Cardinal Rule of Firefighting

[JFLYNN 681]

The recent post about NIMS compliance which referred to the tragic LOD's in Manlius, NY, has spurred me to post this topic concerning one of the most cardinal rules of Firefighting which is often ignored with tragic consequences:

If You Can't See Where You Are About To Place Your Foot.......

CRAWL!!

Inside a fire building, on the roof, even in the street, crawl when you can't see your feet, regardless of the heat conditions. If you are crawling, you will move more quickly and safely because you won't have to worry about stepping into a hole or shaft, or tripping over unseen obstacles. Many Firefighters are seriously injured and killed every year because of trips or falls that would not have happened if they were crawling instead of walking.

P.S. What you are looking for (fire victims) are more easily found (bumped into) when crawling, and what is trying to kill you (heat, smoke, flashover) is more easily avoided when crawling.

P.S.S. Don't forget to continually monitor conditions at the ceiling for signs of flashover.

* Of course, the above information will not receive nearly as much attention as posts on the latest parade or new shiny apparatus, but hopefully it will make a positive difference for some of you. Qtip...

[x134 46]

The recent post about NIMS compliance which referred to the tragic LOD's in Manlius, NY, has spurred me to post this topic concerning one of the most cardinal rules of Firefighting which is often ignored with tragic consequences:

If You Can't See Where You Are About To Place Your Foot.......

CRAWL!!

Inside a fire building, on the roof, even in the street, crawl when you can't see your feet, regardless of the heat conditions. If you are crawling, you will move more quickly and safely because you won't have to worry about stepping into a hole or shaft, or tripping over unseen obstacles. Many Firefighters are seriously injured and killed every year because of trips or falls that would not have happened if they were crawling instead of walking.

P.S. What you are looking for (fire victims) are more easily found (bumped into) when crawling, and what is trying to kill you (heat, smoke, flashover) is more easily avoided when crawling.

P.S.S. Don't forget to continually monitor conditions at the ceiling for signs of flashover.

* Of course, the above information will not receive nearly as much attention as posts on the latest parade or new shiny apparatus, but hopefully it will make a positive difference for some of you. Qtip...

I agree %100 Chief, great post!

[x129K 1,393]

Post of the year................

Simple....basic...and all too often forgotten!

[Guest DFD189]

Good post Chief, but I would make the following comment/observation:

It has been my experience when observing firefighters operating at a fire scene that when they are crawling, they tend to get tunnel vision on the area to their immediate front (great for avoiding falling into holes). However, when on all fours, and packed up, with helmet on, they do NOT do a good job of monitoring conditions overhead, or even around them. The issue of rapid fire progression is a serious one that kills numerous firefighters. We need, as you clearly stated, to monitor overhead conditions. I question the utility of crawling to accomplish that task.

I'm a big fan of advancing in a modified crouch, where the forward leg can be used to "feel out" the floor in front as you advance by "sweeping" and "stomping". This keeps the firefighter positioned so that he/she can observe up, down and all around. This is SOP in the UK and Sweden, where they factor in fire behavior indicator recognition as a key element of how they operate tactically. On my attachments there, every time I went down on all fours to advance, I was quickly corrected. Needless to say, I learned that my leg strength wasn't what I thought it was. Squatting heavy weight versus sustaining yourself/advancing in a crouch are two totally different things.

The feeling in Europe (at least where I operated) was that if fire conditions inside a structure are such that you cannot sustain a crouch to advance/operate a handline, and are compelled to go down to a crawl, then maybe you shouldn't be crawling to begin with -- perhaps there needs to be better ventilation in place, etc. If the conditions are such that you are driven that low, then maybe it doesn't make any sense do go any deeper into the structure until conditions improve.

But back to the intent of your post -- we definately need to do a better job of clearing the way ahead as we advance into a structure, especially with new construction where wood-chip I-beams are used instead of steel. Basement fires can turn deadly quickly, as past tragedies have demonstrated all-too well.

Just some comments. Good post.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Got that right Chief!!! Firefighters have to remember to be down on you hands and knees and go downt he stairs on you butt with your feet first!! Too many times I have to yell at someone during training evolutions to do this. This should be the first thing everyone should remember when entering a structure like you said, when can't see your feet, you crawl!

Great reminder point Chief Flynn!

[JFLYNN 681]

Got that right Chief!!! Firefighters have to remember to be down on you hands and knees and go downt he stairs on you butt with your feet first!! Too many times I have to yell at someone during training evolutions to do this. This should be the first thing everyone should remember when entering a structure like you said, when can't see your feet, you crawl!

