Strategy and tactics

[FFPCogs 863]

I always like to get the insights of my colleagues in the fire service on incident management and size up. In that vein I'm starting this topic to tap into the knowledge and experience of the contributors here.

While pictures are good I like videos as they offer a more dynamic and true representation of what's going on. In this one the FD is not on scene yet, so it's open and there's no action to critique.

(edit) When posting replies to this video please identify that your response is in regards to scene #1 ( there are now 2 different incidents in this thread to discuss)

Here is scene #1:

I'll reserve my comments on the video so as not to spoil it. Take a look with no audio and describe your tactics based on the following;

You're the officer, you have a driver and 2 FFs on the crew with you. This is what you pull up on. It's unknown if anyone is inside and the next due Engine and the Truck are still 3 mins out......what would you do?

Cogs

ps If anyone has any other videos in which the FD has not yet arrived or is just arriving please post them for discussion.

Edited February 26, 2011 by FFPCogs

[efermann 28]

Great idea, especially using a video with no FD on scene to nit-pick. Looking forward to hearing/reading the ideas from this.

[firefighter36 52]

I'll bite. First and foremost, from listening to the conversation, we are able to establish that "Les" was the only occupant and that he was accounted for. We also heard either the bystander or LEO who was on scene state the possibility of hazardous chemicals.

The fire seems to be burning rather violently, consistent with the fuel smell Les related. If we go with the video and all parties inside are accounted for, I would definietly consider a defesnive operation, and evacuate and protect potential exposures until we have the manpower and equipment to make an attack on the fire. I would also want to know if this was a vehicle fire in the garage like the conversation related, or if there was other fuel feeding this thing.

It would also be beneficial to contact additional resources, utility companies, etc.

Thanks for a good post Cogs! I'll leave the next steps for the more experienced guys and officers and other brothers and sisters here! Let's keep this thread going!

[JohnnyOV 2]

Get that line through the front door and protect what has not already been lost. 2nd line should protect the exposure on the B side, and obviously the truck co's will be preforming their primary search.

Off the bat it looks like a heavy fire load, but a 2.5 in the front door and down the hallway should make a good stop... if that fire load held up by the time the first due arrived. By the 3rd min, there was considerable less fire, and an easy knockdown looks possible from an interior attack.

Edit: Didn't realize there was a set crew assigned. Either way, my post still stands. Get that line through the front door and knock it down. A wise man once told me, "All your problems disappear once the fire goes out." Give it a full knock down from the inside and keep from "spreading it around the house", and your exposures will be protected.

Edited February 25, 2011 by JohnnyOV

[FFPCogs 863]

I'll bite. First and foremost, from listening to the conversation, we are able to establish that "Les" was the only occupant and that he was accounted for. We also heard either the bystander or LEO who was on scene state the possibility of hazardous chemicals.

The fire seems to be burning rather violently, consistent with the fuel smell Les related. If we go with the video and all parties inside are accounted for, I would definietly consider a defesnive operation, and evacuate and protect potential exposures until we have the manpower and equipment to make an attack on the fire. I would also want to know if this was a vehicle fire in the garage like the conversation related, or if there was other fuel feeding this thing.

It would also be beneficial to contact additional resources, utility companies, etc.

Thanks for a good post Cogs! I'll leave the next steps for the more experienced guys and officers and other brothers and sisters here! Let's keep this thread going!

Thanks Mbendel. I revised my original post to make things a little more interesting once I realized my audio wasn't working. I've asked all to watch it without audio so we are not aware of the status of any occupants.

Cogs

[FFPCogs 863]

Ok here's one that's a bit more......interesting.

(edit) When posting replies to this video please identify that your response is in regards to scene #2 ( there are now 2 different incidents in this thread to discuss)

Here is scene #2

Same deal as before, you as first arriving officer, a driver and 2 FFs. Additional units are still few minute out.

I'll get it started.

