Firefighter CLOSE CALL on roof

Comment

Comment by SHANE SMITH on January 3, 2009 at 3:26pm

Well said Chief, ........ say you wouldn't know anything about reading smoke would ya ?...... Funy I can relate to your comments I've worked for fire departments that would've been safely all over that roof (prior to the conditions we now see) - and for departments that should be nowhere near that roof - even early in the incident. Funny thing is I think I can even break that down to shifts and crews .... haha. Take care thanks for the input.

Comment by Dave Dodson on January 3, 2009 at 1:26pm

Great Discussion!

So far, the discussion points out several outstanding observations, judgments, and tactical solutions. We must continue to learn from fires we see - in person or on video.

I'll throw in my two-cents worth.
1. The fire. This event shows how much "energy" is present in the Y2K typical residential fire. That energy surpasses any residential fire from the 70s or 80s and is akin to the JP-4 pit fires I fought back in my USAF ARFF days. The energy release presents two challenges for the firefighters: Rate of Change and HEAT. The rate of change is mighty quick - and probably why the roof crew needed to make a quick exit. (Strickly from a fire behavior perspective). Without more info - I'd presume that the rapid rate of change is responsible for the risk-benefit transition that is now apparent. LESSON: Today's fire are not only hotter - but present rapid-rate-of-change behaviors that compress the time we have available for sound tactical deployment (vent-high, punch low).

2. Ventilation. "Give the fire somewhere to go, hit from somewhere else" is an ideal approach to most fires. The devil is in the details. A fire is "vented" when fire behavoir stabilizes into a straight thermally-convected form and smoke/flame pressure is eliminated from the "box." (I don't make these things up - its just physics). The fire shown in this video is "venting" - it is far from "vented." Big difference in fire behavior and fire stream effectiveness. I agree with the comment below: A large h*** in the roof could've totally changed the behavoir we now see. LESSON: Smoke/flame pressure build-up within a building makes firefighting difficult. "Wet stuff on the red stuff" works best when fires are truely "vented." Make the box behave and everything gets easier (thanks and tip to Tommy Brennan!, RIP) DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying this fire department failed or other fire departments should roof ventilate. I believe that tactical solutions for any one situation should be based less on the situation and more on what a fire department brings to the party. I've worked for fire departments that would've been safely all over that roof (prior to the conditions we now see) - and for departments that should be nowhere near that roof - even early in the incident. The trick is to understand the impending fire behavoir - and design a tactical solution to make the box behave with the resources that have come to the party!

Love to hear your comments - and please make it safe out there!

Comment by SHANE SMITH on January 2, 2009 at 2:05pm

I felt the need to comment on this thread, simply to voice my opinion and express my passion for aggressive, yet safe, firefighting. . I am a strong believer in mastering your craft while maintaining a humble approach and never claim to know it all. For the record and due to simple “text” lacking emotion or often times possessing misconceptions, this is opinion only and I mean no disrespect to any who reads this.

I deal with many issues similar to this thread given the area I work and the dynamics of various “aged” departments experiencing a metamorphosis,… if you will,… from low staffed combination departments to moderate sized fully professional departments surrounded by well established large professional departments with unlimited staffing. So with that, controversy is abundant, we all want to save life and property through safe practices given our dynamic circumstances within our agencies. Something else I have learned over the years is our networking abilities are becoming easier through sites just like this, along with the abundance of user friendly recording devices, we are able to critique each other all over the world. This is much like our other tools good, bad & sometimes misused. I couldn’t agree more with Josh when it comes to critiques based on a “clip”.

I am very familiar with this given fire through, again, ….networking. Josh is correct in the tactical approach to this fire,.. It was fully intended to be a coordinated, efficient fire attack which warranted the practice of vertical ventilation. I think it is safe to say that if the interior crew did not have an equipment malfunction we would have seen a much different picture, or maybe not since the video would have been “NO BIG DEAL”. This in no way means we can’t learn a few things from this video. I always say we ALL should learn something from every incident of significance whether we think it went well or not.

