I thought he was going to lose it for a minute there, way to stay with it
I thought he was going to lose it for a minute there, way to stay with it
Huh, I guess our expectations must be different? I'll elaborate more later, I'm interested in what others (some others) think.
If "they" will speak..
From what I read about the call they were the only two there at that time, tried to hit it from outside when that wasn't working they went agressive and knocked it down.
Seems like a good choice to me.
Tell us what you think. Why wait to see what others say?
I think anyone would be hardpressed to find fault with what this crew did considering conditions encountered and the apparent lack of staffing.
Before anyone chimes in about pushing fire, they should do some research on the recent NIST and UL tests that dispel that myth. Applying water to fire reduces temperature and burn rate in immediate fire area and throughout the structure.
I don't believe they went interior because exterior wasn't working. I believe it was part of a transitional attack.
The only thing that I might have done differently is try to get up the stairs sooner. Otherwise I don't disagree with their tactics here.
The one thing that may have made a greater difference would have been a higher flow line. To me short staffed situations like this call for a medium sized handline capable of flowing 200 gpm or more. Yes, you won't be advancing when doing that with 2 guys with the nozzle wide open but you can pin hit gate back move up pin hit again. My preference would be either a smoothbore or a low pressure combo nozzle.
OK, now I have some time, here goes. I guess my expectation would be to see that line up those stairs and working the fire area from the inside, upon arrival. It appeared the nozzleman spent a few minutes combating flame tongues at the eave line, maybe due to seeing this take possession of the roof in the past, but the volume of fire inside lead me to believe the fire was already up or heading there via the ceiling. The bystander outside noted he couldn't say if everyone was out, while we wouldn't trust him saying they were, this at least would confirm I was sending my crew as aggressive as safely possible. Again that would have been up the stairs, who knows maybe an occupant is right near the egress path? Hitting the fire from below at that gpm was not going to knock it down without breaking it up room to room. Maybe backing up a little and trying to get the stream further back might have helped? I still would have liked to have started at the top of the stairs.
And what was the helmet cam guys' function, it appeared he did very little until the finally went up the stairs and maybe he put one hand on the line? The POV may have skewed our ability to see his function?
Upon scrolling down on the YouTube page it sounds as if Fresno has had many company closures and are hard-fast on the two in/two out, thus without known rescues, they wait until other personnel arrive before getting in. Hard for me to find fault with that when you are slashed to the bare bones, at some point you have to say, this is the difference in how we protect your lives-property and ours when you reduce the number of personnel arriving quickly.
I'm interested to know what people think of fighting the fire from the door at the top of the stairs before the second company arrives. From that position you can hopefully hit the seat better, control the means of egress and stop the fire from escaping the apartment/compartment. You have the safety of an exterior set of stairs, the fire is at or above your level allowing for an easy retreat out of the IDLH. You can see that once they made the top of the stairs, the fire quickly darkened, likely due to them breaking the problem up into smaller pieces (rooms).
As Fyred said, no problems with their tactics, I would have tried to get up the stair sooner, and at least hit it from the doorway. What I don't know is how far behind they expected the next units to be. Also, I think it's Fyred that runs 2" lines on everything. The extra flow without losing much mobility would be nice here.
RFDAC, I like the idea of hitting it from the doorway while waiting for the second company. You can get a better shot at the seat of the fire and probably knock down the bulk of the fire in that main room.
I know what UL and everybody else has said about pushing fire. It's probably at least partly accurate, but I also know this: We all agree that hydraulic ventilation forces heat and smoke out of a space during overhaul, so why wouldn't it force heat and smoke through a space during attack?
Yes, the fire that the stream hits goes out, but the flow of heat that the fire has established can be upset if the line contradicts it. That means that what had been the "damper" of your house fire has become the "flue" because you've reversed the current of the "chimney".
Hydraulic ventilation is done post control. The fire dynamic has totally changed by this point. Because the fire is out. There is much much less heat energy in an area that is being hydraulically overhauled than there is in an actively burning fire area. Hydraulic venting is done with a fog line. I believe all interior attack lines should be straight stream, especially any stream used in transitional attack.
As far as "the flow of heat that the fire has established", it too gets cooler when water is applied. Once we knock down the fire the damper vs flue scenario should be a moot point.
Some have mentioned hitting the seat of the fire. For interior firefighting it is totally unnecessary to hit the seat of the fire. Just getting water into fire area cools the immediate fire area and surrounding areas. This slows the active burning of contents w/o actually hitting seat.
This fire could very well have burned into the attic space much more easily via exterior than interior (unless ceiling or wall coverings had been previously compromised). If fire had gotten into an open uncompartmented attic space the entire building could have been lost. So if a second hoseline was not immediately forthcoming, protecting the attic space from exterior would satisfy basic rules of line placement (locate fire, protect exposures, confine fire, extinguish fire; in that order)
I agree that it would be necessary to send someone up the stairs initially as part of size-up process. There could very well (as was mentioned) be occupants near to door that could be saved. This may have been done; we just don't know. If there was a team available to search (sounds like there wasn't) and size-up indicated possible occupants, the line would be better placed at entrance to protect search.
I also agree that any department that is lacking resources should at least consider whether they are using the best size hose and nozzles. If you're only goona have one line, make it the most efficient one you can get.
It comes down to staffing, resources and response times. The IC, which may be a company officer, has to deploy resources based on size-up and must do so consistent with safety.
