1. #26
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    If you noticed, the 2 1/2" was not preconnected as it was being pulled from a dry load. Part of the delay was getting it broken and then connected to the discharge. The other delay was caused the firefighter originally pulling the load from the bed. After about 100', he simply stopped pulling the load and walked away to don an SCBA, and the other three members near the nozzle stood there for several seconds until one of them came back to the truck to finish pulling hose. In addition instead of actually pulling off several folds at a time, they were simply pulling it off hand over hand.
    even with my precon of 250', i would have broken it. it wouldn't take that long. one minute tops to charge it.

    scba? if your knocking it down from the ground who cares about the pack on your back. (all the while knowing that it likely in the back of the seat, that guy may have been a pov responder though). i have been to quite a few works where three people kneel down and put there masks on (haven't even made the call for water) and let the fire go unrestrained. it could have been that the door man stepped off to the side called for water, hit the fire, all the while the other 2 are masked and then are ready to be on air to make the push.
    Originally Posted by madden01
    "and everyone is encouraged to use Plain, Spelled Out English. I thought this was covered in NIMS training."

  2. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    This one doesnt have to be hard. One guy pulls off 50ft of 2.5 and knocks down the fire. Another guys pulls the 1.75 and prepares to enter once the fire is knocked down. The DPO runs the pump. Another guy hooks to the hydrant and joins up with the 1.75 guy to make entry. All should have on SCBA except the DPO.

  3. #28
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    The other issue is the issue my VFD is trying to overcome. For the past couple of weeks we have been working on a deck gun attack initially, and then transitioning to a handline. the issue they seem to have is they still don't understand that in order to be effective, the handline must be ready to go into service as soon as the deck gun attacked is ended. In this video, there was close to a minute between the time that the deck gun was shut down and the handline was put into service. IMO, that is simply too long.
    this is a tough thing for people to do after many years of not doing it. the key is not wasting water. common factors that make it fail:
    -there is a small window of opertunity for it to work, recognize that
    -the deck gun is located in a poor spot, 11 feet in the air on the pumper, not usable for 1st floor stripmalls pstorefront window attacks to hit deep into the structure.
    -the fire is made to behave where the gpm overwhelm the btu production... it has to hit and cool the off-gassing objects
    -bring the pump and the discharge up to pressure prior to opening the monitor, some engines are outfitted with a ball valve at the deck gun for maximum controll and allows the mpo to attend to other things once the pump is set
    -the gpm is big for a short time so 500 gpm over 20 seconds is only 200-225 gpm
    -the attack lines need to be ready to go as the master stream is shut off to get the remaining pockets of fire
    Originally Posted by madden01
    "and everyone is encouraged to use Plain, Spelled Out English. I thought this was covered in NIMS training."

  4. #29
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    I am with several of the other posters on here. Yes the deck gun worked and knocked the fire down. If it was my fire I would have used the 2 1/2 knocked down the fire and pushed inside to allow the truck company to get in to search. That fire would have be easily knocked down with a 2 1/2 flowing 325GPM place directly at the base of the steps. One thing i am willing to bet is that whilie this fire looks impressive it was not deeply seated in the structure. If you look at the video there is little smoke coming out from the 2nd floor windows or eves of the attic. Add to the fact that you can see the vinyl siding melted on the 2nd floor it is resonalbe to conclude that a majority of the fire that you see is the vinyl siding and sofits burning on the front, with extension into the overhang. This siding material is going to burn intense and produrce a large amount of flame rapidly due to the plastic. Whilie you might have a room or two off on the first floor it will not be that large of a deal.

    I would not have pulled an 1 3/4 to take inside and engine company worth its salt should be able to advance a 2 1/2 with little problems into a structure. IMO the hose streatch left alot to be desired. It took to long and poor choice in running the line. Flake the line so that it easier advance once it is charged. not in the street far away from the door.

  5. #30
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFD21C View Post
    I would not have pulled an 1 3/4 to take inside and engine company worth its salt should be able to advance a 2 1/2 with little problems into a structure.
    Hey RFD. Good to hear from ya. Havent in seen ya on here in awhile.

    Why would you pull the 2.5 inside and not a 1.75 when you just said (I agree) that there wasnt that much fire? You guys with the staffing might find it easy, but 2 guys pulling that to the second floor is not easy.