Great reminder point Chief Flynn!

Thanks but actually the only way to go down stairs is backward as if descending a ladder...this way your profile is much lower than sliding down on your butt or walking down in a crouch...if you trip or fall, you fall into the stairs, not the basement or floor below, your head is protected, and if you need to make a fast retreat up the stairs, you are already pointed in the right direction and alot less likely to get tangled up on debris, tools, or other firefighters.

[JFLYNN 681]

Good post Chief, but I would make the following comment/observation:

It has been my experience when observing firefighters operating at a fire scene that when they are crawling, they tend to get tunnel vision on the area to their immediate front (great for avoiding falling into holes). However, when on all fours, and packed up, with helmet on, they do NOT do a good job of monitoring conditions overhead, or even around them. The issue of rapid fire progression is a serious one that kills numerous firefighters. We need, as you clearly stated, to monitor overhead conditions. I question the utility of crawling to accomplish that task.

I'm a big fan of advancing in a modified crouch, where the forward leg can be used to "feel out" the floor in front as you advance by "sweeping" and "stomping". This keeps the firefighter positioned so that he/she can observe up, down and all around. This is SOP in the UK and Sweden, where they factor in fire behavior indicator recognition as a key element of how they operate tactically. On my attachments there, every time I went down on all fours to advance, I was quickly corrected. Needless to say, I learned that my leg strength wasn't what I thought it was. Squatting heavy weight versus sustaining yourself/advancing in a crouch are two totally different things.

The feeling in Europe (at least where I operated) was that if fire conditions inside a structure are such that you cannot sustain a crouch to advance/operate a handline, and are compelled to go down to a crawl, then maybe you shouldn't be crawling to begin with -- perhaps there needs to be better ventilation in place, etc. If the conditions are such that you are driven that low, then maybe it doesn't make any sense do go any deeper into the structure until conditions improve.

But back to the intent of your post -- we definately need to do a better job of clearing the way ahead as we advance into a structure, especially with new construction where wood-chip I-beams are used instead of steel. Basement fires can turn deadly quickly, as past tragedies have demonstrated all-too well.

Just some comments. Good post.

you are right about the problem of tunnel vision but I don't agree with your ideas on how to avoid it. I don't know much about Europe but in my experience in actual Firefighting as well as in training as both student and instructor, modified crouch is ok for nozzleman as well as maybe his Officer and backupman once water is flowing and they are operating the nozzle (I guess I should have mentioned that) but crawling is more practical for everyone else...less physically taxing, faster, lower profile, more balanced, more body surface on the floor (distance from each elbow to wrists and distance from each knee to toes vs. bottoms of two feet- therefore greater likelihood of feeling fire victims, obstructions, etc.). As, I said, "regardless of heat conditions, if you can't see your feet, crawl", so I am not advocating crawling only when "conditions are such that you are driven that low"...certainly if it is too hot to stand without getting burned, then we should consider carefully whether to remain where we are, advance or retreat based on a number of factors, chiefly among them possible life hazards, but we certainly can not always wait "until conditions improve" "before going deeper into the structure"

But whatdoIknow?

[Guest DFD189]

Chief,

I was addressing this from the perspective of an attack line, with the nozzleman and office/back-up firefighter in mind. But in my humble opinion, it is valid for all interior operations.

We can agree to disagree on the utility of crawling, I for one would never knock your experience (you certainly have more than myself). Again, even when searching, I find that firefighters become so focused on their immediate front that they avoid (and when packed up with helmet, are physically constrained from) looking up and all around. Especially if you are searching without a charged handline present, failure to monitor overhead conditions is a major issue, and gets firefighters in trouble far too often. Our gear is very good, and by the time we feel the radiant heat from overhead fire conditions, it might be too late. Its a different technique, definately more deliberate, but the crouch allows you to effectively monitor conditions to a far greater degree than the crawl. It also allows you to better incorporate TIC technology to identify air track, etc, to help you find the seat of the fire in heavy smoke conditions.

I would say that if the conditions are such that we are being driven to the floor, continuing the advance makes little or no sense. If we're going down with full PPE and SCBA, the liklihood of viable victims is considerably reduced, and as such life safety (mine) takes precedent over property preservation...maybe its time to consider a defensive approach. I'm as big a fan of aggressive interior firefighting as the next, but I like to modify that with a good amount of "intelligent" firefighting. If there is a life that can be saved, go for it. If an aggressive attack can meaningfully impact the fire suppression effort without needlessly endangering the firefighters involved, go for it. Other than that, if I'm crawling blindly through a building with worsening conditions (as has been the case a time or two), I question the utility of the operation. On every occassion where that has occured, we were eventually pulled out and went to defensive operations. The culprit was usually deep-seated fire that could not be alleviated with the ventilation plan in place and/or available suppression resources.