As stated above it's a given we will be on scene operating alone for a few minutes. Based on that I would drop off 1 FF to wrap and charge the plug on the way in and position our rig between the center house and exposure 4, leaving room in front of both for the Truck Companies. Upon arrival I would immediately request additional resources..i.e. at least another full box assignment for manpower, master streams, FAST and the utilities co. while making a quick 360 of the scene. I would order my other FF (w/Can/Hook) to spend a minute or so doing a survey from the front of the center house to determine if anyone is viable inside (there's a car in garage) while my hydrant man charges the plug. Once my plugman gets to the front of the house and upon completing my 360 we would to attempt to get to any known victims(maintaining radio contact with the Chauffer throughout). Since there doesn't appear to be any fire or smoke on the 1st floor and fire seems to be only in the rear 3/4 corner of the 2nd and the majority of it is in the attic to me it's worth the risk to at least check it out as much as conditions allow. If no immediate rescue exists or is possible then I would write off that house and concentrate on all of us getting a 2.5 into position upstairs inside exposure 4 (gray/green house on right) since the wind is blowing in that direction and that is the most threatened exposure. My goal here would be to cut off the fire spread and save as much of that house as possible. If the position becomes untenable I would withdraw and regroup as additional units arrive. I would assign initial incoming units as follows unless conditions rapidly deteriorate to the point where the operation becomes defensive only:

My Engine - Chauffer operates deck gun to control exterior fire on exposure 4 and then hit main body of fire in building of origin while we stretch line inside exposure 4.

1st due Truck - set up in front of center house for master stream and primary search of exposure 4

2nd due Engine - hit a different plug and provide water supply for 1st due truck and back up line into exposure 4

3rd due Engine - come in from opposite direction to hit another plug for it's water supply, position the rig between exposure 2 and center house and have Chauffer operate deck gun to control exterior fire on exposure 2 then hit main body of fire in building of origin while crew stretches 2.5 into exposure 2

Rescue - Primary search of exposure 2

After that it's the Chief's ball game.

I'm sure some might find my tactics questionable so hopefully this will spark some good discussion.

Cogs

Edited February 26, 2011 by FFPCogs

[abaduck 123]

I'll reserve my comments on the video so as not to spoil it. Take a look with no audio and describe your tactics based on the following;

You're the officer, you have a driver and 2 FFs on the crew with you. This is what you pull up on. It's unknown if anyone is inside and the next due Engine and the Truck are still 3 mins out......what would you do?

I'm just a firefighter, never had any command experience, but I'll take a stab.

Transmit the 10-75, retone, request a FAST. Officer is now IC, conducts a quick 360.

Needs water, and if we really have no idea on occupants, needs search.

2 FFs: take a look inside, assess conditions, see extent to which fire has spread to main part of house. Close door from house to garage if intact and not already closed. Conduct primary search if possible. Reports on conditions inside from this team will be critical.

Officer + 3rd FF: establish a water supply and start knocking it down through the garage door, depending on reports from the search team; last thing you want to do is push the fire toward the interior of the house, any potential victims, and your search team!

Absent any info on the occupants the primary must be done, but until it's completed you don't have the resources to mount an interior attack (2 in 2 out).

If & when you have more manpower it would be easier; could take a line in the front door for interior attack and to protect the search team.

Am I thinking of at least some of the right things?

Mike

Edited February 26, 2011 by abaduck

[FFPCogs 863]

I'm just a firefighter, never had any command experience, but I'll take a stab.

Transmit the 10-75, retone, request a FAST. Officer is now IC, conducts a quick 360.

Needs water, and if we really have no idea on occupants, needs search.

2 FFs: take a look inside, assess conditions, see extent to which fire has spread to main part of house. Close door from house to garage if intact and not already closed. Conduct primary search if possible. Reports on conditions inside from this team will be critical.

Officer + 3rd FF: establish a water supply and start knocking it down through the garage door, depending on reports from the search team; last thing you want to do is push the fire toward the interior of the house, any potential victims, and your search team!