  6. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    Hey RFD. Good to hear from ya. Havent in seen ya on here in awhile.

    Why would you pull the 2.5 inside and not a 1.75 when you just said (I agree) that there wasnt that much fire? You guys with the staffing might find it easy, but 2 guys pulling that to the second floor is not easy.
    spencer, i agree. plus i want something to protect the outside incase it may light off again. it is depinately a 2 line fire. one to protect outside and egress and one to stop it inside.my manning is a total of 17 ff's and 3 man medic crew. but it takes 10-15 mins total to achieve from when get on scene.
    Originally Posted by madden01
    "and everyone is encouraged to use Plain, Spelled Out English. I thought this was covered in NIMS training."

  7. #32
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    After looking again, it is hard to tell, but there was a tremendous increase in steam when the fire was hit. I cant imagine there wasnt a place for that steam to enter into the interior, therefore I would assume that there was more steam on the inside.

    I dont say this as a bad thing, but an inevitability from the amount of heat and the amount of water. The fire needed to be hit with a large caliber straight stream. I think the 2.5 would have been better, but the deck gun worked. Gotta agree with the others who commented on the time it took to get it firing though. Looks like the holdup was a wait to hook to the hydrant. We would have hit it on tank water waiting for the hydrant.
    I agree. I think that it wasn't a major factor here, as it appears that it was more of an exterior fire. However, I'd be real hesitant to let loose the deck gun. The interior of the structure could see some rapid change in conditions. We need to consider the viability of those inside.

    In this case, I don't think the interior was all that involved. So it probably didn't make much difference.

    I also agree that a 1 3/4 would have been effective. Probably more so then the deck gun, as others have posted, the application can sometimes be more important than the volume.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  8. #33
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFEMT3633 View Post
    oh I was referring to EastKyFF's post about pushing heat inside the structure when attacking from outside...I just mean..that regardless what stream you attack with you do run the risk of "pushing" the fire to any unburned areas...
    In my experience, actually "pushing" the fire with the water stream occurs when you improperly apply the water to the fire and/or you apply too little water to it. When the "GPMs are greater than the BTUs" and applied properly, the fire doesn't move, it goes out.

  9. #34
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,171

    Default

    If this is Beaver Dam Wisconsin, they are a combination department. Actually not to far from where I live. If I get a chance I will talk to one of their guys about this fire and see what he has to say about their tactics.

    Sometimes you just have to chuckle at the armchair quarterbacking that goes on here. They knocked the fire down with the deck gun, moved in with the 2 1/2 and continued fire attack. Perhaps not the same way you would have done it or with the same equipment, but they did get it done.

    As for whoever said pull 50 feet of 2 1/2 break it, connect it to the discharge and hit the fire...then what? You certainly don't have enough hose to go anywhere after that.

    My #1 POC FD carries an Elkhart RAM on one engine and a Stinger preconnected to 200 feet of 3 inch on the other. But then again we are non-traditional with our handlines too. 160 to 300 gpm with 2 inch lines. We may have deck gunned this initially, or pulled the preconnected master stream, or perhaps 2 or more 2 inch lines.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 01-29-2012 at 02:40 PM.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  10. #35
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    West Point, VA
    Posts
    435

    Default

    That was me on the 50ft of 2.5. As you say, there are lots of different ways to do it and we would pull the 2.5, knock it down and proceed in with a 1.75. As I said in the same post, one guy on the 2.5 with two guys getting the 1.75 ready. We would not move the 2.5 inside unless I really missed something and there is a lot more fire interior that I cant tell.

  11. #36
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spencer534 View Post
    That was me on the 50ft of 2.5. As you say, there are lots of different ways to do it and we would pull the 2.5, knock it down and proceed in with a 1.75. As I said in the same post, one guy on the 2.5 with two guys getting the 1.75 ready. We would not move the 2.5 inside unless I really missed something and there is a lot more fire interior that I cant tell.
    My point was with 50 feet of hose you can't even get to the D side of the house. Perhaps 100 feet would have been enough, but even that would have left me leary.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  12. #37
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    I don't have a problem with the use of the deck gun in this case. Yes a 2.5" would have worked too but the deck gun backed up by a handline was effective.

