The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
First thing that should be done at a structure fire.
This is something that the guys and I debate from time to time. Here is the scnerio, your company is dispactched to a working structure fire, there is no entrapment. You and your company arrive on scene, complete a 360 of the structure, hook into a water supply and the decision is made to do an interior attack of the fire. What is the next step that should be taken? I am a firm believer in venting the roof (if possible) and breaking windows and laddering so that there are avenues of egress. If this can be done concurrently as a crew makes an interior attack then so be it, if it has to be done prior to making the interior attack due to a lack of manpower, then thats an option to. What do you all think?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mike on
-
I have seen fires vented to early without the request of the hose team and lose the structure becouse of early venting. You put a fan at the front door and a window is broken out befor fire attack. You just created a big flu for the fire, smoke and super hot gases to travel through out. Only vent well requested.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris on
-
I can see why you guys do it, and obviously you believe in it strongly, it is what you were taught and have done through your career. All I am saying is that there are other ways to perform fire attack than ventilating, and you would be surprised at how effective gas cooling is and how quickly it lifts the neutral plane back up toward the ceiling. Of course, If we are at a multi level fire we will have FF's performing a search over and above the fire, providing the structure is sound. That is a given. But to say ventilating is the only way to save victims is untrue, as we do it for a living here using the techniques we have learned. I truly do not want to say you guys are wrong, you are not and it obviously works well for you. But so do our techniques, they really do work. Thats all I wanted to put across, that there are other ways.
Thankyou, stay safe
-
-
lol, like I said the gas cooling to pencil to paint is an extremley quick attack method, there is no waiting around and often we are the only crew on scene (1 pumper, 4 FF's). But I agree, response time has alot to do with how you will perform your attack. We also cover quite an area, our station covers a 50klm circle around town and we are primary rescue, but our main fire threat is metro and we do respond within 2 mins of the 000 call going to comms. Check the vid on my profile to see one of our instructors practising gas cooling, it is not an attack vid. just a demo. Anytime anyone is over feel free to let me know, I would be more than happy to show you around.
-
Permalink Reply by John on
-
Need to get to the seat of the fire before venting otherwise venting first may cause the fire to spread. Definitely start the attack first.
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Miller on
-
All good points, you have to understand fire behavior, building construction, and have good tactical presence and make good decisions. Pick the right method at the right time. Also as another post said I too don't think you can say you will never do something. You have to be open to all possibilities.
-
Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on
-
Invariably any discussion on ventilation will raise the ire of our overeseas Brothers. I have had this discussion many times before. I guess I didn't anticipate insulting anyone from the UK as my comments were based on the fact that here in the US almost every aspect of firefighter training stresses vetilation as a vital part of a coordinated fire attack. I will pass on the comments regarding my training and any question as to my experience. I wasn't intending to wage personal verbal warfare.
I have no opinion of my overseas Brothers and Sister as being "dip shits". I resign to the fact that we do things differently. Attend any advanced, structured firefighter training classes here, as in 'Firehouse Expo', or 'FDIC' for example, and you will meet and benifit from the knowledge and experience of our Nations best firefighters. And from these classes you will learn the art of ventilation, the tactics and strategies behind the various methods of ventilation in conjunction with structural fire attack.
I stand behind everything I have said. I realize that the ratio of actual truck companies to engines (appliances) in the UK is to the other extreme as it is in the US. I am also very aware that the UK fire service usues much higher PSI with a much lower GPM than we do. I have had the flashover simulator training in which we we demonstrated with using "penciling" technique. A metal container is MUCH different than a dwelling. This technique may work on a one room, furnishings fire. However "zero water damage" with a couple rooms "alight" in which we flow much greater volumes of water isn't likely. We don't have to play with the fire, as the structure will be opened, coordinated with the advancing attack. No, we are not whipping about thousands of gallons of water needlessly either.
I do in fact believ in roperty conservation as a priority, however it is below the safety and well being of our personnel, and any entrapped persons. Removing the glass is probabaly the cheapest way to ventilate the smoke, heat, and gases. I would take it that in the German video you mentioned that there was no smoke from this fire? Given your comments, you must really condemn the US tactics of many major fire departments whom use vertical and horizontal ventilation ona daily basis.