Absent any info on the occupants the primary must be done, but until it's completed you don't have the resources to mount an interior attack (2 in 2 out).

If & when you have more manpower it would be easier; could take a line in the front door for interior attack and to protect the search team.

Am I thinking of at least some of the right things?

Mike

I'd say so.

[wraftery 1,275]

For those considering an interior attack with a 2 1/2, please take another look at the video. There is a red glow along the soffet almost all the way across the A side and blackening creeping downward on the walls below. By the time you stretch your line and finish gearing up, the rest of the house , more likely than not, will have flashed over.

Life is your highest priority, and you don't know Les is safe unless you left the audio on. In doing your 360, if there are bystanders, a quick shout "Does anybody live here?" might give you the "Everybody's out" answer that absolutely changes your mode to defensive. Points to consider at first look are:

1 This fire is bigger than your 2 1/2

2.Even if there may be an occupant, is there even an outside chance he's alive after the coming flashover in the living side of the house?

3. How far into the door can you go and still get out when you see signs of impending flashover? Does 5ft ring a bell?

I'D TEND TO SPIN MY DECK GUN AT THE MAIN BODY OF FIRE, USE MY 1 MIN OF TANK WATER (which won't come close to a knockdown) AND WAIT FOR MY WATER SUPPLY.

Edited February 26, 2011 by wraftery

[abaduck 123]

Good point, Chief - that's one thing I forgot to say; the moment you establish there's no victim, whether by information, search, or report of unsurvivable conditions inside the house, that's when it becomes exterior. That's why I said the first two FFs 'take a look' inside; maybe they'll be able to do a partial search, maybe it'll be straight back out and 'forget it!'. But they have to try; only the garage is fully involved initially, and IIRC by code there's supposed to be a good wall and a steel door between the garage and the living side?

(Edit having watched again; I thought the 'red glow on the A-side soffit' was actually the colour of the paint, still not sure one way or the other. But I did notice from certain angles what seems to be a significant volume of fire on the C-side that I hadn't noticed the first time around. Maybe it's even worse than it looks... just as well I said the officer is doing a 360!)

Mike

Edited February 26, 2011 by abaduck

[FD828 77]

Not to mention that it looks like fairly new construction..... what are the odds that it isn't truss construction? With that much fire showing with a strong wind, defensive seems like a good call.

[wraftery 1,275]

If you are going to start a thread like this please keep each thread to only one scenario.

We all know how confusing it can be trying to discuss one scenario much less two.

Great thread for discussion, though. Keep it up

[FFPCogs 863]

You're right Chief, sorry for confusing the thread. But since we already have 2 seperate incidents here we can identify each as such

Scene #1- Garage fire

Scene #2 - Multi house fire.

I'll try to edit my posts above to reflect this update.

If anyone wishes to pass along their insights please identify the scene accordingly. To that end here is some more video for scene #2 shot from the rear.

Cogs

Edited February 26, 2011 by FFPCogs

[JFLYNN 681]

This is a good idea. Video can be a great training tool. A video such as this of a structure prior to FD arrival presents an excellent opportunity to discuss strategy and tactics without second guessing another department.

In response to scenario #1, I will offer the following: (I will detail what my actions would be as the first engine officer given the resources available as per the scenario- if this fire occured in my own department we would have more manpower available and thus certain things would be done differently).

1. Give a quick size-up via radio and call for more help.

2. If a hydrant is within 50 feet, order the driver to hook up to it. A competent driver should be able to get water from a hydrant within 50 feet of the rig and charge a handline. This is not ideal of course but we need to work with what we have.

If a hydrant is further away than that, radio the second engine that they will need to secure a hydrant and feed us.

3. Leave room for the truck in front as usual but this fire will not require the use of master streams. Neither will we need aerial or tower ladder to reach the roof.

