volunteer personnel can achieve certification, so be it. However, it's not a reason why I support mandatory certification.
    Up until we were forced to become civil service, my combo department, like yours, hired simply from within.

    Given that we only have 8 full-time employees, we hire very infrequently, however, one of the requirements to apply is to have FFI in hand. That is in part why we encourage members to take certification classes, deliver the classes or pay for them and pay for FFI testing.

    And it has worked out well for us as well.

    As far as training, we at my combo department are aware of what our mutual aid departments provide, and have no need for certification their members to know that they are trained.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  6. #366
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Great value? How many people do I need standing outside when the fire and the people needing rescue are inside? You see we run pumps with ONE pump operator and tenders usually with just a driveronce we arrive on scene. The other member in the tender would join the engine company and do whatever assignment the IC gave them, including masking up and going interior. Generally pump operators help change bottles, or ems does. Rehab is ems. So tell me what do I need 5 or 10 or 15 exterior guys for? That's right, I don't. I need guys to relieve those working inside for bottle changes and rehab. Not lawn ornaments. I will say when guys get older and want to slow down many of them turn to driving, but they all remain scba and interior qualified, it just may not be their first choice assignment.

    With virtually no standards, and no medical qualifications, what do you really have anyways?

    So once your tanker driver goes interior, who drives the tanker? I guess I would prefer to use dedicated driver/operators who are not responsible for changing bottles, but that's just me. Funny thing is that our exterior people aren't lawn ornaments. Setting up fans. Filling and dumping tankers. Raising ladders. Footing ladders. Exterior handlines. Command functions. And we do our own rehab and medical monitering even though EMS is on scene.

    Seriously are you this dense? Please note the bold areas of the following quote from above.

    You see we run pumps with ONE pump operator and tenders usually with just a driver once we arrive on scene. The other member in the tender would join the engine company and do whatever assignment the IC gave them, including masking up and going interior.
    Any fourth grader with basic reading comprehension would note that driver and OTHER member would mean 2 firefighters arrived on the tender. The driver stays with the tender and the other member joins up with the engine company. Reading, it's fundamental.

    And how many people, who could be of great value, are excluded from operating ion the fireground because they have ti be interior-qualified?

    Great value? We would lose none.

    And many, many small rural VFDs would lose 50% or more of their fire departments, so yes, in this part of the state at least they have GREAT value.

    Yet again, what are they really losing? Outside firefighters that most often save no one and nothing.

    So once again the certification that you have called useless so many times is required for deployment. How ironic.

    It's required by NIMS and preferred by the state.

    And because it is required you will do it. thanks for making my argument for state mandated training standards.

    Not enough resources to deploy, and frankly, no interest. As far as mutual aid, we generally bring to the table more SCBA qualified members than the host department when responding MA in our own parish, unless we are rolling into the neighboring city or my combo fire district in the next parish.

    Sure you do. For the scenario posted here you couldn't muster enugh interior people to check for extension. So which fairy tale shall we believe?


    I gave you the worst case if the fire occurs on the wrong day, and yes, that does happen now and then. I also gave you the typical scenario (first post of mine on the topic) with a response of 5. Funny thing is that is the exact response we had last week on a kitchen fire. Imagine that.


    So worst case scenario is house burns down everyone dies, best case scenario house burns down slower.

    And that tells the entire pathetic story of firefighting in your area. Acceptance of warm bodies and names on a roster to give the appearance of a fire department.

    There are places in my parish as well as all over north LA where providing bodies for fire operations is challenge. I would be willing to bet that we are not the only state where that is an issue.

    That shouldn't be a challenge it should be a sign that you will accept anything and anyone that can put on a turn out coat, regardless of how little true value they have as a firefighter.

    Yes you have said it, time and time again. So sorry, I will not let you lie your way out of it here.

    Useless for rookie training for rural and small community VFDs. Has value for promotional training in those departments. Not a new tune.