Regarding hydraulic venting, my point was in response to EastKYFF who felt that if we could "push" heat and smoke thru an opening during overhaul, then we could probably push fire during fire attack. I was just pointing out the difference between the two.
My assumption is that any attack crew would be in full PPE (bunker gear, hoods, helmets, gloves, SCBA). If steam is a problem for these members, they are using their equipment improperly.
I didn't mean to indicate that the seat of fire would never be hit. Some had posted that initially operating from exterior at front door would allow seat of fire to be hit. I just meant to indicate that the initial attack from exterior did not have to hit seat of fire.
You stated you would have hit the edge of the roof, then flowed water through window, and then if that didn't work you would hit the fire by the stairs and go to attack fire from doorway. You later stated that your preference would be to get to the stairway a fast as possible. You can't have it both ways with only one handline.
I missed the point about the bystander telling them someone "might" be inside. Although I don't put a lot of faith in bystanders at multiple dwelling fires (unless they live in affected apartment ), I agree that it changes everything about line placement. The initial line would have to be brought up the stairs to protect search, regardless of staffing level.
Hydraulic ventilation is intended to move heat and smoke out of a space. Spraying water in the window (exterior attack) instead of out the window (hydraulic ventilation) will push cool air into the room, which forces the hot air to go somewhere else, possibly an uninvolved area.
Sure, the damper/flue issue is moot once the fire is knocked down. I'm talking about at the moment of initiating an exterior attack. You don't spray water in a vertical vent hole with a handline or ladder pipe, so if the fire is venting horizontally through a window, applying a stream through the opening would have a similar negative effect.
You are still making the mistake of comparing hydraulic overhauling to fire extinguishment. They are two entirely different things with the big difference being the amount of heat present. While an operating handline may cause some air movement, it will not push fire into uninvolved areas. The application of water cools both the immediate fire area and adjacent areas. NIST has done tests where they tried to "push fire" and could not do it. (These were done in real buildings with real contents.) Temperatures dropped from floor to ceiling in all areas of the structure including the floor above and rooms behind closed doors. It was tried with stream from outside into window and from inside the building at entrance door to apartment.
In my experience steam burns thru hood are rare. Are you sure it was steam and not heat generated by the fire itself?
Also, any chance your hood was wet when you got burned?
PS Please don't be insulted by these questions. Just trying to know exactly what happened to you.
Here is the incident where I was burned. I was leading crew into the burn tower for fire attack and I had given the nozzle man detailed instructions. I told him to follow me into the burn room, and using a straight stream to BRIEFLY sweep the ceiling and then hit the base of the fire and then shut down the nozzle. Well, I headed into the room, he stopped at the doorway and with the nozzle on wide fog proceeded to open the nozzle and flow the stream at the ceiling. I got him to shut it down, change the pattern back to a straight stream and come into the room. Where he flopped onto his back, changed the pattern back to wide fog, grabbed the line about a foot back from the nozzle and started whipping the nozzle around towards the ceiling. I got him to shut down the nozzle and pushed him and the rest of the crew out of the burn room before they got burned. I wasn't so lucky, by the time I had gotten out of the room all the steam, and black nasty at the ceiling was down on the floor and I was enveloped in it.
The tops of both of my ears were severely blistered and the skin sloughed of the lobes on both ears. I had my hood on, my collar up and my ear flaps down. If it had been a heat only injury why were only my ears burned? I have no doubt it was a steam injury.
Just to ease your mind regarding your worrying about insulting me...You don't know enough about me to begin to think you can insult me and frankly I don't know you from adam. Anytime you want my experience and training credentials just let me know.
I went out of my way to indicate that I wasn't trying to attack or insult you, yet you appear to have been insulted anyway. I'm not sure why.
It is not necessary to present your experience or training credentials. The fact that you were fairly seriously burned while acting as an instructor at a training session tells me plenty about your experience and credentials, or lack thereof.
Back on the Video..
I agree that perhaps they spent too long fighting it from the ground before going up the stairs.. but not an egregiously so. There were areas they were able to darken from the ground that they couldn't have hit from the entrance, like the back bedroom. They went back over the windows a few times when they probably could have advanced up the stairs.. but again, meh.
My one concern is those types of apartments is the covered breezeway.. they don't always have firestops. A fire as well off as this one has probably taken the attic above the apartment and if there is no separation the breezeway could be compromised. Can't become complacent just because it's "outside".
It looked like the FF with the camera was primarily looking for extension and fire movement while they were outside.. he checked the adjacent apartment (white smoke showing) on the right and the apartment across the breezeway with fire showing.. he also seemed concerned with fire wraping around the breezway from the balcony while making the stairs. Once inside it was hard to tell but it looked like he pulled the ceiling and got the nozzle FF to come back when they found significant fire in the attic.
ETA: Overall a very nice job for 2 guys on a single line given the volume of fire and involvement.
Frankly, you are nothing to me but another newbie trying to make his bones. So good luck with that.
By the way, where are you a Captain?
About 5 years ago now, I lived in a quad-plex apartment building. Two on top, with two directly below. The downstairs apartment I lived in had drop ceiling. I was up in the ceiling one day looking for something, and I noticed there was absolutely NO fire stop between my apartment and the adjacent lower apartment. The wall didn't even go all the way up to the floor of the upper apartments. The framework extended all the way from bottom to top, and the wall for the lower apartments stopped about 2" above the drop ceiling, so there were large gaps in between the framework, where if one of the apartments caught fire and we couldn't get there fast enough, the whole thing was coming down.