Boat Fire Photostory

[Resq14]

I realize "moments in time" and "pictures don't tell the whole story"...

But...

Does anyone fight marine-related fires this way? I've never seen it done... it's "interesting" to me, to say the least.

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/art...6036&s=hotshot

[nmfire]

I would guess by the lack of a FIRE BOAT, that it was probably the only way.

[oldman21220]

What NM said, if you don't have marine capabilities you do what you can. I do find the lack of a fire service boat in Florida strange.

[firenresq77]

I was kinda surprised when I saw it, too...... I don't really care to get out in the water with my gear on, whether I can walk or not........

[42VTExplorer]

I like Montreal's way of doing it, without a boat.

Whenever a marine fire comes in, apparatus pull onto flats / barges placed around the water front and are then brought out to the emergency. Water supply? HAH! They have the worlds biggest one right there.

[CALFFBOU]

I got to give them props for doing what they could. Good job.

The only thing I would have done different is NOT board the
burning boat. It is a write off and not worth putting me or
my personnel in danger just so they can fall through.

Or...If I had a Mini-me, I would put him on the boat and
then leave.

Other than that, good job guys!

[Resq14]

Originally posted by CALFFBOU
It is a write off and not worth putting me or
my personnel in danger just so they can fall through.

Ya think? What are we saving?

[DeputyChiefGonzo]

Given enough time, the fire will reach the waterline and self extinguish... problem solved!

[Bones42]

Being from an area that is partly surrounded by water and not having a fire boat....no, we would not attack a fire at that stage in that manner. We do have personal boats and also a Coast Guard station. We will board their boats, with portable pumps and some hose, and attack from the upwind side via the boat. In the picture, that boat is a total loss. Would it be boarded? Yes, after the fire was knocked down. Boat fires are a good use for foam.

Not having been there, I won't say they did the right/wrong thing. I'm assuming they did the best they can. Maybe it was the first time something like this happened and they will review procedures.

[Rescue101]

In all my years I've never seen one go past the waterline yet.Burning at least.Most of the ones around here happen when they start 'em up without energising the bilge fans. T.C.

[Bones42]

Engine rooms on our clamming/net boats. Starts below the water line and burns everything above it. With steel decks and steel hulls, it's like an oven down there. IF it happens while they are fishing, good chance there is a crew member or two down there packing the fish on ice, which is next to the engine room. These boats also tend to have a lot of "jury rigging" of electrical systems, home-made fixes, and EXTREMELY protective owners. Many carry illegal guns amongst other illegal "medicines". This is their life and they will fight to protect it. It's a group that we work very hard with on maintaining good relations. Annually do tours and familiarizations with the boats and their owners to keep the peace.

[FFFRED]

Honestly I would be very cautious wearing turnouts and a mask as these guys have. If one had fallen into the water you have minimal time before you will begin to sink.

For this reason anytime and Engine Co. is assigned to a Marine Co. for support reasons when we board we are not to wear our bunker pants. We carry them on with us and wear our regular shoes.

Also I would have left the mask on the shore as boarding this ship seems a bit unnessesary. Just surround and drown with what would appear to be a limitless water supply nearby.

JMO

FTM-PTB

[Fire304]

At least they are wearing their packs!

I'd be willing to bet that they don't fight a lot of boat fires are therefore attacked the way they would attack a house fire.

That boat probably had 3000-10000 gallons of fuel oil on board and looks like it is made of fiberglass. If allowed to burn to the water line then sink it would spill. Of course I'd be willing to bet they had no idea that this was the case when they boarded, but an effort had to be made to stop the fuel from spilling.

If the hull is aluminum with a fiberglass superstructure it is probably salvable and is actually worth something (marine salvage is a funny thing, people will rebuild almost anything to avoid buying a new hull). The engines and reduction gears (marine transmisions) might still be OK if it was not an engine room fire. Most likely there is a generator or two down there, as well as a marine sanitation device (very expensive sewage pump). In summary, I'd say this hulk is still worth $10,000-$100,000 or more (depends on hull construction, how much fuel is aboard, what type of engines, and the extent to the damage below the main deck). As a commercial salvor I'd jump at the oppurtunity to take this one on.