    Nope, being trained better than you like is not a negative, despite the fact that it wipes out your little dog and pony show.

    So what did you do besides wring your hands and slink off? Hvw yo revamped it and re-introduced it? Have ou sought out your politicians and tried to sway them? Have yone anything besides whine about the Union firefighters? I already know the answer is no. Bit then again doing nothing is always easier isn't it? And don't say it isn't YOUR job, because it most certainly is if you are unhappy with the status quo. Otherwise you are a hypocrite.

    I have no influence at the state level. never thought to become a player on the state level and quite honestly have no desire either. there are folks that like being on that stage and I'm perfectly happy to leave that kind of stuff to them. To the best of my knowledge, there isn't a whole lot of interest in the volunteer fire service statewide to bring up the discussion of a minimum standard again. And quite frankly, I have no reason to believe that it would garner anymore political support than it did the last time, especially if the volunteer fire service isn't heavily behind it.

    Excuses to do nothing. Nice job at staying consistent.

    Never said I didn't see advantages, and that may be one, but I see more disadvantages and funding issues with having it implemented especially given LSU Fire training's budget situation.

    More excuses and no real soluions other than to bury your head in the sand and change nothing.

    Again, not my role to be concerned about what happens on the state stage. As far as possibly supporting it, at this time I simply see no way that LSU Fire training would have the funding to initiate a new program. It would require instructors for train-the-train programs, admin support and instructors to deliver testing, and the staff, and the funding, simply isn't available for that. They have been laying off and not replacing staff that has left, so they are struggling to just deliver what they already have in place. There is no point is starting anew program such as this, even if the volunteer fire service was behind it, if there is no funding or staff to deliver it.

    LSU Fire Training is undergoing somewhat of a reorganization. They simply aren't in a place right now where something of this size could be pulled off.


    More blather...what you seemingly are best at.

    See this is where you are hysterical. Now you may not even support the plan you supported. What if it was simply a standard and you still taught it in house with a state supervised written and practical test at the end of the course? I know...you won't support that either.


    See above .. LSU simply isn't capable of supporting that type of program right now. They tried that exact formula for 1403 class a couple of years ago, and it didn't work. Not enough interest in the volunteer community. problems delivering the Train-the-trainer classes and problems in having enough instructors for testing and staying on budget.

    As far a still supporting it, maybe, though I have doubts about mandated testing.

    Even a program like that could have some significant impacts on rural VFDs and thier ability to respond.


    Yep, more excuses allowing enabling to maintain lackluster fire protection. Nice work...

    When you reach for the bottom that is all you ever get. As I said we struggled for years with mediocre people and when we raised the training stndards we lost some people but gained far more. We have had a full or almost full roster on my #1 POC FD for well over decade now and training requirements just took another bump up.

    Would have the effect here of reducing volunteers. People here just don't want to give up their outdoor time and would balk at additional training requirements.

    Theh they should find something to do. Fire departments should set training standards to meet the hazards of their area, not to keep barely trained lawn ornaments happy.

    Of course they do...do you send the maintenance men or just vollies?

    We try to send just qualified volunteers if possible so that there will be minimum effect on the shift schedule and general day to day operations. When need be, we will send some of the paid staff, but that is only if we have to.

    Because it's okay to expect the city to send their entire n duty crew to your volly area but not okay for your POC FD to send its paid guys anywhere. Yep, what's that word again? Oh Yeah! Hypocrisy.

    Fact is most volunteer/POC FDs in my tech collage district ALREADY MANDATE FF1 and some MANDATE FF2. Funny thing is they don't struggle for members and no Union anywhere had a damn thing to do with it. Some are now requiring Certified Fire Apparatus Driver Operator and Certified Officer 1 for promotion. Yes Bobby being a driver is a promotion not where they hide people that won't or never would go interior.

    I don't know of a VFD, or even a combo department, that requires FFI for it's volunteer personnel. Simply not done in this area. Encouraged? Yes, but not required.

