Interior Attacks or Not?

Does your volunteer dept do interior attacks on fire runs? Some volunteer departments do not do interior attacks. Does your department? Our department always look at safety first however if your department feels that they can safely go in do they? Some volunteer departments feel led to do only exterior attacks. What does your department do?

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Tony P on January 25, 2009 at 7:33pm

A very good exception Ben!

We should never have the idea that 'we will always go internal', but we can easily have the reverse, sites where we will never go in. Pre-planning is the key. We don't have anything in our area that can fall into the latter category, but it's easy to start thinking of those that should.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy Lyon on January 25, 2009 at 11:15pm

I am joining this conversation late but here are my thoughts on some of the posts.

“If it's a one-room fire accessible from the outside, why take the risk of an interior attack?”
The reason is so that you don’t push the fire further in to the structure and turn that room and contents fire into a full blown structure fire.

The comment was made that most line of duty deaths are either on the roof or in the structure. My first thought is - "no sh*t Sherlock". That is where we work. It is pretty safe to stay outside and watch the structure burn but that not what we signed up for. Our job is to protect life and property.

I would hope that no one does interior attacks just because “That’s what we do”. That would be as foolish as never going in because “That’s what we do”. We do interior attacks, with a calculated risk, because that is how you put a fire out. You can’t pour water on the outside of a structure and hope that it soaks in to the right place.

As I read through the posts, it seems like we are finding common ground. It sounds like we are all just saying that we understand risk vs. benefit and will do interior attacks if they are not suicidal.

Just my two cents.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd on January 25, 2009 at 11:33pm

This is a good question, is this based on Voulenter Dept, or paid. we are voulenter and the chances of us getting any time inside is slim, most of our are very little interior and mostly exterior, we tend to use the fire load, and the conditions of the house, if we can make a good stop then we try, but if its to far gone then no sense.
Now its getting really hard to even judge this because of new construction, check into those new I beams that are glued, yes they are wood, but check them out and do some reading on them, incase they are used in your town..

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by T.J. on January 26, 2009 at 8:05am

My department is a very aggresive interior department, sorry but we go in and get the job done, we've got 2 neiboring departments that call use for manpower when they've got a structure fire because they know we'll go inside the structure and honestly we dont mind that. We've tried to train with them but they still have dont want to do it when the call comes in.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on January 26, 2009 at 5:20pm

Randy,

Just to clarify...

If there's a couch fire, pre-flashover, how is it going to "push the fire further in to the structure and turn that room and contents fire into a full blown structure fire" if you break a window and hit the couch with a straight stream?

I'm not advocating a "never go in" approach, but when you say "It is pretty safe to stay outside and watch the structure burn but that not what we signed up for. Our job is to protect life and property." you're not necessarily talking about just one thing.

A defensive attack is just that - an attack. It is not "just letting the structure burn". It involves putting water on the fire from the outside, not just pouring water on the outside of the structure. Like any other attack, defensive attacks done well can extinguish a lot of fire, without pushing it, and with greatly reduced risk to the firefighters.

Our job is to protect life and property, but those come in ranked order. Firefighter's lives are part of the "protect life equation".

One day, sprinklers, building codes, and new firefighting technologies like the FIT-5 are going to make manual interior firefighting obsolete.

I wonder what we'll say about interior firefighting then?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sully on January 26, 2009 at 5:24pm

We always do a scene size up, too how big the house or building is and the officer will say what he wants done. if thereis someone in there we always do a quick search for anyone. it all depends what it is that is on fire.75% of the time we always go in a burning house or building fire.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Randy Lyon on January 26, 2009 at 6:54pm

Ben,

I agree with you in this scenario 100%, been there, done that. However it must be acknowledged that on some fires you will do more harm than good when attacking a fire from outside. That’s the trouble with any blanket statement. I have been fighting fire for a number of years and have extinguished fire through windows and through interior attacks. Each fire presents its own set of variables that must be dealt with accordingly.

I just feel that people can’t say they will always fight the fire from the outside anymore than saying that they will always do an interior attack.

I agree with you on the life safety issue, I have no desire to risk my life to save an empty structure. On the other hand, the more of the occupant’s personal treasures (photo’s, etc) that I can protect (without undue risk) the better I will feel about the job I’ve done.

“One day, sprinklers, building codes, and new firefighting technologies like the FIT-5 are going to make manual interior firefighting obsolete.

I wonder what we'll say about interior firefighting then?”

I know what I will say “Fantastic, Great and Finally” I don’t do interior attacks because they are fun. I do them when I feel that they are needed to get the job done. Again, with consideration of the risks vs. the benefits.

Randy

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kenneth Holley on January 26, 2009 at 7:00pm

Unless it's shooting out all the windows and doors we will try to make an interior attack. Rarely do we get on the scene and the pull back to regroup and punt. I guess that's why they call us the fire eaters.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony P on January 26, 2009 at 8:58pm

TJ, are you saying that you always go in and get the job done? That you'll always go in regardless of the state of the fire, the state of the structure? Always?

I've been on one structure fire where the IC said right from the start that there would be no internal operations. Simply because the construction of the building, with the state of the fire when we arrived, made the interior just too dangerous. That's is a decision that has to be made at any fire - is this fire simply too dangerous. I'll have to use that popular word 'aggresive' now. Yes we are 'aggresive'. There has only been the one fire (in my own experience) where interior ops have been banned. We have in every other case gone internal, and quickly. Because the risk has been deemed worth it.

Firefighter lives are amongst those that we have to save. A very good way to save firefighter lives is to simply not send them in when the risk is too high. Remember all, if with a proper risk assessment the interior is too dangerous for us, then the likelihood of finding someone inside, still alive, is beyond remote.