Vertical venting discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Walker on December 29, 2008 at 9:28pm

Ideally, the officer of the ladder company assigned to ventilation makes the decision which form of ventilation is going to be used. The IC can specify if they feel it is warranted though. The officer or the IC can make the decision to get off the roof.

Our RIT will throw secondary ladders if they haven't been already to give at least two exit points

The scene safety officer, if assigned, can also make the decision.

Permalink Reply by Scott Kleinschmidt on December 29, 2008 at 9:40pm

The truck officer should have the go / no go call upon arrival. Once he is up there then the IC/Saftey officer can pull them if they want. I think we can all agree at some time or another on the fireground we didn't understand why we were called of the roof or backed out of the house, that is tell we saw what the IC and/or saftey officer saw. Like Mike said our RIT would also be watching out for them .

Permalink Reply by Michael Bricault (ret) on December 30, 2008 at 12:09pm

-Generally the Ladder Company Captain (Captains are assigned to Ladders while Lieutenants are assigned to Engines) will decide on the specific venting tactic that will be performed.
-If during the size up one of the Truck members conveys specific information to the Captain, additional or other types of venting procedures will be initiated. Good Captains listen to their people.
-Obviously the Bat Chief can direct or instruct as needed, but as a generality it is left to the Ladder Company to handle as they see fit.
-As to supporting the ventilation effort, the Ladder Company usually takes care of their own needs; i.e. raising additional ladders, secondary escape routes, etc. (Norman's Rule: know your escape routes)
-If their needs become more than they can manage they will receive assistance from the second due Truck.
-Regarding the video, given the type of structure and the two windows venting freely, it does beg the question of the need/legitimacy for the Truck members being on the roof. The top floor appears to be vented quit well. Couldn't these members have found more pressing tasks to perform than going to the roof?!?!?
-It appears they did open something up on the roof but that something is not issuing nearly the amount of smoke and fire that the windows are.
-Truck members going to the roof must have more than one way off the roof. The ladder used to get there is insufficient; there must be a second means at a minimum; personal escape gear doesn't count.
-Couldn't really tell if there was a second ladder or another way off the roof in the clip other than the method used, it may have been on the other side that was not visible to the camera... or it simply may not have been there at all.
-Stay safe
BRICK

Permalink Reply by Art Zern on December 30, 2008 at 12:40pm

WOW

I would love to hear a cogent argument for taking or sending a vent crew onto that roof.

I agree with the previous posts regarding the truck officer determining the appropriate type of ventilation. If the IC feels he/she has to or needs to direct the type of ventilation, there is a problem. It could be a lack of confidence in the Officer or a less experienced IC falling back to a comfortable mind-set. It could be a cultural issue within the department, whereas the IC gives direction for everything and crews don't do anything unless they are told to act. That sounds like another good discussion.

In any case, the IC needs to be thinking strategically not tactically or worse yet at the task level. On the other hand, if the tactic or task is obviously wrong or unsafe, he/she is obligated to take corrective action. I also agree with the secondary means of egress for the roof crew. As Mike said, if the truck was unable to provide the second means on their own because of other pressing issues, we expect RIT to pick-up on that and throw the ladder. If the truck was unable to provide a second means, communicate that. The support for the first arriving truck can be critical, especially if the crew is split and the workload has exceeded their ability to accomplish all the tasks in a timely manner. We will assign an ambulance crew to assist the truck if additional truck companies have not arrived or until the cavalry arrives.

Who makes the call to get off the roof? The Officer on the roof, the Safety Officer the IC…. I find it hard to believe that anyone viewing this fire could not be at the very least uncomfortable to see a crew on that roof based on the conditions present.

Am I off base on this? I mean, I'm all about agressive truck work but come on. If anyone can, I would love to hear a solid argument for having a crew on that roof.

Permalink Reply by Jeff Schwering on December 30, 2008 at 1:15pm

I agree Art, no one needs to be on that roof. I also agree the roof officer, engine or truck, needs to make that call. If you get on a roof to open it up, Open it up, and get off. There is no need to admire your work standing on a roof you just cut a h*** in because there is fire burning underneath your feet. Admire your work when the fire is out and no one is hurt.

Permalink Reply by Michael Bricault (ret) on December 30, 2008 at 1:44pm

-And yet Jeff, how common is the photo of the company standing around looking lovingly at the h*** they just made.
-You want to stand around and admire your work?.... Become a painter.
-If you must get up on the roof, put up some ladderS (plural), get up, cut it and get off. Get another job and help out. Remember the ongoing manpower shortage?
-Stay safe

Permalink Reply by Brian Arnold on December 30, 2008 at 8:05pm

I gotta chime in on this one just to point out a few things that may be missed if you don't watch the video a few times......

I agree with the group that the job of the truck crew in this video is to provide vertical ventilation and once the h***(s) are cut, the roof is not the time or place to sit back and admire your work.....however, what were the conditions when they got up there? I once heard someone say "first due companies can do no wrong" and since we don't have an adequate account of what it looked like when they got on the roof or what the fire attack companies were asking for it's tough to pass any judgement for them being on the roof in the first place. I do agree that with the increase in fire conditions it's time for them to depart from their lofty perch. I don't think we have a vantage point to tell whether or not they were successful in cutting a h*** or not, but from my perspective I believe that they got at least one h*** on the other side of the ridge.