    As I said, my combo department requires it for promotion, and my VFD is headed in that direction, which I have no issues at all with as it does provide good general knowledge.

    Flip flop...


    Entry Level Firefighter 1 & 2 is a generic rookie firefighter training program taught through the state technical college system. It teaches basic hose evolutions, hose loads, SCBA usage, ladders, forcible entry, overhaul, fire behavior, fire attack, and has a live fire training exercise component. It is essentially a VERY basic rookie school. The advantage is it is STANDARDIZED so every starts the same.


    That's the problem .. it's generic. My rookies don't have any need to know about building types that are not in our district, tools that we don't carry, windows and doors we likely will never be required to force open and operations that we will likely never carry out. The rookies in my combo department need to know a hell of a lot more about tanker ops and brush fires than FFI provides, and they also need to know about vehicle extrication, foam and refinery operations before they take FFII. the same can be said about my volunteer department and some skills they need to know which are not covered in FFI. My rookies don't need generic training ... They need very specific training on our specific operations, buildings, tools and equipment.

    This we will never agree on. So let's just not discuss it anymore.

    Again, I'm training my members for my department, not the neighboring department or a department across the state should they move.


    Your responses here are beyond ridiculous and merit no real response.

    Like what? Hose? Nozzles? Ladders? Axes? Pike poles? Fire? SCBA? What will they never see? Come on tell me? WHAT OF THOSE BASIC SKILLS WILL THEY NEVER SEE? Here is where you argument is completely and totally baseless and you just look like an argumentative azz.


    Sure, some of that stuff can be pulled, and is pulled from FFI and used in my rookie classes. Safety. Fire behavior. Applicable parts of building construction. But the other stuff .... They need to be taught what is applicable to our departments. As an example my combo department uses no smoothbores at all. not applicable to rookies. They need to be taught what tools, equipment and techniques they will use tomorrow in our operations. That's all they need to know at this point in their career.


    AND if I come into your FD to teach those classes I will point out your tools and nozzles, even your hose loads. So, what's your next BS excuse?

    We disagree, because you idea of competence for some FDs is exterior defensive only firefighters. That simply is not acceptable here and I don't think it is as accepted there as you believe. Just wait til gramma is hanging out the window and your exterior heroes can't rescue her and she burns to death right in front of the public's eye...Yeah, they will understand. Especially gramma's family's attorney.

    We will never agree on this either. there are and always will be departments where defensive operations is the standard. That is all they have the resources and training for, Grandma or no Grandma.

    And if that is the best they can do, that's fine with me.


    Of course it is because you have clearly displayed, for all to see, your cold hearted callous "so what if gramma dies" attitude.

    Yes, stuff happens, your ever so glib "La la la people die and I don't care" attitude. Why are you even in the fire service if you don't give a flying F**K about the citizens? Yes, I have had people die at calls, both fire and ems, and sometimes there is nothing you can do to change the outcome, but other times aggressive, FAST action can save lives. Your model of look for all the reasons not to go inside is NOT normal, it is NOT the model of the fire service. It is your method of never getting a boo boo and the citizens pay the ultimate price in the end. Proper, quick efficient size-up saves lives and property. Which is why I became a firefighter in the first place. Why don't you just get a camera stand on the curb and be a fire buff? At least then you wouldn't be in the way at scenes or in the way of prgress.


    Fact, is i don't disagree with you one bit. I would love to be able to know that I could go offensive all the time at my VFD. I would love to know that I would have the reasonable response time, manpower, experience and training all the time. But I don't. And never will. When everything comes together, if there is viable life and property to save, I'll have at it. But that occurs only some of the time, and that's the reality, so i accept that the fact that committing members when I don't have what I need will not change the outcome, and only puts them at greater risk of suffering a "boo-boo" that may keep them from work and providing for their families.

    We have already made progress at my VFD, but it takes time. We will never likely get to the level of my combo department, simply because of funding, career staffing and the volunteer pool. And that is perfectly OK.