4. Order the other firefighter to stretch a 1 3/4" handline to the front door and wait for me there.

5. Go around back for a quick look. As I am doing that I would question any people in the area as to whether anyone was inside. Don't waste a lot of time doing this but do ask the question. Oftentimes people will remain mute until asked and once asked will say, something like, "yes, there are two children in a back bedroom, etc." If someone says yes, there are people inside, take a quick moment to ask how they know this, how many people,and where they are located. Sometimes bystanders have this information also but do not volunteer it until asked. Of course, use your judgement in deciding how credible any info. you receive might be.

During this walk, check for a basement and make sure the fire did not start there. It is very important to not be above the fire unless you know you are. This particular home seems to be built on a slab with no basement but always discipline yourself to check for this.

Is this building truss construction? Maybe, but doubtful. Look at the windows. I believe they are an older, aluminum frame type.

6. On the way back to the front give another quick report by radio to the incoming companies as to what you have and what you want from them. Truck should be doing a search. Second engine should be securing a water supply if not already done by your driver, and second engine should also be stretching a backup line.

7. Take the line in the front door and head for the interior door to the garage. You do not need to wait for a FAST team to be assembled as there is a potential life hazard. In any event, another engine and the truck should be there by now or in another minute, as per the scenario information. Be agressive but cautious. Keep in mind that your company is undermanned, that you might only be working off the tank, that the wind is blowing toward you, the fire may be in the attic, etc. All of these things are concerns but no reason not to initiate an interior attack.

8. Put the fire out. At this point I will take some time to explain...several others in this thread have stated that this fire should be an exterior attack, or that 2 1/2" should be stretched. In my opinion,, neither is correct. The amount of fire showing can certainly be knocked down with an adequately supplied 1 3/4" handline. 2 1/2" is too much to handle for a 2 man hose team anyway. Putting some water on this fire is the best thing we can do to save anyone who may still be inside.

It appears that the main body of fire is in the garage. It may be in the living area of the house too, and also in the attic. You will find out if fire is in the main part of the house when you enter with the line.Hopefully you have a thermal imager. If so, use it to scan the attic and the rest of the house. Before advancing far, check the upper levels of the room for heat and listen for crackling. Do not pass fire. Get the truck inside with you to complete the search and open the ceilings to check for fire in the attic as soon as possible.

Oh, if you encounter any occupants inside, remove them....

***Some of the things in this post which may raise some disagreement are my decisions to make an interior attack with this much fire showing; to enter without a FAST team assembled; to make the attack potentially on booster tank water; to use a 1 3/4" handline***

I acknowledge in advance that these actions may seem controversial to some in the fire service not because they should be, but simply because I am aware of the way many of us think.

OK. I took a few minutes to respond to this type of thread which I usually don't. Can I go back to bashing vollies now????

Edited February 26, 2011 by JFLYNN

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Chief,

Not bad for a Rescue guy.....

[abaduck 123]

Chief (or anyone else who cares to comment), just a quick one... reason I didn't go for interior attack was maintaining 2 in 2 out, as I said. I was under the impression that that rule could only be set aside for a confirmed life safety situation, not just a potential one? I guess I got that wrong?

(otherwise you could violate 2 in 2 out on every undermanned fire call: as as soon as our guys go in, there IS a confirmed life safety situation - us!)

Thanks.

Mike

[Bnechis 3,961]

just a quick one... reason I didn't go for interior attack was maintaining 2 in 2 out, as I said. I was under the impression that that rule could only be set aside for a confirmed life safety situation, not just a potential one? I guess I got that wrong? (otherwise you could violate 2 in 2 out on every undermanned fire call)

The wording is very critical to the answer. The law does not talk confirmed or even potential.

1910.134(g)(4) Procedures for interior structural firefighting. In addition to the requirements set forth under paragraph (g)(3), in interior structural fires, the employer shall ensure that:

1910.134(g)(4)(i) At least two employees enter the IDLH atmosphere and remain in visual or voice contact with one another at all times;

1910.134(g)(4)(ii) At least two employees are located outside the IDLH atmosphere; and

1910.134(g)(4)(iii) All employees engaged in interior structural firefighting use SCBAs.

