The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Positive pressure attack!
Wouldn't it be nice to be able to see victims, dangers, and your way around during interior attacks? It is possible in some cases with a technique called Positive Pressure Attack. This is a new concept to me, in fact I had never heard of it before a recent class on the subject. This technique is, to me, easiest but unused approaches to fire fighting. It increases a victims chances of survival and firefighter safety. Like I said this is a new concept to me but is one I feel so strongly about that I had to get the word out about it. Visit www.positivepressureattack.com for more info, take a class and form your own opinion. This is a good way to become more effective at saving lives, doing less property damage, and increasing firefighter safety all with a piece of equipment I would bet 95% of us already have on our apparatus. Please take the time to atleast look into this, I believe it will truely change how your department will conduct interior attacks. Thanks for reading and be safe out there!
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Trainer on
-
Sorry my fault(stupid), I ment to say PPA. Still no item for a beginer. What people must relize durning training; it's controlled. Proper PPA takes time to set up, and manpower, I'm rough counting here, takes like 10 people. Someone has taken there gas powered toy and figured out another use, my guess, a salesman. I won't argue it works, I've seen it, I'll will say it's not for every fire, and not for every dept. It's just another tool in the bag.
-
Permalink Reply by Bill Muehsam on
-
10? Any 3 or 4 man Engine crew (equipped with a PPV Fan) can execute this tactic within minutes of arrival at the scene of a working fire.
-
-
Here is my thinkin; 2 attack, 2 rit, 2 vent, 1 commander, 1 pump, ok 8. I'll give ya rit for 2 in 2 out, but some sog's won't allow that, ther's also 2 search but I'm not nit-pickin. Point is; with PPA, and the introduction of 25,000 cfm of fresh air flowing into a burning building, above mentioned personal need to be in place, cause this can go wrong in a hurry.
-
Permalink Reply by John Kriska on
-
I have been teaching PPV/PPA since 1987, training and education are the keys to successful PPA operations. In conjunction with my teaching of PPA, I provide free of charge a PPA Powerpoint Presentation that covers the basics of using PPA. Included in this presentation is a SOG for a three person engine company to provide their own timely and appropriate ventilation using PPA. If interested contact me at fckrisk@yahoo.com.
-
Permalink Reply by Dan Buell on
-
If you have the right training and plenty of manpower it is a good idea. But a positive pressure fan can make things go bad in a hurry if not applied correctly.
-
Permalink Reply by Steve on
-
I agree with a lot of what has been said already. Is it a great tool? yes when used correctly. Again anytime you are introducing fresh oxygen there is a possibility of things going wrong real quick. Train train train as you should with any new tool. This has been in Pa for at least the last 8yrs. I've seen it work, however i've almost seen someone get people killed not executing it correctly.
Be safe brothers
-
-
If you have ever entered a structure on the attack team, and hated that you had to crawl on your hands and knees because of the heat, smoke, thermal layer, etc. Hated not being able to see on a primary search because of the smoke. If you believe in the safety of your attack crews, then you need to do the "research" on this. It is NOT manpower intensive, does NOT take alot of time to execute, and is a SAFER method to execute the attack on a fire. It WILL NOT spread the fire as some of you have indicated. It is a proven tatic that can SAVE lives of anyone trapped in the structure.
-
-
Bill Muehsam, all I can add to your post is an Amen!! You got it my friend.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Bill,
When you said "It is NOT manpower intensive, does NOT take alot of time to execute, and is a SAFER method to execute the attack on a fire. It WILL NOT spread the fire as some of you have indicated. It is a proven tatic that can SAVE lives of anyone trapped in the structure.", you put a lot of absolutes into two sentances. At least two of those statements are demonstrably less than 100% accurate.
PPA is not always a safer method of fire attack. As Chief Kriska and I both pointed out in a previous thread on this topic, if you don't know where the fire is, then PPA is probably not appropriate. That's because, under some circumstances, PPA can and does SPREAD THE FIRE. I've seen that happen on more than one occasion, usually with a total loss to a savable building. That doesn't mean that PPA is never appropriate, just that sometimes it is not appropriate.