    Of course you don't disagree and that is the pitifully sad part that failure to improve that may lead to civilian deaths is 100% okay with you.

    And I know that there are departments with fewer resources and manpower, and a lesser level of training and experience than mine. And yes, I understand their situations.

    Understanding doesn't help them improve...

    Why NEVER? Is there a time warp there? Is it a looped time continuum there that refuses to allow change? Is it against Louisiana law for fire protection to improve? Is there a local conspiracy to burn down the town? WHY CAN'T POSITIVE CHANGE EVER OCCUR? You see this is where you sound like a complete numbskull and an enabler for believing that change simply will never occur. It may never occur while you are in the area since you keep patting them on the head and saying "yeah you guys suck, but it's okay, you don't need to ever change."

    Money. Funding. Volunteer base. Demographics. ya, I know, excuses. When you can expand the taxbase for these departments, they can fund change. When you can change the demographics so that the rural areas are not becoming increasingly older, you can have the volunteers for change. When there is more funding for LSU to deliver training, you can have much better training support.

    It takes no additional taxbase to take the equipment and manpower you have and strive to update and improve your training and skill level.

    We have made changes at my VFD. Slightly increased training requirements. have increased the number of members with voluntary FFI. have changed the attack philosphy to deliver more water to the fire faster with an initial exterior stream. have seen alight budget increase and upgraded our tool inventory. Yes, changes have been made, but we are still, and likely always will be hampered by manpower and response times, and that realistically can't be greatly changed.

    You see, change often can't occur if the factors that are causing the problems don't change. And that is, and likely always will be the case throughout rural northern LA.


    Then that is a pathetic statement about community service and the faliure to understand the duties and obligations that come with being called a firefighter.

    Yet for this scenario you couldn't muster enough guys to knock down a garage fire and check inside the house for extension. Remind me again which version of the fairy tale to believe?

    See previous answer. First scenario I discussed was 5, which is typical. And yes, we can get only 1 or 2.

    Then on those times you don't even have an engine company, let alone a fire department.

    In these economic times, when you **** and moan about the lack of financial support for your volly FDs you have no problem with the citizens of the city paying to come out and fight your fires with no reimbursement from the volly FDs. God man you are the epitomy of the word hypocrite.

    Funny thing is, the Chief of the neighboring city suggested that they be added to our first alarm.

    By the way, we drain thier resources 4 or 5 times a year. That is the sum total of all of our structure fires, smoke investigations and fire alarms. Ya, we're real bloodsuckers.


    I am sure he did. Maybe his plan is to eventually just take you over. Have you ever thought of that Mr Watch out for the Union. Seems like a great foot in the door. Especially when he can show that on x number of occasions when they arrived you didn't have enough people to do jack squat.

    Whether you suck blood once or 5 million times you are still a blood sucker.
    More blather, babble and excuses.
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  7. #367
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Up until we were forced to become civil service, my combo department, like yours, hired simply from within.
    You really should get some help with your reading comprehension.

    My department has NEVER hired from within and I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. In order to hire from within you have to have a within to hire from. All new hires are selected from the Civil Service eligibility test for the FD. Prior to 8 years ago, new hires were full-time employees. Now new hires are part-time employees. Our part-time firefighters are not "fill ins". They are assigned to a shift and scheduled to work just like the full-time firefighters, but don't work more than 36 hours in a week. Our turnover rate is pretty low and so far none of our part-timers have become full-time. That will change over the summer when a retirement will happen. When that occurs it won't be a case of "hiring from within", it will be a promotion to full-time status since the person is already an employee of the fire department.

    Given that we only have 8 full-time employees, we hire very infrequently, however, one of the requirements to apply is to have FFI in hand. That is in part why we encourage members to take certification classes, deliver the classes or pay for them and pay for FFI testing.

    And it has worked out well for us as well.
    I'm glad that it is working for you, but we aren't talking about the same thing. Your department actively provides access to training to your volunteers in order to prepare them to be eligible to apply for a position. We now simply require our applicants to already possess the certification in order to apply for a position So while both may be working, it's not for the same reason.