Now, if you watch the video in its entirety, I personally feel it is screaming for vertical ventilation heavy pressurized smoke was abundant along with the interior crew attempting to get to the seat of the fire. Bread and butter for most….. As far as the structure is “Self Vented” well, I have heard that one before. Is it not true that a propane tank with the relief valve in operation is self venting? The question is …….. Is it adequate???? Just because fire is showing out a window…..or two….does not mean it is adequately vented. Someone please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. This is not to say we reach a curve In the incident where it is foolish (and I mean foolish in a negative way this time) to go to the roof or vertically ventilate.

Lastly….why do people feel going to the roof is so unsafe? Is it because that is the only place news crews and civilians can video mistakes being made? Good thing they can’t film the interior……we would all be out of jobs  All aspects of our jobs posses an inherent degree of danger. Understand when to ventilate and how, I am not an advocate of any method….but I am a very VOCAL advocate on all methods. Know your job and do it correctly to the best of your ability for the given environment you’re faced with.

Comment by Chad Snyder on January 2, 2009 at 1:07pm

I agree with Josh this is only a short amount of time captured to make judgement. Ralph and Thomas you both said what purpose or why were they on the roof? The video obviously starts minutes after they were assigned ventilation, meaning they already had ladders up and were in position to cut, so my guess is that when they placed the ladder there was no fire venting from either window, but Im sure the upstairs was hot and smoke to the floor. These conditions, even for a less aggressive, less experienced FD is screaming for vertical ventilation. If you take all that and combine it with these Brothers getting fire regularly and venting those fires well then I dont see any issue with them going to the roof.
Micheal, you said the fire had already self vented so there was no need to be on the roof. Would you mind explaining are you refering to the windows? I would agree that if the assignment had been given to vent when the video started, then bad plan, however I would have the truck ready to vertically vent as soon as the engine is hitting the fire. Doing this would obviously assist in knock down and make things safer for interior crews. But to say that just cause its self vented that it doesnt need or isnt safe to vent I disagree with.
Now thats not to say we cant learn from a close call like this...
PPE... enough said
Situational awareness, giving the guys on the roof a heads up if the engine is having hose problems or the fire is growing. IC or other companies seeing that if the windows self vent we need another means of egress and letting the truck know when the windows do.
Apparatus positioning. The truck companies job or duties all revolve around supporting the attack line. With that in mind if I'm the engine I want to allow the truck to get as close to the scene as possible so that they can use whatever tools are required to get the job done.

As to passing the 1:30 test haha I doubt many of us could.
Great discussion, please reply back so we can all learn

Chad

Comment by Josh Materi on January 2, 2009 at 2:37am

The fire was not self vented when they went to the roof.

"All I could say is WHY? Why is anyone on roof?"..........?
Where do we start? They went to the roof to vent over the stairs leading to the Living Space above the garage. When they went to the roof the fire had not self vented yet. The guys had trouble getting the h*** completed in time, not sure why. I do know the house needed to be vented and knowing the location of the fire and floorplan typical for this style house I would not have use a fan to vent this fire. The question about the second ladder is a valid concern and I know these guys typically throw a lot of ground ladders on their fires. Lets remember that this video is only 1:30 seconds long. Can all of your fires pass the 1:30 video critique? I encourage a discussion so please expand on your comments, email me if you like joshmateri@yahoo.com

Comment by Ralph Long on January 1, 2009 at 8:27pm

All I could say is WHY? Why is anyone on roof?

Comment by Michael T Rapcavage on January 1, 2009 at 5:40pm

There is no need to be on the roof. Fire already self vented itself. Where was the second ladder placement?

Comment by Josh Materi on January 1, 2009 at 2:35pm

"I don't know what purpose it served to be on that roof."
If you see the whole video you may understand the need for verticle vent. The fire was in the kitchen on the 1st floor, the truck was attempting to get the vent over the stairs that lead to a living space above the garage. No shortage of issues and a lot to learn from on this fire, the engine had a clogged fog nozzle, poor apparatus placement resulted in crews not being able to ground ladders from the truck, and everyone failed to recognize a developing hostile event, and a failure to wear all PPE (gloves). These guys get fires in these houses often and do a great job. Great department, just caught them on a bad day.

Comment by Thomas Mahoney on December 29, 2008 at 5:48pm

I don't know what purpose it served to be on that roof but it is a good thing a ladder was already in place.