Well the problem with these videos is we only get a look at what the camera operator wants you to see, meaning here we only see the "A" and "B" sides, with a nice tree blocking a good view of the "B" side. So basically it is hard to say what we would really do, without knowing a 360.
That said, the first things that stick out to me, besides the front porch engulfed, is there is a fire on the "B" side about ground level, by the tree. It could be from the porch or it could be a basement window, showing a fully involved basement that spread. Second thing that sticks out is the For Sale sign in the yard. Doesn't mean much, but could be an issue if there was something suspicious about the fire. It can also mean this could be a vacant. Given the size of the home, it could also be converted to rental property and the For Sale sign could be a rent sign. Either way it's noted.
Not sure who the guy was coming from the street to the pumper and then helping lay out LDH. My guess is this could be one of the volunteers (I believe Beaver Dam is a combination dept), or even a chief on scene first who conducted a 360. Since it looks like he gets the LDH from the compartment, I'm led to believe he is a member and not just some farkle. I like the pulling of 2 1/2" s right away, but it looks like one was pulled, I didn't see a back up line. I also like the knock down of the bulk of the fire with the stinger.
Now the problem is with the limited view we are privy to, is is this a interior fire or is this a fire which started on the proch? You can see some fire still on the porch, and there is significant greyish smoke coming from the "A" "D" corner of the house, so was this fire that was already inside or fire pushed in? There is a nice glow later on on the "A" "B" side of the porch, hard to tell if it is inside or a reflection from fire on the proch. Not seeing a lot of smoke from the upper floors, it could just be a porch fire, but again, I'm curious about that basement.
Things I don't really like and which I would have like to seen was a crew to the back of the house with a line. At about the 5:50 mark, you see water coming out the "B" side of the structure and you can see the hose time that knocked down the porch fire went in. Preferably I would go in the back of the house if looking to go offensive. The porch could be compromised, above and below and there is still fire on the porch, now behind the interior team.
For the most part, I would have done things like seen here, knock down with the stinger, big lines. The difference is I would stay off the porch as much as possible and wouldn't go in with fire behind me. I would have a hose team to the back of the house, where is presumably appears unburned, to push the fire to where it is already burned.
A point I sometimes try to get across. We tend to use the same tactics on every fire. Lay a line and pull an 1.75" pre-connect. On a fire like this, might as well piss on a campfire after the dogs and marshmallows are finished. 2.5" and/or a deck gun worked great on this fire.
In the Northeast U.S. we refer to this tactic as a blitz attack. Make a quick knock down of the bulk of the fire with the deck gun, finish up with the hand lines pulled. It's not always warranted or needed, but in this instance it worked great. On another note, I can't believe you've never seen a deck gun used!?!?!
Besides maybe a little rough work on the initial stretch (pull it ALL out of the bed with one shot...grab it, keep moving), a good, qucik hit with the deck gun, 'blitz attack' knocked it down. How many departments would have pulled the inch and three quarters pre connects? Even with two or three flowing together, it would not have had the knock-down effect.
The term "fully involved" as used by the narrator is so often misapplied. Fully involved indicated fire showing from every orifice, door, window, on all floors. This was heavily involved on the first floor, but certainly not fully involved.
Can't really tell anything else. Doesn't look as if it extended to the second floor, but I would bet there was alot more than we could see.
How many departments would have pulled the inch and three quarters pre connects? Even with two or three flowing together, it would not have had the knock-down effect.
I guess the only factor would be what is seen with a 360. If this appears to be a fire on the porch, with nothing else really showing, after the knock down with the stinger, there may not be much fire inside that a 1 3/4 couldn't handle.
In this situation for us, a 2 1/2" "blitz line" would be stretched and most likely a "lead line" to the back. The "lead line" for us is 100' of 1 3/4" wyed to 2 1/2". If the 2 1/2" is needed the wye is removed and nozzle put on. If after initial knock down it is seen that a 1 3/4" will suffice, it's there. I would prefer to make an interior attack from the back here though, vs going across the porch.
I've watched that video a couple of times, what I notice most is the intense fire on the porch, so much so that the stairs, all the way to the ground, are on fire. Secondly, with the intense heat the windows off of the porch most likely were compromised so using the deck gun on the porch could only drive the fire into the house. Not the most effective move in my opinion.
The deck gun on on my engine can move 1000gpm+, (tank water is only 750 gallons) there is a lot of force from that gun and guaranteed to drive fire back into the dwelling, so definitely would not have done that. While it's irresistible to want to start putting water onto the porch, making entrance from the charlie side and advancing the line toward the alpha, pushing the fire from the unburned back into the burned makes the most sense.
As out attack lines are 2" (200'), there would be ample flow to push back and knock down the fire, from the inside. That being said our "backyard line" is 250' of 2 1/2" which might also have been deployed here as well.
Good video. I would have to agree that the deck gun was appropriate or at least a 2.5"handline. Without knowing the whole picture it is hard to second guess anything. Don't believe that much more damage is being caused in that short of time by using the deck gun to knock down the main body of fire. I would also agree that sometimes we get lured into attacking the fire at the most obvious place but not knowing what the rear of this building looks like, it is hard to make the argument to attack from the unburned side. How much longer is it going to take you to stretch a line to the rear, force entry (maybe), and then stretch through what appears to be a pretty large home. You are going to get just as much additional property damage doing that, if not more because of delay. Deck gun/2.5" blitz line followed by 1.75" lines seems good to me. Worked well for them.
I know this is against every thing yall know but it works for us out in the backwoods of texas.
When there is a structure we use our make shift deck gun (hand moved - truck mounted). The reason for this is there is 1 powerguy in the county if he is even there. We have to fight the fires with live electricity. Then after we knock it down then we run red lines in and take care of it from there If we cant reach it with the 150 ft of red line we have a second person outside riggn up a back up line so if somthin happens he can come in or if someone else shows up then they can advance it and we will back out.
Remember this is in the backwoods (well there aint no trees in the panhandle) of texas.