  8. #368
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    I am sure he did. Maybe his plan is to eventually just take you over. Have you ever thought of that Mr Watch out for the Union. Seems like a great foot in the door. Especially when he can show that on x number of occasions when they arrived you didn't have enough people to do jack squat.

    Whether you suck blood once or 5 million times you are still a blood sucker.


    No worries about that.

    Since it's a municipality, if they were to annex a fire district, it would have to run it under contract and would get an automatic rating of 8, which is twice our current rating of a 4.

    In addition, the water supply issues would lower the cities rating as they currently are served by a very good water system throughout the city.

    And the members are not union.

    Sorry to disappoint you.

    As far as the rest of your previous post, you are the one that simply does not get it.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  9. #369
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I am sure he did. Maybe his plan is to eventually just take you over. Have you ever thought of that Mr Watch out for the Union. Seems like a great foot in the door. Especially when he can show that on x number of occasions when they arrived you didn't have enough people to do jack squat.

    Whether you suck blood once or 5 million times you are still a blood sucker.


    No worries about that.

    Since it's a municipality, if they were to annex a fire district, it would have to run it under contract and would get an automatic rating of 8, which is twice our current rating of a 4.

    Your volly FD has a rating of 4? BULL SCHIDT! With your manpower issues alone there is no way you have a rating of 4.

    In addition, the water supply issues would lower the cities rating as they currently are served by a very good water system throughout the city.

    Why would annexing your volly FD's area affect the city rating? They would have a split rating like many city/rural combo FDs do. I know one that has a 3 in town, and rural ratings, depending on location from 6 to 9.

    And the members are not union.

    Not relevant to the chief maybe playing your volly FD and you for suckers to get a foot in the door for expansion.

    Sorry to disappoint you.

    Not disappointed at all, in fact I am chuckling at the possibility that you are being set up by this chief.

    As far as the rest of your previous post, you are the one that simply does not get it.


    I get it completely, you accept mediocrity and blame everything but the truth for its continuing.
    Nice try, too bad it is just more nonsense.
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  10. #370
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Sooo... We fought a structure fire today... 4 guys on the first engine... Only crew on scene for the first 10-15 minutes of the fire.... House is still standing... Homeowner was appreciative that we saved what we did because a lot of pictures and personal effects were saved.... No one got hurt... The fire went out...

    Pretty sure that qualifies as low manpower...

    Just sayin.....
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  11. #371
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Sooo... We fought a structure fire today... 4 guys on the first engine... Only crew on scene for the first 10-15 minutes of the fire.... House is still standing... Homeowner was appreciative that we saved what we did because a lot of pictures and personal effects were saved.... No one got hurt... The fire went out...

    Pretty sure that qualifies as low manpower...

    Just sayin.....
    OH MY GOD! How did you ever fill the IC position, the Safety Officer, EMS sector chief, Rehab? Oh, that's right, you actually went to work fighting fire and saving someone's house instead of looking for excuses not to.

    The only thing that ****es me off is you **** knockers waited until I went to work to once again have an actual working fire. DAMN IT!!
    Chenzo likes this.
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  12. #372
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    OH MY GOD! How did you ever fill the IC position, the Safety Officer, EMS sector chief, Rehab? Oh, that's right, you actually went to work fighting fire and saving someone's house instead of looking for excuses not to.

    The only thing that ****es me off is you **** knockers waited until I went to work to once again have an actual working fire. DAMN IT!!
    IC was on the nozzle, Safety was running the pump, and rehab is for quitters lol.

    It's not my fault you "pick" the bad days to have to work.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  13. #373
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    IC was on the nozzle, Safety was running the pump, and rehab is for quitters lol.

    It's not my fault you "pick" the bad days to have to work.
    Oh well...
    “The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, and becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live.” Leo F. Buscaglia

    This place gets weirder and weirder every day...