    My only complaint would be that it seemed to take a while to make the decision to put the deck gun into service. It looked like they started pulling the line then changed tactics and went with the gun. I don't know what size tank the Engine has so maybe they were waiting until the water supply was closer to being established.

    Hindsight (and MMQB) being what it is I would have focused on getting the gun in service 1st, water supply and hand-line second. Of course, by committing to the deck gun you run a risk if those other tasks aren't completed quickly.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  13. #38
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Ahhh, the joys of the firehouse forums. Lets honestly assess this:

    1) There is a certain percentage of people on here that have never seen a fire that big
    2) There is another percentage that, depending on the time of day, may not even get enough people to get the rig there
    3) There is a percentage of drivers that may not even find the address
    4) There are others that may get it there, but couldn't get into pump to save their life. Let alone enough interior firefighters to do anything
    5) There is another percentage that may not even know what a deck gun is
    6) Finally I would venture to guess there is even a few on here, that presented with that situation, would completely vapor lock and not do anything.

    So with that being said, to the Beaver Dam FD, nice job on the knock. Keep true to your tactics and what has worked for you.
    Personally, I find it a very sound tactic. Exterior fire-big enough water NOT to push it interior as suggested. Interior fire-that sucker is defensive all the way. Again big water with the reach to knock it down and even reach interior through the window to put a very good dent on it's progress. All the while, allowing your available man-power to stretch the hand lines needed to knock down the rest of the exterior and work their way interior.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  14. #39
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Ahhh, the joys of the firehouse forums. Lets honestly assess this:

    1) There is a certain percentage of people on here that have never seen a fire that big
    2) There is another percentage that, depending on the time of day, may not even get enough people to get the rig there
    3) There is a percentage of drivers that may not even find the address
    4) There are others that may get it there, but couldn't get into pump to save their life. Let alone enough interior firefighters to do anything
    5) There is another percentage that may not even know what a deck gun is
    6) Finally I would venture to guess there is even a few on here, that presented with that situation, would completely vapor lock and not do anything.

    So with that being said, to the Beaver Dam FD, nice job on the knock. Keep true to your tactics and what has worked for you.
    Personally, I find it a very sound tactic. Exterior fire-big enough water NOT to push it interior as suggested. Interior fire-that sucker is defensive all the way. Again big water with the reach to knock it down and even reach interior through the window to put a very good dent on it's progress. All the while, allowing your available man-power to stretch the hand lines needed to knock down the rest of the exterior and work their way interior.
    My Brother, another excellent posting by you. Way to clear the chaff and get right to the wheat.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  15. #40
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    My Brother, another excellent posting by you. Way to clear the chaff and get right to the wheat.
    I concur on the matter.

  16. #41
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RyanEMVFD View Post
    Wish we had a deck gun.
    If your truck doesn't have a deck gun, a Blitz Fire (or similar appliance) would be a good option. Connected to a 3" line you can get a lot of water on a fire quick. (With practice of course)

    As for the tactics in the vid, either the deck gun or the 2 1/2" would have been fine as the initial attack mode, they just maybe need to practice a little to speed things up a bit. Tad bit slow but nothing critical. One big thing I noticed is a lot of guys with no packs on. There should have been a few guys ready to go if something happened like the porch collapsing. Ya just never know.

  17. #42
    Forum Member
    CaptOldTimer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    7,257

    Default

    From the For Sale sign on the left part of the front yard, I would think the house may be vacant. I couldn't any other indicators giving it a live in look.

    The operator dumped the tank giving at least a good minute with a lot of water. It did take some time to get the 2-1/2 pulled and charged. The members just grabbed the nozzle and pulled it off toward the yard. The rest of the hose remained in the bed, until someone else came up and pulled it off. Also there was because the delay at the hydrant. Once the hydrant was open, the 2-1/2 finally came up and the operator refilled the tank, evident by the flow water coming from under the wagon.

    Remember large fire, large amount of water. I think the 2-1/2 was the best bet over a smaller line. You can always pull a 1-3/4 to mop up the job.
    Stay Safe and Well Out There....