I would also have tried to push/pull the boat into the shallows so it could not sink (does not appear to be much water there).

The Coast Guard? Yeah right, the only fire they will fight is the one in their own boat. Unless there are lives to be saved it is USCG policy not to engage in property salvage. Even when they choose to break with policy there efforts are inefective at best.

[Fire304]

FFFred, you should not sink wearing full turnouts and a pack, there is enough bouyancy there to keep you at the surface, however it might force you face down. SCBA will work down to about 10-15' below the surface of the water. I would insist on wearing SCBA as the fumes from a boat fire are about 100 times nastier that of a car fire except you can't just walk away. A little twist of the wind and you're dealing with a half dozen smoke inhalations on the water who will then need rescue, but they have the only boat. They should have been wearing PFD's at all times, preferably under their bunker coats as the PFD's are quite flammable.

[FFFRED]

My dept tested bouyancy with the gear and found you would have AT MOST 2 minutes of float time best case senario.

For small craft such as the one pictured I would think the use of the reach of the stream to keep you away from the smoke would be safer than trying to board using the methods pictured with gear and mask.

FTM-PTB

[CALFFBOU]

Here is a little bit more information on shipboard firefighting-

http://www.ocsd.org/Operations/Harbo...lDivPatrol.asp

[Bones42]

The last few years we have had "in water" drills with our turnout gear and SCBA. As long as the PPE is worn correctly (we all do that right?) you will have good bouyancy for well over 10 minutes. The key is to have well secured neck flaps. These keep air from escaping. Kicking off boots also helps, but is not always easy. SOP for us is to have a dive team dispatched and on scene during any near-water activities.

And yes, the CG is terrible at their firefighting efforts, which is why they are more than happy to let us board their boats and do the work. Back in 1992, we had a bad flood in town. One of the first calls we got was from the CG station...they needed to be evacuated as the water was getting too high. Don't they have all the boats?

[Resq14]

If you don't have the means to pump water from a boat (fixed system, portable pumps, etc), in this instance, I'd let it burn and control environmental issues through proper channels should they arise. Wading,clinging onto, and boarding boats with structural PPE isn't the safest thing in the world imho.

Not all SCBA are capable of functioning underwater. As such, they should never be relied upon as a "backup plan" or as a safety net for accidental immersion/submersion.

PFD's? Definetly mandatory. I won't say that they weren't wearing them underneath the PPE in the picture, but it doesn't look like it. As stated already, if structural PPE is needed in addition to a PFD, most recommend that the PFD be worn on the as close to the body as possible i.e., under gear.

Floating in turnout gear - you should be able to keep yourself afloat by capturing/trapping/entraining air in PPE, inverting a boot or helmet, and securing gear openings as stated already. Floating in turnout gear with SCBA makes things more difficult but not impossible. If any FF has not done this type of training, I highly recommend that you do it. It's an eye-opener. Do I consider it safe out on the water? No, it's more "saving our own" training.

Risk/benefit... boat can be replaced, environmental hazards can be mitigated. To close, I fully understand this is a series of pictures representing moments in time, and that not everyone has access to full-fledged fire boats. I'm just commenting on what I saw and offering my thoughts, right or wrong.

[Dave1983]

Originally posted by oldman21220
What NM said, if you don't have marine capabilities you do what you can. I do find the lack of a fire service boat in Florida strange.

Oh, not strange at all. I live in Fla in a county with water on three sides and only only one (out of 17) departments has a boat that can fight fire. The airport has one as well, but both of these boats are on one side of the county, and it takes forever for them to get to the other side. My district has about 12 miles of gulf and inland waterway to cover. We have a rescue boat but it cant fight fire The USCG base has fire capable boats we can use, if we can get them. The large city in the next county has a couple fire boats, but it would take at least an hour for them to reach my area.

As for the photo no, we would NEVER do that. It would burn untill it drifted in range of a master stream we would set up on the beach or the USCG shoows up. Or it sank, which will put the fire out

Dave