  14. #374
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Since it's a municipality, if they were to annex a fire district, it would have to run it under contract and would get an automatic rating of 8, which is twice our current rating of a 4.

    Your volly FD has a rating of 4? BULL SCHIDT! With your manpower issues alone there is no way you have a rating of 4.

    Last time we were rated we had a lot more bodies on the roster. Most of it was deadwood but they were still names.

    A couple of years ago the ex-Chief decided to get rid of the deadwood. That is why our actual numbers are much lower now.

    We also had a tanker that we now longer have.

    This is our rating year. We will likely take a hit.


    In addition, the water supply issues would lower the cities rating as they currently are served by a very good water system throughout the city.

    We only have a water system in a very small part of our district (less than 10%).


    Why would annexing your volly FD's area affect the city rating? They would have a split rating like many city/rural combo FDs do. I know one that has a 3 in town, and rural ratings, depending on location from 6 to 9.

    The rating system here in LA got rid of split ratings a few years ago.


    Not relevant to the chief maybe playing your volly FD and you for suckers to get a foot in the door for expansion.

    The city would have no interest in adding the 100 miles that we cover. First of all, the area is rural and there is no way the city could bring in enough income to provide services. For that reason alone, the city residents would not go for it. Secondly, the residents of our area would not go for being in the city.

    The reason that he told our Chief that he would come in first alarm was to repay us for responding into the city, which we do very little of due to their manpower, and it would give his guys a couple more fires worth of experience per year. They already cover the bottom 1/2 of the parish's vehicle extrication needs, including ours.


    Sorry to disappoint you.

    Not disappointed at all, in fact I am chuckling at the possibility that you are being set up by this chief.

    As far as the rest of your previous post, you are the one that simply does not get it.

    I get it completely, you accept mediocrity and blame everything but the truth for its continuing.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  15. #375
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    IC was on the nozzle, Safety was running the pump, and rehab is for quitters lol.

    It's not my fault you "pick" the bad days to have to work.

    So you consider that safe?

    IC on the nozzle... I'm sure he was able to keep track of the complete scene from there.

    Safety tied to the pump panel.

    No rapid intervention capability.

    Ya, sounds like a good idea to me.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  16. #376
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you consider that safe?

    IC on the nozzle... I'm sure he was able to keep track of the complete scene from there.

    Safety tied to the pump panel.

    No rapid intervention capability.

    Ya, sounds like a good idea to me.
    The building is still standing. If it was your fire, it would be burnt to the ground.
    Weruj1, Chenzo and rm1524 like this.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  17. #377
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    So you consider that safe?
    Umm... Yeah, yeah I do. Not one person got hurt. Not a single firefighter, no occupants were injured, hell, not even any of their pets got inured. Not in that first 10-15 minutes, not the other 3 hours of the call. Not a person was hurt period. What is your definition of safe?

    IC on the nozzle... I'm sure he was able to keep track of the complete scene from there.
    I was IC... What exactly would you have liked me to keep track of? The other interior firefighter? He was right on my azz, in visual and voice contact with me the entire time... The hydrant man? He was hand stretching 5" to the hydrant, then he pulled a second hand line to the exterior and watched the B and C sides of the house... The pump operator? He was doing what he was supposed to, pumping, and watching the A and D sides of the house...I put the first 100' of our 300' crosslay on my shoulder, walked to the front door, dropped it and did my 360... while I was doing that the MPO and the other FF who was going in with me were flaking the line out, and by the time I got back to the front door, I was being sent water... Soooooo what exactly wasn't accounted for or kept track of? Oh, I get it, I didn't have an "INCIDENT COMMANDER" vest on...Gotcha...

    Safety tied to the pump panel.
    Safety "tied" to the pump panel, ok we'll go with that... He was also watching the A and D sides of the house and the A-side roof, in radio contact with the other firefighter watching the B and C sides of the roof and the C-side roof, both in radio contact with me as IC and nozzle man... See, because we do this thing called training, and go to these things called classes, we can multi-task and still safely and aggressively fight the fire, and even go interior... Oh I get it, he didn't have a "SAFETY" vest on... Gotcha...