Note 1 to paragraph (g): One of the two individuals located outside the IDLH atmosphere may be assigned to an additional role, such as incident commander in charge of the emergency or safety officer, so long as this individual is able to perform assistance or rescue activities without jeopardizing the safety or health of any firefighter working at the incident.

Note 2 to paragraph (g): Nothing in this section is meant to preclude firefighters from performing emergency rescue activities before an entire team has assembled.

[abaduck 123]

Thanks Barry... well I don't know quite how to read that... in plain English, you're not performing an 'emergency rescue' unless you have a known (by observation or information) victim to rescue, are you? A search is a search; it doesn't become an 'emergency rescue' unless you locate a victim! So I'd say that was pretty equivalent to my 'confirmed'.

I don't know what the lawyers would make of it; fortunately I'm a fireman, not a lawyer.

Mike

[antiquefirelt 994]

For those considering an interior attack with a 2 1/2, please take another look at the video. There is a red glow along the soffet almost all the way across the A side and blackening creeping downward on the walls below. By the time you stretch your line and finish gearing up, the rest of the house , more likely than not, will have flashed over.

I'm not as concerned with the interior work, as I'd tend to try this with a 1.75" line while a 2.5" SB knocks down the fire in the garage. But I did want to comment about the 2 1/2" interior line. Maneuvering a 2 1/2" in a residential occupancy is nearly impractical, other than in the great rooms of some McMansions. The compartmentized nature of residential occupancies often make for far too many corners and quick turns for the big line.

[16fire5 693]

I'm not as concerned with the interior work, as I'd tend to try this with a 1.75" line while a 2.5" SB knocks down the fire in the garage. But I did want to comment about the 2 1/2" interior line. Maneuvering a 2 1/2" in a residential occupancy is nearly impractical, other than in the great rooms of some McMansions. The compartmentized nature of residential occupancies often make for far too many corners and quick turns for the big line.

Can't agree more while 2 1/2 definatly has its place in many situations interior residential attack is not one. I would strongly consider using the 2 1/2" off the bat to knock down the garage from the driveway. I would like to confirm the interior garage door is closed/intact if possible before flowing exterior water. This is usually the case and if it was done to code this door usually lasts a little while. Two minutes with the 2 1/2" should take a lot of the heat out of the fire and by then hopefully some more companies are on the scene. Once second due is on scene I would drop the 2 1/2" and stretch a 1 3/4" handline into the house with the truck who hopefully has a camera and is poking holes looking for fire above us. By the looks of this video we can be pretty sure it's in the attic above the house. Even if the double 5/8" sheetrock held this fire was lapping under the eaves and surely made its way in.

Just some thoughts why I went this way.

The heavy fire in the garage could possibly overwelm the 1.75" if the push was made from inside without taking the heat out of it first.

A 4 FF engine can't fulfill 2 in 2 out and do interior ops required here.

I'm not used to being on a 4 FF engine so some of it is just guess work.

[wraftery 1,275]

Very good critique, Jflynn. I was unable to type out all those points becaause it was a nice day here in VA and I had to get some yard work done. We each saw a slightly different fire in the video. I saw what appeared to be an addition on SideC that also appeared to be well involved as well as fire taking over the attic, with the house unuccupied. As we all know, once the life factor is added, the entire strategy changes. I went defensive simply because I expected the attic to flash fairly soon.

I have 2 items that might be called disagreements, but I would prefer to call them "talking points."

1. I looked at the video one more time. (You don't get to do this do in real life. Maybe NFPA could, like fooball, institute the challenge, and after instant replay, you get to do it over). If you see this as not having control of the attic, then take the deck gun out of the equation. I think the 2 1/2 is the right tool in this job. There's always the "Make a loop and sit on it" trick which I have done, and I'm a little guy. At a coup;e of points in the video whre it looks like you could get it with a1 3/4 but I would play it safe and go wih 2 1/2. I think that if your guys pulled a 1 3/4 on arrival for this, you would be asking them why.