Again, just observations from my limited experience here and there.

[Guest DFD189]

PS....not to knock Yonkers, but the last time I checked, they actually fight fire over in Europe, too...at least that was the case in London, Paris, Devon and Malmo! It is a different approach, one based on a lot more attention to fire behavior than is the case here in the US...some not familiar with their training (i.e., many US firefighters) mistake their deliberate approach to fighting a fire as plodding, slow, ineffective. Actually, it is well thought out, extremely safe, and very effective. We can debate the impact of building code, construction types, etc and how that influences the European methodology, but fire is fire, and when it gets above your head, whether in Europe or Yonkers, you're in deep trouble. The amount of effort the Europeans spend monitoring interior conditions influences their tactical choices. They take a slower approach to making entry, one which emphasizes firefighter safety. They also incorperate "gas cooling" tactics to "make safe" their immediate area of operations, whether its a room or a hallway. As such, they're not fans of rapidly crawling into a structure; they prefer the more deliberate crouch. After watching/perticipating in their operations, and then comparing and contrasting with how we do things here, I do think there is room for improvement on our end. When a Phoenix Captain from one that cities busiest companies noted that the Swedes and Brits were 20 years ahead of the US when it came to firefighting, I have to respect his opinion -- especially after seeing both operate first hand.

[firecapt32 282]

Great post Chief Flynn--- if you cant see your feet you shouldnt be on them.

[JFLYNN 681]

PS....not to knock Yonkers, but the last time I checked, they actually fight fire over in Europe, too...at least that was the case in London, Paris, Devon and Malmo! It is a different approach, one based on a lot more attention to fire behavior than is the case here in the US...some not familiar with their training (i.e., many US firefighters) mistake their deliberate approach to fighting a fire as plodding, slow, ineffective. Actually, it is well thought out, extremely safe, and very effective. We can debate the impact of building code, construction types, etc and how that influences the European methodology, but fire is fire, and when it gets above your head, whether in Europe or Yonkers, you're in deep trouble. The amount of effort the Europeans spend monitoring interior conditions influences their tactical choices. They take a slower approach to making entry, one which emphasizes firefighter safety. They also incorperate "gas cooling" tactics to "make safe" their immediate area of operations, whether its a room or a hallway. As such, they're not fans of rapidly crawling into a structure; they prefer the more deliberate crouch. After watching/perticipating in their operations, and then comparing and contrasting with how we do things here, I do think there is room for improvement on our end. When a Phoenix Captain from one that cities busiest companies noted that the Swedes and Brits were 20 years ahead of the US when it came to firefighting, I have to respect his opinion -- especially after seeing both operate first hand.

Europe? Phoenix? (one of their busiest companies too!!); Delmar??? Like I said, whatdoiknow???

[wraftery 1,275]

Regarding Europe, we tend to have more combustibles (wood) in US construction. Masonry is more prevalent in Europe.

Just an observation

[demps121 39]

hey DFD189 you that guy that was the center of controversy in Mt Vernon a while ago! We know all about you!!!!!!!

Edited August 6, 2009 by demps121

[JFLYNN 681]

Regarding Europe, we tend to have more combustibles (wood) in US construction. Masonry is more prevalent in Europe.

Just an observation

Thanks for the observation Bill. I realize I was being a bit of a wise a**, but the point I was making in my last couple posts is that you really can't compare Firefighting tactics from Europe (or even Phoenix or Delmar, NJ) to Firefighting tactics employed in older cities and towns in the U.S. There are so many differences- some obvious and some not so obvious regarding the typical building construction which will be encountered, and I just didn't want to get into a debate about this...it could really go on forever and I'm mjust not into it.

I just thought I would pass along what I feel is a valuable tip- you guys can consider the source and either use it or not.

Be safe and qtip.

[nfd2004 750]

Fighting fires in a City like Yonkers is a lot different then fighting fires in a City like Phoenix. I"ve never been to Europe but from what I understand a lot of the construction is stucco, stone or brick. Lets just compare City"s like Yonkers, and Jersey City to a City like Phoenix or even L.A. City. The amount of fire potentional is dramicically different. Yonkers or Jersey City, or pretty much any fair size Northeast city has many 2 1/2 or 3 story wood frames. Four, five and six brick apartment buildings of wood joist and lath boards. And few fire stops. Very serious exposure problems, and many old factories, some of which are 100 years old, and some completely vacant. Fighting fires in these types of buildings must be made using a quick aggressive attack. Otherwise the entire block could be lost.

On the other hand, a City like Phoenix is a fairly newer city. They basically don"t have the old balloon construction. There is a lot less of the old Mill type construction. And they certainly don"t have the serious exposure problem facing these older cities. I travelled to L.A. City in 1984 to buff. I hung out in one of their worst areas at the time. Watt"s. The busy companies were Eng 46 and Eng 33 and Truck 33. Most of that neighborhood was all one and a half story, single family, wood frames. A far cry from the huge 3 1/2 story wood frame Queen Anne"s of some of our Old Northeast Cities.

So I think its fair to say that there probadly is adifferent style of fighting fires in various parts of the country, and perhaps the world. Yes, fighting fires is a dangerous business whether your firehouse in in L.A. or N.Y. Yes, the smoke and heat is the same. But based on what I"ve seen, all cities are "NOT" created equal.

I don"t know Chief Flynn, but anybody who"s fought fires in some of these Old, Tough Cities, has got my vote.

Edited August 6, 2009 by nfd2004

[x129K 1,393]

hey DFD189 you that guy that was the center of controversy in Mt Vernon a while ago! We know all about you!!!!!!!

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......................(lightbulb CLICK!)

Good catch!

[IzzyEng4 427]

Thanks but actually the only way to go down stairs is backward as if descending a ladder...this way your profile is much lower than sliding down on your butt or walking down in a crouch...if you trip or fall, you fall into the stairs, not the basement or floor below, your head is protected, and if you need to make a fast retreat up the stairs, you are already pointed in the right direction and alot less likely to get tangled up on debris, tools, or other firefighters.

Guess you can teach an old dog new tricks. I never even though of doing a decent that way!! Will have to remember that one and pass it on during training. Thanks!

[Capejake72 8]

from the Fire Orders (basic Tenets of Wildland Firefighting)

Fight fire aggressively, having Provided for Safety First

[FFPCogs 863]

That crawling when there is limited or no visibility is even an issue is completely absurd to me. Now maybe the tactic elsewhere is to not advance (or search) when there is no visibility and that's great, but that simply won't fly in my neck of the woods. Nor would I want it to.

Soapbox time:

That this most basic of manuevers is not being followed speaks volumes about the state of the American Fire Service. We have gotten so far away from basic evolutions and "common sense" due to "safety" or technology that we are actually putting ourselves at greater risk by relying on these factors. No matter what anyone says the old tried and true is what works....it has managed to keep the vast majority of us alive for all these years now hasn't it? If newer members aren't following suit than that is the fault of the "seniors" for not setting them straight immediately. There is no sustitute (i.e. thermal imagers, heat detectors on the mask, all manner of PPE ect) for good solid knowledge of the BASIC skills (like crawiling with high heat and/or no visibility) of this job. If members aren't getting that than it's time to hammer it in a bit harder. Put away the toys and hit the drill tower.

Cogs

[Guest Wait&See]

The recent post about NIMS compliance which referred to the tragic LOD's in Manlius, NY, has spurred me to post this topic concerning one of the most cardinal rules of Firefighting which is often ignored with tragic consequences:

If You Can't See Where You Are About To Place Your Foot.......

CRAWL!!

Inside a fire building, on the roof, even in the street, crawl when you can't see your feet, regardless of the heat conditions. If you are crawling, you will move more quickly and safely because you won't have to worry about stepping into a hole or shaft, or tripping over unseen obstacles. Many Firefighters are seriously injured and killed every year because of trips or falls that would not have happened if they were crawling instead of walking.

P.S. What you are looking for (fire victims) are more easily found (bumped into) when crawling, and what is trying to kill you (heat, smoke, flashover) is more easily avoided when crawling.

P.S.S. Don't forget to continually monitor conditions at the ceiling for signs of flashover.

* Of course, the above information will not receive nearly as much attention as posts on the latest parade or new shiny apparatus, but hopefully it will make a positive difference for some of you. Qtip...

Excellent Chief,

Well said its about time this site starts focousing on more training and how we can right the wrongs that continue to happen everyday in the fire service.