    No rapid intervention capability.
    Point being? RIT wouldn't have done me a f**king thing If we'd have stood in the yard and burned the house down. Oh, I get it, A burning house is scary for you, and you didn't want to break a nail...Gotcha.


    Ya, sounds like a good idea to me.
    Sounds like a great idea to me. Ya know what makes it an even better idea? And even better than an idea, a great strategy? The fire went out, no one got hurt, and the homeowner was appreciative of the fact that we saved irreplaceable sentimental items and pictures... Oh, I forgot you don't give a rats azz about anyone but yourself, considering you said you'd let a f**king child burn to death in a car before you risked breaking a nail... Gotcha...
    So, the homeowner was thankful, the fire went out, the house is still standing, no one got hurt, and that's still wrong in your eyes? If you think for one second that anything we did was unsafe, and that the MPO and FF that were outside weren't watching our asses inside, and me and the other FF inside weren't watching our own asses, you are completely 100% wrong.

    Here, this will spin you into even more of a tizzy... If that 4th guy had been 30 seconds slower, we would have had 3 people on the first due, and STILL made an aggressive interior attack... Oh no! What would we have done! Who would have passed out the vests?!

    Please, get out of the fire service. You are absolute f**king poison.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  18. #378
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    The building is still standing. If it was your fire, it would be burnt to the ground.
    Would very much have depended on who was there ...... our experienced folks or a group with little experience, and where it was in relation and response time to our AMA engine.

    Also we have no idea how large the fire was.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  19. #379
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    So, the homeowner was thankful, the fire went out, the house is still standing, no one got hurt, and that's still wrong in your eyes? If you think for one second that anything we did was unsafe, and that the MPO and FF that were outside weren't watching our asses inside, and me and the other FF inside weren't watching our own asses, you are completely 100% wrong.

    Here, this will spin you into even more of a tizzy... If that 4th guy had been 30 seconds slower, we would have had 3 people on the first due, and STILL made an aggressive interior attack... Oh no! What would we have done! Who would have passed out the vests?!

    Please, get out of the fire service. You are absolute f**king poison.
    My biggest issue was that the IC was interior on the attack line.

    Attacking a fire interior, with a 4 man crew, depending on the fire, may not be that big of an issue. IMO putting the IC in that situation on the line interior, vs being, worst case, on the pump panel until he can be relieved is.

    Honestly if you were the one on the pump.... I would not have questioned it.

    While it is not the best scenario, it at least gives you the ability to view the entire incident.

    And by the way Skippy, we had a building fire last week.... and knocked it down with 4 people as well.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 04-30-2013 at 02:55 PM.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #380
    Forum Member Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Would very much have depended on who was there ...... our experienced folks or a group with little experience, and where it was in relation and response time to our AMA engine.

    Also we have no idea how large the fire was.
    Small fire in basement laundry room that was on the B-C corner, only visible flames inside. Outside, fire showing from the B side soffet. Lot's of smoke, not much visible fire. The bulk of the fire was IN the wall, and the void space between the ceiling and the roof.
    Same scenario as we had. With 4 guys on the first engine, next engine (or tanker/tender/squad/rescue/ambulance/tower/ladder/quint/cop car/helicopter/personal vehicles/pedestrian firefighters/tanks/humvees/bicycles/whatever) is 10 minutes out, what would you have done?

    Exactly, the house would have burned to the ground.
    conrad427 likes this.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cal Fire Photo
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-03-2009, 04:40 PM
  2. Looking for photo of rare fire apparatus
    By blueeighty88 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 06:46 PM
  3. Now that is a nice fire photo...
    By CALFFBOU in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-31-2005, 11:55 PM
  4. New from Fire Photo
    By firephotonews in forum Meet and Greet
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-18-2003, 08:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts