Nycfire.net

Incident Alert => Citywide => Topic started by: guitarman314 on July 18, 2018, 02:28:22 PM

Title: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: guitarman314 on July 18, 2018, 02:28:22 PM
https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20170627/long-island-city/reopen-fdny-engine-company-261-dutch-kills.amp/
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on August 19, 2018, 05:33:53 PM
https://www.ebay.com/itm/NY-New-York-City-FD-Engine-261-Ladder-116-The-Skulls-FDNY/401583552162?hash=item5d803eb6a2:g:~KwAAOSwaGBbd5lv
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on December 17, 2018, 05:31:31 PM
CALL TO REOPEN ENG*261....   http://queenscrap.blogspot.com/2018/12/call-to-reopen-engine-261-in-light-of.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on December 17, 2018, 05:34:43 PM
UFA 65-2 12-17-18.. QUOTE. .PRESS CONFERENCE : REOPENING OF ENGINE 261. the UFA will be joining Congresswoman Carolyn Moloney as well as other local politicians at the quarters of Ladder 116 (at 37-20 29 St Long Island City NY 11101 ) discussing the reopening of Engine 261 on Wednesday December 19, 2018 at 1 PM. Member turnout is needed. All off duty members are invited. Members are requested to attend in FDNY or UFA sweatshirts & jackets , no uniforms. UNQUOTE.


Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: capthale on December 17, 2018, 08:44:43 PM
Will this offset the loss of the other engine company
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: JA290 on December 17, 2018, 08:48:03 PM
Will this offset the loss of the other engine company
Which engine?
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: capthale on December 17, 2018, 10:30:02 PM
The one the squad took over
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: JA290 on December 17, 2018, 11:54:34 PM
The one the squad took over
First off. One doesnít have anything to do with another. 
Secondly, they didnít lose an engine company, they just changed what if responds to.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: mack on December 17, 2018, 11:58:27 PM

(https://i.postimg.cc/G497kVgG/E-261.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/G497kVgG)
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: fdhistorian on December 18, 2018, 12:00:56 AM
The re-activation of Engine 261 is different from calling for additional units in Hudson Yards.

Engine 261 was not closed because of operational needs.  They were running calls and their area did not have a reduction of hazards or population.  In fact today, the population and potential challenges are greater than before.  They were closed for financial reasons.  The city did not wish to allocate the funds to keep them operating.  They did not say that the company wasn't necessary.  The need for their existence is known, documented, and equal to or greater than before.  Reactivating the company is a matter of allocating the funds, not re-justifying the statistics.

Engine 19, on the other hand, has been gone from the Hudson Yards area since 1947.  The hazards and the population have changed dramatically since then.  The company was disbanded along with other companies because activity levels and military logistics hazards along the piers and yards dropped in the post war (WW2) years.  Some of those companies were redeployed as new units in other parts of the city.  Now the demands are expected to increase beyond the capabilities of the present area companies, so additional companies will be needed.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: wfd444 on December 18, 2018, 02:59:41 AM
The 1939 second sections and 1947 first sections were all eliminated to facilitate an additional platoon NOT because of a lack of need for their existence.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: memory master on December 18, 2018, 07:17:20 AM
The FD operated a three platoon system years ago, i.e., 12A-8A, 8A-4P, 4P-12A, before going to the two platoon system of 9A-6P and 6P-9A.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: manhattan on December 18, 2018, 07:22:18 AM
memory master - any idea when and why that change was made?

Thank you.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: nfd2004 on December 18, 2018, 08:14:47 AM
memory master - any idea when and why that change was made?

Thank you.
The FD operated a three platoon system years ago, i.e., 12A-8A, 8A-4P, 4P-12A, before going to the two platoon system of 9A-6P and 6P-9A.

 "manhattan", I can't speak for memory master or the FDNY, but I know that many fire departments choose to work the two split shifts in order to have more days off in a single week cycle.

 Most departments that I know of worked a 3 day (8am-6pm) 3 days off, followed by 3 nights (6pm-8am), 3 days off. That work schedule would average out to 42 hours/week.

 That has changed for most places here now to working 24 hours on (8 am - 8am following day), followed by three days off. Still averaging 42 hours/week. Of course the great benefit to that is only two days a week required commuting to work.

 In many cases there are positions within the fire department, such as fire prevention or training division, where guys really don't want those jobs because they require a regular Monday-Friday, 9-5 schedule. 

 I know that some departments, particularly in the south, work a 56 hour work week of 3 days, 3 nights, 3 off.

 Again, I can only speak based on what "I" am familiar with.

 Let me also add regarding the bringing back of Engine 261. Whenever I go along on the FDR Drive and look across that East River, it reminds me of downtown Boston today. It has developed so much with dozens of high rise buildings.

 Not only fire protection, but where are all those people going to go grocery shopping ? And I'm sure a Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks coffee shop could make a killing there in the morning.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: fdhistorian on December 18, 2018, 10:41:41 AM
The 1939 second sections and 1947 first sections were all eliminated to facilitate an additional platoon NOT because of a lack of need for their existence.
Closing second section companies in 1939 provided staffing for a third platoon but the respective first section engines, ladders and firehouses remained open.
The 1947 companies and their firehouses were closed.
Staffing versus number of companies has been discussed in many ways for decades.

1939 - E5-2, E7-2, E13-2, E16-2, E18-2, E26-2, E30-2, E31-2, E33-2 and L2-2, L5-2, L20-2, L21-2
1947 - E4, E19, E20, E25, E29
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: memory master on December 18, 2018, 12:57:12 PM
memory master - any idea when and why that change was made?