[JFLYNN 681]

One of the brothers (not from Manlius) just private messaged me regarding this topic. While he didn't say it directly, I

Oops, I hit post prematurely...anyway, the brother who private messaged me got me to thinking that I should not have referred to Manlius in my post about crawling...for all I know, the two brothers WERE crawling. It was pure speculation on my part and I shouldn't have done that. I apologize for that and hope it didn't cause any heartache for anyone.

To be clear, no one from Manlius contacted me to complain about this but in case any of those guys were bothered by my post, I want to make a heartfelt apology with no excuses at all...I just screwed up!

[gpdexplorer 46]

Chief, I got to thinking when I read your post. Crawling is excellent, but I feel like often times when we drill and/or take classes at the county, we are always given that sheet of wax paper that everyone hates to put in our SCBA mask. I think that the wax paper doesn't create a situation for firefighters to look up and "monitor conditions overhead." Honestly, I realized that when I'm doing my search or what have you, I rarely think to look up because I can't see anything no matter what I do. I know that the wax paper is supposed to help us understand that many times we won't be able see much in fire conditions, but I don't believe that it teaches us good tactics either.

Any thoughts?

Edited August 6, 2009 by gpdexplorer

[Guest DFD189]

Well, Chief, I assumed you posted your initial thoughts to generate some discussion. I think you've succeeded, since this post has gotten more attention than any parade or apparatus post currently out there. Congratulations.

The first known firefighting manual, written in 1830 by a Scottish fire chief named James Braidwood, lists as a tactic for fighting fires firefighters entering a burning building with a hoseline while crawling under the smoke. He also advised firefighters not to spray water on the smoke, but rather advance cloe to the fire and put water directly on the "seat" of the fire.

Tradition is an amazing thing. It seems because we have been doing something for nearly 180 years it must therefore be accepted as gospel and followed accordingly. "Thats the way I was trained, thats the way you will do it" seems to be the mentality prevalent here.

European and other "progressive" fire departments did not adapt their tactics simply because they fight masonry-only fires. There are a great deal of wood-frame structures in these respective communities. Their tactics and operational methodologies are derived from studying the science of fire, and with an eye on firefighter safety and firefighting efficiency. Not only do they not like to crawl on all fours, they are big proponents of spraying water on smoke to reduce the liklihood of rapid fire progression. Imagine that?

I can say this: those who question the viability of crawling in heavy fire/smoke condition did not do so lightly, but rather after years of study and effort where different tactics and methods were tested and compared. Firefighter safety was paramount in their deliberation, something those who profess an adherance to the Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives process might think more about, especially the part about being trapped in a culture which is adverse to change.

Having gone through the NY State Fire Instructor training process myself, I can say that when a system teaches one approach (i.e., "crawling") and only one approach, then I'm not surprised that its viability continues unquestioned. "Crawling" is easy to justify; its easy to teach and do, and it is accepted practice. God forbid we try to introduce a methodology which is physically demanding (try duckwalking through a structure, and you'll definately love crawling), and is drastically different than that the Chief and senior firefighters learned when they went through the academy.

I'm not saying Chief Flynn and the others who are proponents of "crawling" are wrong. One does what works for them. If "crawling" is derived from a process of deliberate study and consideration, then more power to those who embrace it as a tactic. But I would say that those who slam others for considering alternative methods, especially when the process of consideration involves in-depth study and analysis based upon examining building contruction, fire behavior, and firefighter physiology (and with firefighter safety in mind throughout) might want to ease back a bit. They aren't wrong to reject "crawling". Rather they have made a professional decision based upon fact-based analysis and study. I, for one, would much rather operate from a foundation of "fact based" methodologies than "faith based." Doing something because "thats the way we've always done it" is not "fact based." Its a leap of faith.

Its Delmar, NY, not Delmar, NJ. And our SOP is to still crawl through a fire building on all fours, although some in the department are trying to change that.

Last thought....keep it professional, and (to quote the Chief), QTIP.

[FFPCogs 863]

Chief,

Any miscommunication is purely unintentional, so no harm no foul. And while it may be that the facts are "wrong", the point of your post most assuredly is not.

Thanks for making us think and starting the discussion.

