The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
FDNY Test Non-Emergency Response In Queens
The three-month pilot program in Queens is designed to reduce the number of accidents involving fire trucks responding to certain calls. In 2009, there were 148 accidents involving fire trucks rushing to calls for such things as water and gas leaks, fallen trees, false alarms and foul odors.
In October, a ladder truck flipped and hit a tree after colliding with an engine truck rushing to the same non-fire emergency.
The test program begins Monday.
All-out emergency runs will continue for fires and medical calls.
___
Information from: The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com
Related
- Firefighters in Queens Won't Rush to Calls
- FDNY Begins Test of Non-Emergency Runs
- Queens Firefighters Told to Slow Down
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Vic Silverfish on
-
How do you determine which ones are "non-emergency"? I've seen gas leaks, injured person, and alarm bells all turn out to be really bad (explosion, shooting, and apartment fire respectively). Admittedly they were "nothing" most of the time, maybe that is the risk/benefit math they have done. I am curious to see how this goes.
-
Permalink Reply by FETC on
-
Vic,
This is not uncommon. There are many non-emergency calls... Like a CO call without anyone ill, broken pipe or water leak, stuck elevators without injury, lock outs, etc.
But from a fire alarm response standpoint: We operate with the first due (district) engine responding lights and sirens while the rest of the alarm assignment goes flow of traffic to a reported fire alarm (no further info)
This reduces multiple vehicle hot responses. We all know flow of traffic response is safer. The other thing it does in areas where the same intersection is used by different stations... is allows apparatus to NOT meet in the same intersection both going hot or fighting for the same opticom. (reduces collisions)
If the first due arrives on scene with something showing, or dispatch upgrades information, then the flow of traffic units can upgrade to lights and sirens response.
Reported fire, gas leak, etc. are all hot responses.
-
Permalink Reply by Roy Walker on
-
Thanks FETC I agree completly but was going to ask how Queens didn't classify a gas leak as an emergency.
-
-
They probably didn't say it. It also mentions false alarms? How do you know it is a false alarm until you investigate... Your reading an article from the New York Times not the FDNY.
-
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on
-
We've been doing this type of response for several years. It works out fine. The units responding non-emergency can always be upgraded to emergency response by the first arriving unit or by dispatch if needed.
-
Permalink Reply by lutan1 on
-
Wow! I'm getting an education on FFN today, first in the "no pay, no play" discussion and now this.
So if I understand the system as it stands now, FDNY respond lights and sirens to EVERY call regardless of the nature of the call? That sounds crazy and potentially hazardous to someone not used to thsi system...
-
Permalink Reply by EngineLadder on
-
You do understand that in large city with a large call volume you can not go non emergency on runs. Its ridiculous I can sit in traffic for 10 min or be on scene in 5 min the sooner you get to a run the sooner you get it done the sooner you are in service for another run.
-
Permalink Reply by Just Plain Craig Moyer on
-
I think in some cities this would work but not NYC. I can see a slow response with lights and siren. Just stop at the dang intersections. Its not that hard. Traffic is too bad in some places to go no L&S. Also years ago we had a fire alarm that turned into a 3 alarm fire. Kids in a locked car should be an emergency response. But overall driving with commons sense is the best way to go.
-
-
I agree. While this type of response system works for us here in suburban Chicagoland, it might be a different story in New York City. Although, the St. Louis F.D. started their "on the quiet" response protocol back in the late 90's, and it's worked quite well for them also.
-
Permalink Reply by Tony P on
-
It may not work everywhere, then again it might... FDNY are right to test it. I wonder how they do things in London, after all, the London Fire Brigade is one of the biggest and busiest in the world with one of the worst traffic situations.
We've done things that way for longer than I can remember. The information given to the call-taker is what set's the initial response; further information given, smoke sighting, traffic, can all result in an upgrade. Lights and siren response is dangerous, limit it to when it must be used.
-
-
You do understand that in large city with a large call volume you can not go non emergency on runs. Its ridiculous I can sit in traffic for 10 min or be on scene in 5 min the sooner you get to a run the sooner you get it done the sooner you are in service for another run.
Sitting in traffic for a non urgent call is not an issue IMHO. It's non urgent.
As for getting a truck back on the road quicker, when weighing that up with the potential risks associated with the use of lights and sirens, I think is an invalid argument. Under our laws (I know it's the USA and we're in Australia, but for a different perspective...) the Police and courts would have a field day with us if we gave that as an excuse after we'd mowed someone down....
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