As far as roof stability, it still looks good for another minute or two provided that this is stick frame construction. Look at the changes and color of the smoke. This fire does not appear to have taken hold of the attic space as of yet and is producing the massive BTU's from interior contents and not structural members. How do we know this? No brown smoke which would indicate fire reaching into areas with unfinished lumber.

What I do see as an issue is their routes of egress. Unfortunately the wind appears to have limited their choices on placement of ladders and it looks like they are forced to either fade the heat or eat the smoke. If I was on the roof I would have liked to have seen a ladder toward the rear as another option. I'm guessing that the "hot" slide the first FF had to do off the roof was due to heat conditions but since I wasn't there or talked to these men, all I can say is "I'm glad there was a ladder there for you to use and I hope you are safe".

Agressive truck crews are worth their weight in gold to the engine folks and must be led by experienced officers. An IC that is paying attention to fire and smoke conditions and assists the truck crew in their decision making, helps round out the team concept of keeping everyone safe. If I'm making the push to the second floor with a hoseline, I want as much of the heat and smoke heading straight out and up as possible.

As far as the decision to get off the roof; Truck officer, IC and occasionally the safety officer prodding the IC to get em' down.

Stay safe,
Brian

Permalink Reply by Jim Mason on December 30, 2008 at 8:20pm

Mike ,
You know loving that h*** is , for some, one of the best parts of life. Of course, not us fine CSF members! The FF's in the video were in a bad position. I've been told to get off the roof a few times and it was no where as bad as this one was. My question is also this, how did those winodows get broken? Did they do it?
That is a mortal sin around here, to break the windows that will cut off the roof teams primary means of egress. I saw that on my first fire in the city. There also looks to be a ladder truck on the right side of the video frame. Why didn;t they use that instead of the ground ladder or at least place it for 2nd egress?
One more question on the size up of the situation. The fire area looks to be additional floor space to the original layout (above the gargae area - it looks suspicious to me) I would be concerned about truss construciton in this one with that much fire. .
I always tell my guys that they make the call to get off the roof. Then I give them parameters about truss. First tell me if there is truss construction if you find it.
Then if there is fire in the truss, it's over. I tell them to radio to me " We are abandoning the roof!" This way they have no reason to mis-understand. If I don;t answer, tell the chief. In other words get off and get us out. I tell them it';s their decision and I'll support their decision by standing in front of the boss to explain that we burned down 3 blocks becasue of this building, but no FF's died.
When I imagine myself doing this, I also think about adding some historical perspective to the discussion. Something along the line of - For a town that once burned the entire city down, 3 block should really not be considered that bad a day.
I also tell them the listen to the radio, even while cutting with a saw, for me to tell them to get off, in case we have problems that can;t be solved and it moves to a defensive operation.

Permalink Reply by Art Zern on December 30, 2008 at 8:36pm

Brian,

I said the first companiies can do no wrong. I also said my only choice was to quickly determine if we are winning or losing and adjust the operations accordingly. This is clearly an operation that would be quickly adressed and that company would have been ordered off the roof if I pulled up to witness the time span of this video and likely long before.

I also agree that there was likely a point when roof operations could have been conducted safely; however, that time has passed. There is no way to tell the whole picture from this or any video, but I will stand by my statement "I find it hard to believe that anyone viewing this fire could not be at the very least uncomfortable to see a crew on that roof based on the conditions present". and I still beg the question "If anyone can, I would love to hear a solid argument for having a crew on that roof". Again, I don't doubt that there was a point where roof operations were viable and proper, just not based on the conditions depected in this time frame. Those members should have been off of that roof well prior to that point.

Permalink Reply by Brian Arnold on December 30, 2008 at 9:54pm

Art,

Agreed, it's time for this company to leave the roof. This is a battle that they are not winning. Total time span on the video that we get to see before they are looking to get down; about 40 seconds. My point being is that this was probably not the same picture of the roof that the truck went on initially. Conditions changed dramatically in a short period of time. But since we cannot see the conditions from 1, 2 or 5 min. prior to our short snippit, I would never second guess the initial decisions of this truck officer or IC.

In my house, we have a truck and engine that frequently arrive simulataneously. Just last tour we were reminded how quickly conditions can change for both roof and interior crews and how important communication and a Strong Command Presence can be. It's part of what keeps up all alive to fight another day.

I would love to know if anyone knows where this video was taken. I'd love to hear directly from the guys on the roof or at least someone on scene.

Love the discussion....

Permalink Reply by Mike Walker on December 30, 2008 at 10:15pm

I'm going to try to keep from sounding like a broken record but I make no gaurantees...

The roof look like a short span 4 in 12, which means little to no attic/cockloft space. From the start of the video the fire is free burning and there would be no chance of survival for anyone in that upper area, so if I were the IC and my first view was the same as the video, I would call the ladder company down. Maybe when the Ladder crew got on the roof it wasn't free burning, and maybe it didn't look as menacing to them when it first lit off but none the less I'd call them off, goes back to the whole team work thing.

Other things I noticed about the video... Chief's car on the scene, look just past the chief's car.... a second ladder. I'm not proud of the placement of it by any means but somebody may have felt like they could cross that off the checklist... Can't help but wonder who threw that other ladder? Sure hope it wasn't that Ladder company.

Permalink Reply by Mike Walker on December 31, 2008 at 12:59pm

my kids informed that IMHO means, "In my humble opinion"
this is for the generation of firefighters that don't text as a primary form of communication

This concludes this firefighter service announcement.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page