Cogs

[efdcapt115 1,511]

I'm not saying Chief Flynn and the others who are proponents of "crawling" are wrong. One does what works for them. If "crawling" is derived from a process of deliberate study and consideration, then more power to those who embrace it as a tactic. But I would say that those who slam others for considering alternative methods, especially when the process of consideration involves in-depth study and analysis based upon examining building contruction, fire behavior, and firefighter physiology (and with firefighter safety in mind throughout) might want to ease back a bit. They aren't wrong to reject "crawling". Rather they have made a professional decision based upon fact-based analysis and study. I, for one, would much rather operate from a foundation of "fact based" methodologies than "faith based." Doing something because "thats the way we've always done it" is not "fact based." Its a leap of faith.

I don't think anybody is "slamming" you for your opinions, or your experience in other countries. Most are simply disagreeing with you. I would venture to say you've received replies from officers and firefighters with a combined amount of fire experience that adds up to decades if not centuries. As you know, the aggresive interior crawling and searching that occurs in places like Yonkers, FDNY, and most departments in southern Westchester, is done so without the protection of a hoseline by truckies working their way as quickly as possible to the seat of the fire to begin their search outward from that point for fire victims. This is by no means "faith based" (although much praying is done by many members when they are in these situations), rather it is "experience based". It is what has been found to be the most effective way to reach the hot spot and make the grab if possible. If "that's the way we've always done it" continues to work, there is no reason to discard the methodology because it's old. (Edit: Now I'm thinking about Bill's awesome post about the Halligan tool again)

Additionally, firefighters in Europe may indeed be very cautious about entering fires. So are American firefighters. But IMHO the tradition of making the calculated risk of putting your @ss on the line to make the grab, and if we in America continue to be more aggresive in our tactics, it is simply one more reason why this is the noblest and most honorable profession in America; putting the life of a potential victim or your brother firefighter ahead of your own.

~Stay safe.

Edited August 6, 2009 by efdcapt115

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I can speak for myself as an instructor on both the state and county level I try to give balanced instruction by showing and allowing students to try multiple techniques and find which one works for them or the situation at hand. I can also attest to some of the things Chief Flynn was pointing out as in my experience watching and instructing students going through evolutions that in regard to the duck (crouch) walking technique, many have a difficult time not just conducting a efficient search with that technique, they also have difficulty in coordination and maintaining balance. I have tried during training evolutions myself to get used to the technique and its just flat out not for me. It slows me down. Where I do employ the crouch/duck walk is when advancing a hoseline, as I come up from one knee (which is a separate topic point I'm gonna hit on shortly) it puts me right into the crouch where I can rapidly get the hose where I want it to get back to one knee and open up the nozzle. As far as the European discussion, I think there are lessons to be learned and things to be tried (in training first) from anywhere. Opening up a nozzle in bursts into the upper thermal layer in certain applications isn't anything new nor earth shattering. Are they still using high pressure/low volume lines there? I for one never understood why (and this still happens in the U.S. in some area with high pressure booster lines) someone would want to bring the equivalent of a pressure washer into a burning building. In regard to the discussion about the stairs, I and several other instructors who I work with on a regular basis have noticed an increase in students and firefighters utilizing a technique of going down stairs on their butts feet first. All one has to do is observe another doing this and where the majority of their weight is focused to tell that this is a flawed technique. The purpose as stated of going down on your stomach is better weight distribution on the stairs and if your legs go through your upper body has good friction and surface area to hpefully keep you on the good section to pull your way out or wait for help.

Earlier I pointed out about being on 1 knee. Other then when crawling, the majority of instructors (including myself) teach and consistently reinforce staying off both knees when operating. Being on both knees is not as stable as being on at least 1 knee. Have 2 people in gear get on the ground, 1 on both knees, 1 on one knee...as you pass by them bump into them and see which ones falls over the easiest. Then have them do it again and tell them that they are 5' inside a doorway of a room that is going to flashover and they have to get up and get out...see who can exit the fastest.

The one thing in the fire service is that there is always more then one way to skin a cat. As long as they are accepted practices or standards of the fire service they are viable options and doesn't make the way you like it any better then the way another may do something that is also acceptable for the same task. If you are a trainer or educator this is critical to understand this.

[Guest DFD189]

Additionally, firefighters in Europe may indeed be very cautious about entering fires. So are American firefighters. But IMHO the tradition of making the calculated risk of putting your @ss on the line to make the grab, and if we in America continue to be more aggresive in our tactics, it is simply one more reason why this is the noblest and most honorable profession in America; putting the life of a potential victim or your brother firefighter ahead of your own.

~Stay safe.