    Always remembering 9-11-2001 and 343+ Brothers

  18. #43
    Forum Member
    RyanEMVFD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Why? It's not like you're going to visit me! But I'm near Waco, Texas
    Posts
    2,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    If your truck doesn't have a deck gun, a Blitz Fire (or similar appliance) would be a good option. Connected to a 3" line you can get a lot of water on a fire quick. (With practice of course)
    It's on our wish list. Along with a lot of other stuff we really need. I think gloves is about the only thing we don't need.

    As for the video. I wasn't there and I don't know their SOPs or everything else to give an honest opinion. I honestly don't know what my department would have done. Definitely not a deck gun because, wait for it, we don't have one. If anything the video would be good to watch and do some scenario training off of.
    NREMT-P\ Reserve Volunteer Firefighter\Reserve Police Officer
    IACOJ Attack

    Experts built the Titanic, amateurs built the Ark.

  19. #44
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Ahhh, the joys of the firehouse forums. Lets honestly assess this:

    1) There is a certain percentage of people on here that have never seen a fire that big
    2) There is another percentage that, depending on the time of day, may not even get enough people to get the rig there
    3) There is a percentage of drivers that may not even find the address
    4) There are others that may get it there, but couldn't get into pump to save their life. Let alone enough interior firefighters to do anything
    5) There is another percentage that may not even know what a deck gun is
    6) Finally I would venture to guess there is even a few on here, that presented with that situation, would completely vapor lock and not do anything.

    So with that being said, to the Beaver Dam FD, nice job on the knock. Keep true to your tactics and what has worked for you.
    Personally, I find it a very sound tactic. Exterior fire-big enough water NOT to push it interior as suggested. Interior fire-that sucker is defensive all the way. Again big water with the reach to knock it down and even reach interior through the window to put a very good dent on it's progress. All the while, allowing your available man-power to stretch the hand lines needed to knock down the rest of the exterior and work their way interior.
    What exactly do you object to?

    I haven't seen any posts insulting the FD involved here. This forum is for the discussion of tactics and was just cruising along with the various opinions of those on here.

    Not sure I see what value you are adding to the thread, but get down with your bad self.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  20. #45
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    What exactly do you object to?
    Cant see where I objected to anything. This was in reference to the general armchair quarterbacking prevalent in the firehouse forums as a whole. Reread my post, at no time did I specify this thread.
    I haven't seen any posts insulting the FD involved here. This forum is for the discussion of tactics and was just cruising along with the various opinions of those on here.
    And a Hefty dose of second guessing their tactics. As opposed to the "if I was in that situation..."

    Not sure I see what value you are adding to the thread, but get down with your bad self.
    I really don't need to get down with my bad self, but this is my career, not a hobby. I agreed with their tactics, and stated my reasons. If you want a debate, intelligently counter my points of why I agreed.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  21. #46
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    So with that being said, to the Beaver Dam FD, nice job on the knock. Keep true to your tactics and what has worked for you.
    Agreed.. Good job. Big fire on arrival and the deck gun got the job done.
    Now.. I hope you're not including my previous post in your assessment of forum posts. The only thing I had posted that I'd consider criticism would be the amount of time it took.. not the tactic itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    Personally, I find it a very sound tactic. Exterior fire-big enough water NOT to push it interior as suggested. Interior fire-that sucker is defensive all the way. Again big water with the reach to knock it down and even reach interior through the window to put a very good dent on it's progress. All the while, allowing your available man-power to stretch the hand lines needed to knock down the rest of the exterior and work their way interior.

    On the subject of the tactic (not this instance of it) the advantage of going with the deck gun first is that it quickly provides big water without a lot of manpower (as SPFDRum mentions). The disadvantage is that it's location is fixed so it cannot be maneuvered or advanced after the initial knock. Also the flow of most guns I've seen are controlled from the panel (vs at the gun itself) so they could suck down more water then a 2.5" or blitz where the control is at the nozzle itself.