Thank you.
I am guessing now that it was the very late 1940's or early 50's. I believe the UFA was instrumental in implementing that change. I cannot recall my dad doing anything but the two day tours with a 48 hour swing and two night tours with a 72 hour swing. He was on the job from '37 to '58 and I do remember him speaking about the three platoon chart but I'm only guessing on the circa dates. Hope that helps.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: manhattan on December 18, 2018, 02:15:00 PM
Many thanks to you and Bill.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: entropychaser on December 18, 2018, 03:11:09 PM
FDNY three platoon system began on 3/1/37. It was department-wide on 12/31/39. The three tour day was trialed in the late 1940's, I believe in the 5th Division. Yes, there was a roll call at midnight. It was ditched in less than a New York minute.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: nfd2004 on December 18, 2018, 04:39:18 PM
 Regarding the hours worked by firefighters, I remember as a kid in the 1950s, my father, a Bridgeport, Ct firefighter working 7 day shifts, followed by 2 days off. Then 7 night shifts followed by 2 days off.

 Then came the 56 hour work week of 3 day shifts, followed by 3 night shifts, followed by 3 days off. I seem to remember that Bridgeport was one of the first cities in Connecticut to get that.

 Also at the time all Bridgeport Firefighters were required to live within the city limits. When my grandparents (my fathers parents) moved to Milford, Ct (two towns away), my father was required to call into the firehouse where the on duty officer would write down a phone number to call in case he was called in for a major fire.

 There were maybe 4-5 times a year when he would be ordered to go back to the firehouse, none of which he was paid for. It was considered your job in an emergency and there was no pay for that.

 When I wasn't doing good in school and my parents had to bring me in for a little talk with the teacher, that teacher asked me; "William when you grow up what do you want to be" ? Of course, "what else - A FIREMAN". My father and teacher both shook their head like - "the kid is a lost cause". Of course with the low pay, long hours, the type of work, you can understand why they felt like that.

 Sorry guys for getting so far off track, but I had to tell my story.

 
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: lucky on December 18, 2018, 05:35:32 PM
I remember my father telling me that the two shift system did not return at one time and that certain battalions and divisions worked the two shift system while neighboring ones continued working three shifts.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on December 18, 2018, 07:28:06 PM
I remember my father telling me that the two shift system did not return at one time and that certain battalions and divisions worked the two shift system while neighboring ones continued working three shifts.
Yes the old 12th BN continued to work the 3 eight hour chart well after the rest of the Job switched....the theory back then was that the had the busiest Units in the City at the time & it would be too taxing to work longer than eight hours straight...little did anybody know what was in store in years to come.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: wfd444 on December 18, 2018, 08:37:31 PM
engine 12 closed in 1959
engine 19 in 1947
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: CFDMarshal on December 18, 2018, 09:11:03 PM
So will it be Engine 12 or Engine 19 that comes back to life?Or will it be none at all? Or will they close one to re-allocate resources? Will they add a Truck Company? what number will that be? So many questions for our wandering minds!
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: fdhistorian on December 18, 2018, 09:32:43 PM
engine 12 closed in 1959
engine 19 in 1947
Typo - my fault - fixed.
Thanks
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: wfd444 on December 18, 2018, 11:00:18 PM
Ladder 8 is vulnerable....they could close or relocate to Hudson Yards as an engine or as ladder 8 and the ladder 8 station/house occupied by engine 7...
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: baileyjeff on December 19, 2018, 09:26:52 AM
Why is Ladder 8 so vulnerable, they just spent thousands to rehab there house.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: FD347 on December 20, 2018, 01:43:24 AM
They spent millions on the Bronx and Queens CO's and look where they are now.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: memory master on December 20, 2018, 08:53:09 AM
How true 347, how true!
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: manhattan on December 20, 2018, 03:22:35 PM
https://www.amny.com/news/lic-firehouse-amazon-1.24752842

Amazon HQ2 plans spark renewed push to reopen LIC firehouse
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on December 20, 2018, 08:19:48 PM
Turnout at the Reopen 261 Rally yesterday was OK for a last minute announcement ....the word from those in the know seemed to be very positive..... www.ebay.com/itm/FDNY-Engine-261-Ladder-116/362513681781?hash=item54677fcd75:g:tZAAAOSwz05cGv0C


Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on December 22, 2018, 03:39:10 AM
261 RALLY....    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2018/12/19/long-island-city-rallies-for-return-of-fdny-engine-company-amid-population-boom/
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on January 14, 2019, 07:37:56 PM
ENG*261....    https://nypost.com/2019/01/14/fdny-may-re-open-firehouse-to-serve-amazon-boom-in-queens/
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: guitarman314 on January 14, 2019, 09:28:15 PM
   What? They want to put an ambulance in the firehouse, but what about E261? >:(
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: FDNYSTATENISLAND on January 14, 2019, 09:52:30 PM
I think that may have been a misunderstanding I think they mean 261 engine.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: 68jk09 on January 14, 2019, 10:12:20 PM
Maybe he meant they will be participating in CFR responses also ?
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: jmag228 on January 14, 2019, 10:27:09 PM
Likely poorly defined writing or understanding by the reporter.
Title: Re: BRING BACK ENGINE 261
Post by: baileyjeff on January 16, 2019, 08:00:33 AM
Hopefully this will happen sooner rather than later.