Well said. I'd just refer you to the 16 firefighter life safety initiatives, in particular initiatives 1-5. The accumulated experience and wisdom of those who wrote these (and I'd read the white papers that accompany each initiative "bullet") is likewise considerable. I think one of the issues they want addressed (and these are American firefighters, many from the East Coast, perhaps with some FDNY-Westchester experience mixed in) is the "culture of courage" which causes us to put our lives at risk needlessly. "Risk alot to save alot, Risk little to save little" is a motto to, literally, live by. I sometimes fear that the American firefighter culture (which I am a proud part of) operates on the basis of "Risk because we can". Aggressive tactics for the sake of being aggressive isn't noble; its dangerous, and thats why these "wise men" have written these 16 initiatives.

Firefighters around the world risk their lives to make "grabs." I know many Brits, Swedes and Frenchmen whose courage under fire cannot be questioned. They have saved numerous lives by placing themselves at risk under heavy fire conditions. They do not "hesitate" to enter a structure; they simply do so in a measured, safe fashion which integrates a full risk-assessment aspect that we here in the US sometimes breeze by in the name of tradition and experience.

I don't mock experience. But as a former Marine, when I look at the Iwo Jima memorial, I am thankful we decided that the frontal assault was a wasteful way of doing business, and adopted "maneuver warfare" instead. The Marines today are no less courageous and dedicated than those who died storming the beaches during WW II. But I would say they are a heck of alot smarter in terms of the tactics they use, and better prepared to do the task of "closing with and destroying the enemy through firepower and maneuver" armed with the best technology and science can provide, rather than sticking to the weapons and tactics of the past simply because thats the way its always been done. I think NIST has done a considerable amount of work concerning fire behavior in single-family residences and multiple occupancy structures. The importance of monitoring fire behavior conditions by tracking smoke, heat, flame and air track cannot be overstated. Married to a tactic which locks your field of vision to a very limited range (i.e., crawling) when you can utilize an approach (i.e., duckwalking, or crouching) which gives you great "up-down-all around" range of motion might be something worthy of discussion, even in places like FDNY-Yonkers-Westchester where the firefighters have a tremendous amount of first-hand experience fighting fire under difficult conditions.

As you said, we can agree to disagree.

[Guest DFD189]

ALS,

Outstanding input.

I have to agree that the "crouch" or "duckwalk" isn't for me, either. Its damn hard to do. All I was saying is that those who are advocates of fire behavior-based training (predominant in Europe) frown on the crawl, since in their opinion one is not able to adequately monitor overhead conditions.

There is definately more than one way to skin a cat, and we all have to use that which is best for the circumstances we operate under.

As for Europe and hoselines, you will find that many departments make use of a high pressure/low volume "booster line", as well as low pressure/high volume lines. The American emphasis on GPM flow rate does not get much attention in Europe, since they point out (at least in my experience) that much of the GPM we flow in the US ends up on the ground, and not doing the job of extinguishment. Their love affair with the booster line comes from their belief that water so applied is more effective and efficient for gas cooling, and once you inert the fire gases, it is a simpler job to put water directly on the fire.

I will say that with modern construction materials making for hotter, more intense fires, there seems to be a greater emphasis in using the 45mm line (our 1 3/4") for initial fire attack. They do have 75mm lines (our 2 1/2"), but these are mainly used as supply lines, not attack lines.

There is a growing discussion in Europe about the need for higher flow rates to fight modern fires. Also, the level of training needed to get a firefighter to the point that she/he can effectively implement some of these tactics is considerable. Sweden takes two years to train a basic firefighter. The Dutch and Germans are more like the US, and I know from first hand experience that the Dutch struggle with assimilating the nuances of the 3-D approach to firefighting favored by the Swedes, Brits and French.

Like you said...there are many ways to skin a cat. I guess my point is that before we reject out of hand other options, we should at least take the time to consider them, and think about why those who practise them made the decision to do so.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Well said. I'd just refer you to the 16 firefighter life safety initiatives, in particular initiatives 1-5. The accumulated experience and wisdom of those who wrote these (and I'd read the white papers that accompany each initiative "bullet") is likewise considerable. I think one of the issues they want addressed (and these are American firefighters, many from the East Coast, perhaps with some FDNY-Westchester experience mixed in) is the "culture of courage" which causes us to put our lives at risk needlessly. "Risk alot to save alot, Risk little to save little" is a motto to, literally, live by. I sometimes fear that the American firefighter culture (which I am a proud part of) operates on the basis of "Risk because we can". Aggressive tactics for the sake of being aggressive isn't noble; its dangerous, and thats why these "wise men" have written these 16 initiatives.