2. There are no hydrants within 50ft. I didn't see any in the video, and there are no hydrants within 200 ft or even 500 ft. Didn't you see the cop and the guy in the Buick (probably an unmarked car)? They were driving back and forth looking for a water source for us to no avail. How else could you explain them.

As far as trusses go, we had to take our best estimate on arrival. But it is development which means most houses are of similar construction.. A heads-up firefighter would have taken mental notes when he has been there before.

[antiquefirelt 994]

I know this may be a little controversial as well, but this is a good place to get a feel for everyone's thought from a decent cross section of the fire service.

Truss roofs in typical single family dwellings: how significant a concern?

I think we all know to "Beware the truss", but how much do we allow truss roofs to affect our operations at private dwellings? I have some thoughts of my own, but I'd like to hear what some others think first. Obviously you can guess where I'm heading given the question is even being asked.

[efdcapt115 1,511]

I know this may be a little controversial as well, but this is a good place to get a feel for everyone's thought from a decent cross section of the fire service.

Truss roofs in typical single family dwellings: how significant a concern?

I think we all know to "Beware the truss", but how much do we allow truss roofs to affect our operations at private dwellings? I have some thoughts of my own, but I'd like to hear what some others think first. Obviously you can guess where I'm heading given the question is even being asked.

Chief,

In my opinion the chances are very good that if we have trusses in the roof, chances are we're going to have trusses in the floor joists. Operating above trusses as we know is extremely dangerous. So I would say yes; significant concern, and definitely affects fireground risk/benefit analysis:

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200206.html

[antiquefirelt 994]

Chief,

In my opinion the chances are very good that if we have trusses in the roof, chances are we're going to have trusses in the floor joists. Operating above trusses as we know is extremely dangerous. So I would say yes; significant concern, and definitely affects fireground risk/benefit analysis:

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200206.html

I couldn't agree more that today the building industry is using lightweight everything and I cannot disagree that we must know the construction of the building we're entering to be able to predict probable events. And knowing that trusses are present must be part of the risk/benefit analysis, it's how much weight do we place in the risk side when roof trusses are encountered in PD's?

My question regarding roof trusses specifically in residential is that we as a fire service seem to be further distancing ourselves from our first priority when we encounter trusses. Given that residential homes are fairly compartmentalized I'm interested in the theory that while dangerous, residential roof truss failures will tend to be localized and have far less catastrophic failures than larger commercial occupancies. Given the fist scenario posted here, the very real possibility that this house or many similar ones would have extension into the truss attic is real. But, what are we to do if we become so risk averse to trusses, that an attic fire precludes us from searching the same when we have persons unaccounted for? And in an ever growing likely scenario, vacant SFD's certainly could have squatters that no one (neighbors) anticipates.

I'm not thinking about tossing caution to the wind, but looking a the real possibility that we could be pulling bodies from a home some night after the roof has collapsed only to find that there is very little intrusion below the interior walls.

Maybe a better approach is what type of tactics should we be considering when we anticipate a truss roof with fire attacking the trusses? Do we write it off? Open it up from a TL? Support a search and then go defensive? Going forward this problem is only going to multiply as the percentage of housing stock built with lightweight material slowly moves upward. Clearly residential sprinklers are needed to combat fires in these newer homes, but we'll still have a large chunk of lightweight unprotected for years to come.

Edited February 27, 2011 by antiquefirelt

[Bnechis 3,961]

Given that residential homes are fairly compartmentalized I'm interested in the theory that while dangerous, residential roof truss failures will tend to be localized and have far less catastrophic failures than larger commercial occupancies.

Very good point, except in the case of the cathedral ceiling particularly in the "great room". I think in the area of bedrooms the compartmentation may by us time and protection, but how do you know what’s above you when you are making your assessment (beyond the pike pole out & up in front)?