There are a lot of variables your statements didn't take into account. First, what building type, size, occupancy, and number/positioning of victims are you talking about? If you're talking about a small, easy-to-find room-and-contents fire in a 1,800 sq/ft, lightweight wood construction single family dwelling, then your statement has a good chance of being accurate. If you're talking about a hot, smoky 28,000 sq/ft unprotected noncombustible construction home improvement store at 8 PM on a weeknight, and the fire location uncertain, then you are flipping a coin when you crank the fan for PPA. At that point, you have a 50/50 chance of helping save the victims with the fresh air or of killing them and making the fire worse.
How many times have you put the fan in the front door of a commercial occupancy only to find that opening Side C is a time and labor-intensive problem do to the armored construction on the rear of most commercial occupancies?
Even on small house fires, I've seen the fan go in the front door, a rear window broken out as the exhaust point, and the fire get pushed vertically into the previously uninvolved 2nd floor because a hall door on the first floor was closed, the smoke and heat couldn't make it to the exhaust point on the rear, and the smoke bank down and obstruct the fan team's view of the airflow obstruction.
Blind use of ANY tactic is still blindness. We need to THINK about our strategy and tactics, not just react. Always leading off with the fan is a reactive tactic, not a thinking one.
And before I hear "training" as the problem with the department's I've seen use PPA to destroy a structure, I'll tell you that these departments had plenty of training, and had used PPA many times with terrific success. Training wasn't the problem on any of these fires - choosing the appropriate ventilation tactic was.
-
-
Since retiring from active service, I have been teaching a class titled "Timely" and "Appropriate" Ventilation, A Tactical Priority. In the class, the points brought our by Ben Waller are covered because as my dad use to say, "son, there is a time and a place for everything". Not only must you be trained in the use of PPA, you must also be educated in PPA and you must know when and when not to use the tactic. I would suggest for those interested, visit the thread cited by Ben Waller on this site, there are over 100 responses on it, both pro and con.
-
-
Chief,
There is no "one tactic fits all" in the FIre Service, and I'm not saying that PPA is. Every incident calls for a good size up, putting ICS in place, an IAP, and SAFE execution of the selected tactic(s). What I have been reading on this thread is either some "uninformed" or "confused" personnel. Positive Pressure Attack and Positive Pressure Ventilation are two totally different tactics and some apparently can't, or won't distinguish between the two.
PPA is just another tool, and may I add, when properly employed, very effecive. Anything that increases FF safety is a good thing in my book.
Unfortunetly, there are still segments of the Fire Service that either, do not, or will not, research or accept the latest technologies or tactics. I had thought that the days of fighting an interior attack with booster line were well behind us. I was wrong. I had thought that most of the Fire Service had seen the advantages of using LDH (Large Diameter Hose). I was wrong. If I can help "enlighten" others, than I will continue to do so.
-
-
Bill,
I don't have any problem differentiating PPV from PPA. However, I'd respectfully reiterate that you did say that PPA "will not spread the fire". Sorry if I interpreted that as a "one size fits all" tactic, but there are numerous cases studies in which PPA did indeed spread the fire. That does tend to indicate that you were advocating blanket PPA use, because you didn't indicate any variable that would restrict its use such as a building larger than the fan capacity to pressurize it, a well-involved fire that is autovented, a fire in a lower floor of a mid-rise or taller structure, mid-building obstructions that block the planned exhaust exit route for the smoke and heat, etc.
I'm all about englightenment, too. An important part of enlightenment as it pertains to technology is to recognize technology limitations as well as technology capabilities.
Frankly, there are many situations where PPA is not a good choice. The previous PPV/PPA thread that Chief Krisda and I mentioned had a good discussion about variables that keep PPA from being a good tactic. Those situations include heavily involved Boston-area 3-deckers with numerous rescues and heavy fire venting from the 2st floor. PPA there is a waste of time at best, and a killer of the civilians at worst. Ditto for a fire in the downstairs of an unprotected New York ordinary construction apartment building with civilians trapped. Ditto for a fire that has autovented due to the added response time that some volunteer departments have on a daily basis. If you have checked out the video from the Charleston Sofa Super Store fire, I would be interested in hearing if you believe that PPA would have been of benefit in that fire.
I fail to see how "PPA will not spread the fire" is either enlightening or accurate. That's not bashing or an attack. There were no qualifiers attached to that statement in your original post. If you have qualifers attached to it in your basic set of assumptions, it would be beneficial if you'd post them - and your basic assumptions - as well.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