Firefighters around the world risk their lives to make "grabs." I know many Brits, Swedes and Frenchmen whose courage under fire cannot be questioned. They have saved numerous lives by placing themselves at risk under heavy fire conditions. They do not "hesitate" to enter a structure; they simply do so in a measured, safe fashion which integrates a full risk-assessment aspect that we here in the US sometimes breeze by in the name of tradition and experience.

I don't mock experience. But as a former Marine, when I look at the Iwo Jima memorial, I am thankful we decided that the frontal assault was a wasteful way of doing business, and adopted "maneuver warfare" instead. The Marines today are no less courageous and dedicated than those who died storming the beaches during WW II. But I would say they are a heck of alot smarter in terms of the tactics they use, and better prepared to do the task of "closing with and destroying the enemy through firepower and maneuver" armed with the best technology and science can provide, rather than sticking to the weapons and tactics of the past simply because thats the way its always been done. I think NIST has done a considerable amount of work concerning fire behavior in single-family residences and multiple occupancy structures. The importance of monitoring fire behavior conditions by tracking smoke, heat, flame and air track cannot be overstated. Married to a tactic which locks your field of vision to a very limited range (i.e., crawling) when you can utilize an approach (i.e., duckwalking, or crouching) which gives you great "up-down-all around" range of motion might be something worthy of discussion, even in places like FDNY-Yonkers-Westchester where the firefighters have a tremendous amount of first-hand experience fighting fire under difficult conditions.

As you said, we can agree to disagree.

Brother, I'd just tell you I dedicated my entire career, particularly my eight years as a tour commander to "firefighter life safety initiatives." I'm sure the initiatives you are refering to are wonderfully written, carefully thought out, and more than likely many of them have already been implemented in the depts. refered. The American fire service has re-written the rules regarding "risk vs. reward", and the adoption of OSHA mandated firefighter rescue is now pretty much standard practice in both career and volunteer depts.

As far as your service to our country in the Marine Corp, I'm sure I can speak for every member on this site that we have no greater respect than for our members in the military, and also have the fullest confidence in their ability to conduct warfare, and to have changed their tactics to adopt to urban warfare. But let's not forget the well established and unchanged objective of our warriors; KILL THE ENEMY. That hasn't changed, and they are still great at it.

Edited August 7, 2009 by moosecfd368
fixed quotes

[abaduck 123]

As far as the European discussion, I think there are lessons to be learned and things to be tried (in training first) from anywhere. Opening up a nozzle in bursts into the upper thermal layer in certain applications isn't anything new nor earth shattering. Are they still using high pressure/low volume lines there? I for one never understood why (and this still happens in the U.S. in some area with high pressure booster lines) someone would want to bring the equivalent of a pressure washer into a burning building. In regard to the discussion about the stairs, I and several other instructors who I work with on a regular basis have noticed an increase in students and firefighters utilizing a technique of going down stairs on their butts feet first. All one has to do is observe another doing this and where the majority of their weight is focused to tell that this is a flawed technique.

Tommy,

1. Yes the UK still use high-pressure hosereels - 500psi, 50gpm if I recall correctly (very much like our booster reels) for interior attack, where possible. Part of that is down to building construction, and part of that is down to the tactics which have already been alluded to, i.e. gas cooling. The UK also operate a 'quick water' SOP, which aims to have the first hoseline in the door within 30 seconds of the pump pulling up to the structure. Of course, they won't hesitate to get out the 1 3/4" equivalent if the volume of fire requires it - and as others have pointed out, whilst UK building construction may not have changed all that much, fire loads in those buildings ARE increasing, exactly as they are here. A couple of examples from brief fire reports:

Fire in detached house. Kitchen 40 per cent destroyed by fire and 60 per cent by smoke. Flooring on ground floor 100 per cent destroyed by fire, 60 per cent smoke damage to flooring on first floor. Extinguished using 2 hosereel jets, 4 breathing apparatus sets in use.

Mid Terraced 2 storey dwelling 90% destroyed by fire. Extinguished using 8 sets of breathing apparatus,a ground monitor, 2 main jets and 2 hosereel jets.

(They lost one - went exterior. 'hosereel jet' = booster reel, 'main jet' = 1 3/4", 'ground monitor' = master stream. Was in my home town too.)

2. I don't know where this 'down the stairs on your butt' technique came from - who's been teaching it? Is it used outside the Northeast? Feet first on stomach, feet at the edges of stairs to put your weight on the strongest part is what I was unambiguously taught.