[antiquefirelt 994]

Very good point, except in the case of the cathedral ceiling particularly in the "great room". I think in the area of bedrooms the compartmentation may by us time and protection, but how do you know what’s above you when you are making your assessment (beyond the pike pole out & up in front)?

Ah yes, good point. I wasn't really considering the non-typical truss styles. It seems now you can order your trusses to meet just about any roof line or ceiling you'd like. When I worked in residential construction we used standard trusses over the "normal" attic areas but almost always used rafter and joists over cathedral ceilings. But then, that was 15+ years ago when trusses were far less customizable for the average consumer.

The case can certainly be made that going forward we much take a far more progressive approach to pre-fire intelligence. Thankfully in our small community we work hand in hand with the code office to review all new construction plans, and note hazards as they're being built. We also have a residential sprinkler ordinance that requires all new one and two family dwellings to be sprinklered. Our state building code, now a "mini-max" state, has adopted a provision that all floor trusses must have either a one hour fire barrier or sprinklers protecting them. Sadly they failed to keep the residential sprinkler portion of the IBC or NFPA 101, and by rule no municipality can enact the requirement as part of the building code. Thankfully ours was adopted in the land use regulations and is allowed to remain.

The case for more aggressive VES tactics would seem compelling, though it would seem a difficult task to undertake for many FD's who struggle with so many other basic operations. Without a doubt the job is getting far more dangerous, with new hazards, tighter buildings, hotter fires, but less overall jobs to gain experience at. In the past 10 years my own dept has trained and employed VES, but very few firefighters have actually employed the tactic under difficult conditions.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

Hmmmmm… if I was the first in engine officer… I would be looking for a hydrant to grab on the way in to that street… being the circle at the end, hopefully they were design at the main turn off….

Updates from neighbors and PD units, would be a clue of heavy fire load… plus the house being on a hill up, the smoke will be seen from a distance… so I would grab my own water source on the way in and leave 1 FF with the hydrant….

Upon positioning the rig, the second FF would assist the driver with connecting to the supply hose and start raising and positioning the deck gun… as soon as the driver has the pump ready, we would dump the 750 – 1000 gallons into the garage, to knock down the amount of fire load and heat…. “ I “ would start doing a quick look around and interview anyone with knowledge…

Upon an established water supply, the 2 FF’s and my self would set up to take a 1 ¾ to the front door, and if conditions of the fire in the garage and roof structure area seem lower, would start entry… ( I would not make entry, because of the heavy fire load, until I had a secure water source and would not wait for the 2nd engine to establish this, the fire is too advance )

At this point the second engine should be on the seen, and they can Fast “ our “ line and pull a second line… Ladder can start their work…

( but seeing the fire coming out of the roof vent on the B side, it has the attic, so a blitz knockdown of the garage might produce enough steam to darken down allot of fire, even in the attic, as the steam would rise. )

** roof truss – I would assume they are there ….

** floor trusses - ?? maybe not, I am going to say, slab on grade… the bottom of the doors look to low to the ground…

My ideas….. ready ... aim ... fire...

[FFPCogs 863]

Great replies thus far. There's not much to add to scene 1, you guys have done a good job of covering the factors involved. I'll just throw in my $.02 to say that with a crew of 4 I too would hit the plug on the way in. That amount of visible smoke coming in would definitey indicate to me that there's a good fire working and I'm gonna need water. I tend to agree with the idea of hitting the garage from the exterior with the deck gun to get a quick knockdown of the visible heavy fire with my tank water. Although I would leave that to the Chauffer while I did a 360 and my remaining FF stretched an 1 3/4 to the front door. Like everyone else I would assume roof trusses unless I knew otherwise, (which if this was my 1st due area as a good officer I would). But that doesn't negate that we still have to get a primary search going if we're unsure if anyone is still inside. With the other units on the box still a few minutes out, once that heavy fire is darkened down and my plug is charged it falls on us to get that search going as we stretch our line inside the front door towards the garage. Depending on conditions in the main house, I may very well leave one FF with the line at the door to the garage while the other FF and myself search.

