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?
No, I don't know exactly what you mean. That's why I asked you to define it.
As for why be a department...well, they didn't start the fire at your house, insurance or not.
Your neighbors will appreciate the exposure protection even if your house is a total loss.
Once again, if their community is happy with the level of protection they get, who are we to tell them otherwise, particularly if they are volunteers? In a lot of states, including mine, if you're sloppy or dangerous enough to let a fire start in your house, the fire department has the legal right to take possesion of your house until the fire is out and they relinquish it either to the homeowner or to law enforcement.
I'm not "what iffing" this situation, either. There are many small, rural departments in my state that don't have the money to meet a lot of standards for interior firefighting. That's no a "what if", it's simple reality.
They still give their community the best level of protection they can, and they do it on their own time and still at a considerable amount of personal effort and risk. I think we should be applauding them for doing the best they can with what their communities give them instead of ridiculing them because they're not exactly the same as we are.
It comes down to two things - money and manpower. If the community doesn't have the money to fund annual medical clearances for interior firefighters, then interior attacks don't make much sense for that department.
If the community relies on volunteers and they have minimal volunteer coverage in their district during daylight on weekdays, then they can't fight a fire with people that aren't there.
That doesn't reduce the courage, intelligence, or dedication of the firefighters who are available or whose community funds them adequately at all. In my state, 85% of the fire departments are completely or mostly volunteer. A lot of those departments used to depend on farmers, local businessmen, or shift workers from the local mill for fire coverage. Those same workers are now either retired or commuting to an urban location for work, so they're simply not available a lot of the time - or at all.
Permalink Reply by Rob on January 22, 2009 at 11:29pm
Risk Vs. Gain!!!!!!!
If we can get in and get a stop, absolutely we are going in! If it is a known vacant with no life risk and well involved, break out the marshmallows boys! Some may scream at me for this because of the 2 in 2 out rule, but just the other day we went interrior on a bedroom fire with 2 FF's and the chief running the pump. Yes we had another engine with 4 and one more with 2 on it a couple mintes out, but light smoke to the floor in the house and flames visible in one window, got to get the stop. We had knockdown in about 45 seconds from making entry. Now, with our typical staffing will I go in every house every time, HELL NO! You just have to make a good solid judgement call on arrival based on how big is the risk vs. how big is the gain. In this case the fire was contained to one room with no extension in to the walls and there was very minimal risk to crews so we went for it. A couple weeks ago we had a two man engine pull up on one 3/4 to the ground and heavy smoke from the eaves of the house next door with only one more engine on the road....pull the 2 1/2 and give it hell till the cavalry arrives. Just depends on the situation.
Permalink Reply by Rob on January 22, 2009 at 11:36pm
AMEN! This is a tactic I feel is not used enough. Between options of either blitzing it with a quick shot from the deck gun of growing a pair and pulling the 2 1/2" or even the 3" you can certainly overcome BTU's quickly and get the upper hand, if it will be safe to enter after the fire has worked on the structure and the weight of the water you just put in is accounted for. Good old farm house with heavy timber construction, no problem, the houses they are building today, I might grab a lawn chair and some hot dogs.
Thanks Rob for another sensible answer. It joins with those already posted above. A risk assessment has to be made on arrival - you cannot make a proper judgment until that time!
For those who insist that 'we always attack', 'we always go in', ' it's what firemen do', etc.. What sort of flowers do you want?
I agree, with the exception that if your pre-planning assessment determines that there should be NO ENTRY no matter what you find on arrival, then you can make the risk-benefit assessment before the call comes in.
There has been national-level research into marking and demolishing uninhabited buildings and other major hazards to firefighters going back to at least 2004. Here is a 2006 update on this project, which was conducted jointly by the International Association of Arson Investigators and the U.S. Fire Administration. http://home.comcast.net/~jjassoc/Back06.pdf
The document makes for interesting reading...
Permalink Reply by Hugh on January 25, 2009 at 12:10am
If the the fire can be attacked without firemen getting hurt than we attack we do a very good survey of the fire before we send men in and than we attack it at the base and than ventilate it and clean up and get the engine packed back up and head home. Stay Safe Brothers and Sisters. Hughie The 57 House