As for the comments regarding "Emergency egress"...I don't believ a reply is even necessary. Your words speak volumes on that subject. Questioning my training with regards to this vital and common fireground tactic only serves to question the training of those who teach of this vital, life-saving survival tactic. You may feel you are condemning me personally, but you are really degrading many of the top US fire service instructors. When you speak of your very admirable fireground safety record concerning LODD's, somehow it seems to hint at condemning us in that we have not adopted the UK theories on firefighting which may be responsible for our less than ideal record. Our stats are skewed, to say the least.
Speaking of those last 3 "heavily involved' house fires which you state we saved...I would wager they were not of wood frame construction, and that the structural integrity was not compromised becouse of brick/block, or concrete construction, correct? If they were indeed heavily involved no doubt the interiors were somewhat damaged??? I doubt that some miracle was worked in which heavy fire involvement resulted in minimal damage.
You see in some cases, all construction features being equal, I understand you tactics with regards to brick/block contruction and room and contents fire. Frame dwelling are totaly diifferent.
Onward to the US...while some Countries may still be using a basic booster line with hundreds of PSI and relatively low gpm (tongue in cheek here mate) the basic principle here is to use the proper sized hoseline in the first place to confine, control, and ultimately extinguish the fire. Coordinated attack using the all-important first line in conjunction with ventilation is OUR best way to ensure fireground success. We MUST get away from this inch and three quarters for everything attitude. Or if it isn't preconnected we don't consider it. If the fire is screaming for a big line, by all means...pull the two and a half! THAT is our best insurance. And understanding the principles of venting for life, and venting for fire control.
I am just not a big...ahem...fan of using PPV in the initial stages of attack before we have located the fire, especially ina frame dwelling. Too many variables need to line up perfectly for it to be successful.
These are my opinions folks. Sorry to offend anyone fom any department, city, state, or country. If I came off as ignorant, I appologize.
-
Permalink Reply by Shawn Burgess on
-
We would set up a PPV fan and then vent the opposite side of the structure. Coordinating the vent with the interior attack.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Chris, I didn't say that "ventilating is the only way to save victims" so I don't know why you would put that statement in a reply to one of my posts.
Ventilation might not be the only way to save fire victims, but it's the best way. I stand by my statement that low-volume, high-pressure attacks don't remove heat from the area where the victims are. I've actually used the techinques you're talking about, and they simply don't work on fires that are autovented, as many fires in the U.S. are. The only way to remove heat from survivable victims is to move that heat away from the victims, and ventilating is by far the best way to get that done.
High-pressure, low-volume attacks rely on unvented, small, contained fires. Once the fire vents itself, it's time for high volumes of water or for Class A foam.
Positive Pressure Ventilation/Positive Pressure Attack is used sucessfully on single-family dwelling fires on a routine basis in some parts of the U.S.
You also didn't address the issue of prevention of water damage vs. prevention of fire damage. If the fire is large enough to have flashed over, you're past the point where water damage really matters, at least in the single-family dwelling construction found in most parts of the U.S. To paraphrase Alan Brunacini once again..."You can dry out water damage, but you can't unburn fire damage."
-
Permalink Reply by Fireyladd - Retired Chief Sharp on
-
PPV indeed! Why break out windows un-necessarily. A attack with PPV will do the ticket.
-
-
DAMM , you are always right...............................
-
Permalink Reply by Dustin J. Millis on
-
Agreed... every fire requires different operations in different orders.
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Stewart on
-
Here in South Australia pending on the size of the structure either it be a house or shed the first arriving brigade does external attack using side reels whilst the pump operator and other crew members bowl out 64 & 38 mm hoses and set up a standpipe/hydrant then connect the hoses up ready for BA crew to use for internal attack
When the 2nd brigade arrives their appliance is used to feed water to the first responding truck whilst refilling their tank at the same time from the hydrant in a method we call relay pumping the BA operators gain access into the structure and perform interal attack whilst being supported by external attack outside
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