I have noticed that some hold fast to the 2 in 2 out "rule" and I do not in any way fault that decision. For me though I believe that an aggressive attack is called for in most cases to achieve a succesful outcome. That is not to say suicidal actions, but more so calculated risks based on the circumstances and the experience and abilities of my crew and myself. To me both scenes 1 and 2 allow for what I call "safely aggressive" action (as opposed to aggessively safe) on the part of the 1st due Engine. And this even if every member of my crew is not a highly experienced grisled old Jake.

I'm a firm believer in the following philosophy (from FDNY Engine Company Operations chapter 5 color and italics are mine):

5.1 ENGINE COMPANY OFFICER

5.1.1. The engine company officer will have more influence on the outcome of a fire operation than any other member on the scene. The attitude this officer displays will become a model for the unit's firefighters to follow. The manner in which orders are given and assignments made sets the tone for the entire engine company operation at a fire or emergency. Officers who are serious about training and expect a high level of professionalism from the members of their company will see it reflected in their unit's performance at drills, fires, and emergencies.

For me I tend to lean towards a more aggressive posture as a matter of course, but that posture is (and has to be) tempered by the facts, the safety of my crew, what they are capable of and what my experience tells me.

Hope to see more input on both scenes

Cogs

Edited February 28, 2011 by FFPCogs

[efdcapt115 1,511]

I couldn't agree more that today the building industry is using lightweight everything and I cannot disagree that we must know the construction of the building we're entering to be able to predict probable events. And knowing that trusses are present must be part of the risk/benefit analysis, it's how much weight do we place in the risk side when roof trusses are encountered in PD's?

My question regarding roof trusses specifically in residential is that we as a fire service seem to be further distancing ourselves from our first priority when we encounter trusses. Given that residential homes are fairly compartmentalized I'm interested in the theory that while dangerous, residential roof truss failures will tend to be localized and have far less catastrophic failures than larger commercial occupancies. Given the fist scenario posted here, the very real possibility that this house or many similar ones would have extension into the truss attic is real. But, what are we to do if we become so risk averse to trusses, that an attic fire precludes us from searching the same when we have persons unaccounted for? And in an ever growing likely scenario, vacant SFD's certainly could have squatters that no one (neighbors) anticipates.

I'm not thinking about tossing caution to the wind, but looking a the real possibility that we could be pulling bodies from a home some night after the roof has collapsed only to find that there is very little intrusion below the interior walls.

Maybe a better approach is what type of tactics should we be considering when we anticipate a truss roof with fire attacking the trusses? Do we write it off? Open it up from a TL? Support a search and then go defensive? Going forward this problem is only going to multiply as the percentage of housing stock built with lightweight material slowly moves upward. Clearly residential sprinklers are needed to combat fires in these newer homes, but we'll still have a large chunk of lightweight unprotected for years to come.

Chief,

I hadn't watched the video before I responded to your question. Upon viewing it I realized the structure in Yakima, WA is very similar in construction to the houses around my sister's home in Kent, WA. I'm sure most that viewed it realized the house is built on a slab, so floor joist collapse isn't a major concern regarding this particular fire.

The knowledge of the construction types in our response areas as we have been trained is critical information and will influence our decision making on the fireground.

There have been many informative posts in this thread; less experienced firefighters reading this information would do well to study the various approaches to attacking this fire.

[wraftery 1,275]

A LITTLE TONGUE-IN-CHEEK HUMOR I heard from a Proby school instructor.

How one man can operate an interior 2 1/2 effectively:

"Use a straight stream...50 psi is better than 100. Get low and open the nozzle fully..

Hang on tight 'cause it will bang you around the hallway for a while until it pins you against a wall.

And that's where you fight the fire from."