Boston firefighters? Logan Airport hot point

Back in the old day's like the 70's Boston had a dedicated box for Logan, it was Box 612. It is now Box 8211, a mutual aid box. Running card is available @massmetrofire.
 
It certainly sounds like politics has a lot to do with the response of outside agencies to Logan Airport.  Under normal circumstances, the closest companies always responded directly to the scene with more distant companies backfilling the uncovered areas.  This is done without consideration of what department/agency the units are part of.  In this case, it seems like the airport management didn't want to deal with the Boston FD, any more than they had to.  Obviously, they have their reasons which just guessing I bet was because they could better control other agencies versus the Boston FD.  Could this be because of the chief?  Only time will tell.
 
There has always been a longstanding fued between the Massport FD and the Boston FD. The reality is that Massport also has ownership of much of the waterfront off of the airport and that is where the above referenced statement concerning non-airport situations was originally intended for.

Several of the afore mentioned fire departments, Chelsea, Winthrop, Revere, and even Quincy (ted Williams Tunnel) to name a few, are closer to the airport than many of the Boston companies. In addition the Airport is not a BFD responsibility, they are a mutual aid responder, however I do agree why break up the response from Downtown companies.
 
On  7-31-73 Box 612 was transmitted @ 1122 for a plane crash of a DC-9, no survivors. I would really hope E10, TL3, and R-1 get the call. But politics pays your salary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I agree they are close. Look at their mutual aid ability, Chelsea (?) Revere (?), BFD has made MA fire responses. And Quincy, 5 PM on the Xpressway going to Boston!. On a more serious note, and I do not want to offend anybody on this site, you imploud at a large air speed into a ground surface it is will not be a pleasent area. I went to Bunker Hill CC in Charlestown  Ma, had a great guy from L21 (56) first due. He said you will NEVER see this again! FF J. White BFD L21.
 
Grump, I am not totally disagreeing with your premise.

However, at the time of the 73 incident the Mass Port department was 42 members with no more than 11 on duty at anyone time.

Boston lists their mutual aid availability at 10 and 5 ... why any different to the airport and Quincy's response via the Ted is much closer than Roxbury, Back Bay companies or other Boston Companies, that still have to use the expressway to get there.

Mutual Aid, which this is, is not supposed to strip a community and I believe that is what Massport FD's intention is here.
 
Massfireman: in the 1973 incident that was a box @ box 612 was transmitted @ 1122. Massport responded on its own alarm response assignment. I do not question mutual aid responses. It is a Massport incident, they drill and train, know where everything is, hydrants, etc. I agree it might be politics, I live just W of Chicago and if we had a major incident I do not think the brass would look kindly on CFD bossmanship! And in 1973 they could have brought in the academy from Moon Island, it was a recovery incident, no survivors.
 
Massfireman; I think we agree on a lot. I think Metrofire wants to go to a more regional dispatch system. In the older days all Metrofire calls went to Boston, they made sure move-ups were made, Revere E-1 to Saugus on a WF. So you could monitor Metrofire through BFD. Now it seems to be a more regional dispatch, BFD responds on adjoining suburbs, Cambridge, Dedham. I agree this is the best way to use rescources. If you read my posts though, in the Chicago area MA is being abused by politicians. Western Chicago suburbs have cut manning and companies, they rely on MA. You put 3FF on an engine, 1 FF on a truck and hold on! Why should suburb B tax money used to support suburb A. After all A made the political decision. And if B has a working fire with no help, well!. Mutual aid has been abused, the premise was: We have a fire we cannot control, we need help. I caught the Chelsea MA confligration, enough fire from everyone!! Without MA, even from NH it would have been pretty bad, Truck and engine companies made a valiant last stand at the Bridge, they won. By the way I attended Bunker Hill CC in Charlestown Ma with the son of the acting chief at that time. I have found out he has passed.
 
Municipal airports are usually state or city/county owned.  There are exceptions (like NYC airports) in which multiple states or governments share ownership.  Fire protection varies, depending upon ownership.  LAFD protects LAX, CFD protects O'Hare and PFD protects Philadelphia's Airport.  When states own airports, there are usually authorities created to run them.  Fire protection is the responsibility of the airport authority.  Port Authority provides police and fire protection to NYC airports.  Massport provides fire protection to Logan Airport.  Washington National Airport has its own fire department

Usually municipal fire departments are larger, with more resources and robust training assets, than smaller airport authority fire departments.  It might be more efficient if state authorities simply contracted municipal fire protection instead of running their own, smaller departments.  I am not suggesting cutting the firefighting and EMS jobs required at airports, but it would seem you could cut some of the bureaucracy, operating and training expenses of airport fire departments if they were provided by the respective cities or counties they are in. 

NYC originally provided fire protection to LaGuardia and eventually turned responsibility over to Port Authority NYNJ, which has fire protection problems identified by the FAA.  Airport firefighting is specialized, but FDNY, BFD and other city departments train for aircraft firefighting anyway.  Would FDNY, BFD and other city departments be as effective, or more effective, and would taxpayers save some tax dollars if fire protection was provided by larger city departments? 
 
As Mack said there are various scenarios for protections of airports that vary from city to city.  There doesn't seem to be any right or wrong solution.  Since AFR is such a specialized type of firefighting was very different equipment, turnout gear and tactics, it seems like that type of firefighting is best left to specialized units instead of being integrated into a large department.  However, the structural firefighting aspects of airport firefighting, as well as water supply and triage to support the actual AFR are basically the duplication of such efforts for other areas of firefighting.  Maybe the best solution is to have the actual AFR firefighting a separate organization or division of a larger department and have everything else handled by the department who covers that area.  Even if the actual AFR was a separate organization it should still remain under the control of the municipalities conventional firefighting command structure (Commissioner, Chiefs, etc.).  This would allow reduced bureaucracy for the AFR resources as well as allowing better utilization of other resources.
 
Bulldog said:
As Mack said there are various scenarios for protections of airports that vary from city to city.  There doesn't seem to be any right or wrong solution.  Since AFR is such a specialized type of firefighting was very different equipment, turnout gear and tactics, it seems like that type of firefighting is best left to specialized units instead of being integrated into a large department.  However, the structural firefighting aspects of airport firefighting, as well as water supply and triage to support the actual AFR are basically the duplication of such efforts for other areas of firefighting.  Maybe the best solution is to have the actual AFR firefighting a separate organization or division of a larger department and have everything else handled by the department who covers that area.  Even if the actual AFR was a separate organization it should still remain under the control of the municipalities conventional firefighting command structure (Commissioner, Chiefs, etc.).  This would allow reduced bureaucracy for the AFR resources as well as allowing better utilization of other resources.
Click to expand...


Doesn't Chicago have a structure similar to what you describe?  O'Hare is covered by CFD with specialized units at the airport
 
Grumpy did not want to set off such a discission, I guess i should re-read my posts before I hit send. CFD has has several  ( 3 I think)engine companies, a RM TL and a Haz-Mat/Squad 7 available. CFD had E- 9, 10, and recently put E-12 in service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top