    Personally I like the tactic and we've used it ourselves on a couple fires. The key is to be diligent with their water until the supply is established.. that's true for any line, of course, but a little harder with a deck gun. Also while the deck gun is in service the rest of the crew HAS to get lines ready to go in after the knock.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  22. #47
    MembersZone Subscriber
    ffmedcbk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    781

    Default

    i thought for the most part this has been a good tactics/training discussion of ideas.

    most posters have been saying good call on the big discharges of water whether a 2.5" or a deck gun. i have these types of structures in my 1st due. we have used this video in training. we like to watch the videos of our own engine crews stretching in and work to enhance our own trainng and functions. sometimes it looks all fubar, but just as a football team you review and do work to better the performance for next time.

    reminds me of the fire engineering mag cover that was blank/white years ago of the "perfect fireground".... we aim for it and we aim to improve.

    keep posting guys, this is good.
    Originally Posted by madden01
    "and everyone is encouraged to use Plain, Spelled Out English. I thought this was covered in NIMS training."

  23. #48
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    I really don't need to get down with my bad self, but this is my career, not a hobby. I agreed with their tactics, and stated my reasons. If you want a debate, intelligently counter my points of why I agreed.
    You were clearly criticizing a number of folks for having an opinion. You do this by calling into question their background and experience. Cute, but not helpful and pretty insulting.

    You call it "second guessing"... well, no kidding. However, only by taking a "second" look and talking about the tactic being shown is there any value to this discussion.

    A professional is open to criticism and an honest discussion about their choice of strategies.

    I don't believe that the FD in this video did anything "wrong". I don't disagree with your saying they did a good job, but if that's all we are going to do, then let's just remove the fire tactics board.

    You agree with what they did and would do it the same way, cool... no problems. Why you have to crap on everyone who doesn't agree is not needed.
    Last edited by ChiefKN; 01-31-2012 at 08:27 PM.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  24. #49
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Marble Rock, Iowa
    Posts
    217

    Default

    I have to say that I am a big proponent of this tactic and we use it a lot. We actually had a structure fire this morning and used it. It buys us quite a bit of time to get alot done with limited man power.

    Our Monitor uses a 250GPM nozzle and we carry 1,000 gallons of water. Needless to say, you can get a lot of things done in 4 minutes with just a few people and keep the fire at bay until you can make an all out attack. We have never lost a structure where we have used this type of attack and we will continue to use it because it works great for us!

    Lots of good discussion here! Love hearing everyones differing opinions, give you a lot to think about!

  25. #50
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Well you showed me. You want to continue to throw barbs out, be my guest. The morning table here at shift change is tougher.
    As far as their choice of strategy, I agreed with it. With corresponding reasons why. But I also liked the question you posed about if the conditions changed interior and the debate it brought up.
    As far as crapping on anyone, not hardly. Let me break some of the issues brought up in the tread and I will add my take. As far as constructive criticism, absolutely essential. But I wasn't on their fire ground, know anything about their department, staffing or equipment, I will leave that to them.

    **As far as the perceived delay in bringing the deck gun on line, I don't know; was it pre-plumbed? Is it locked in a goofy position? Is it telescoping and it needs to be extended to clear the cab? From the video, I can't tell. But the 2 1/2 wasn't in a position to be effective anyway at the time the deck gun was charged. But it was in a great position to hit the roof of the porch where the deck gun missed when it was shut down. Not to mention, by this time, there was enough man power to advance it.

    **As far as using a 2 1/2 or an 1 3/4, with the benefit of hindsight and getting to watch the whole video, sure, maybe. But initially when they arrived, are you sure its just siding? Or just an exterior fire? Its much quicker to transition from a deck gun to hand lines than the other way around. Especially if you are working with limited man power.

    **As far as guys with no packs, are the POC guys allowed to respond directly to the scene? Yes, that could definitely be an issue if there isn't enough apparatus on scene to pack up everyone...

    So there you have it, my opinion. With that and a buck fifty, you may get a cup of coffee. I even managed to do that with out crapping on anyone or insulting another's opinion.
    Last edited by SPFDRum; 01-31-2012 at 08:09 PM.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Deck Fires
    By FIREINST in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-29-2009, 09:07 AM
  2. on deck
    By HFDINSTR in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 03:55 PM
  3. Good call - exterior ops with truss roof involved
    By Firescueguy in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-18-2004, 04:08 PM
  4. Deck gun nozzles
    By FIRE549 in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-25-2001, 07:11 PM
  5. Pay-Per-Call... good? bad? suggestions?
    By Eng522ine in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-02-2001, 07:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register