Portland firefighter falls through roof battling two-alarm fire

[SOUSGT 357]

News video of a scary event.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/320366/28/On-camera-Firefighter-falls-through-roof-battling-two-alarm-fire

[wraftery 1,275]

WAAAAAY TOO MANY guys on that roof given the volume of fire and the amount of time it was burning.

If it was a wood trussed roof, which it looks like it very well could be, there should be NO people on the roof.

We fire service people have been arguing against lightweight wood trusses for many years now. Let's not prove our argument correct by losing two or three companies through a roof that we know will only last 20 minutes.

Going defensive when encountering a worker in this type of building is not due to a lack of courage, it is the proof that we are right and the building trades are wrong.

[dwcfireman 656]

I don't mind going on a roof and cutting away, but I think I would have said NO to this one. The fire seemed to be venting itself quite well, and I agree, wraftery, it should have been have been a defensive attack. Unfortunately, sometimes it's too late before someone figures out that their up against lightweight construction.

What's really bugging me, though,, is that there are (a) too many firefihters on the roof, and ( firefighters on the roof after the fire appears to be knocked down. Since I wasn't there, nor did I see the entire incident, so I can't say what the reason is for this decision, but it just doesn't look right. IMO, three should be the max on the roof. I understand that if you have a massive building (i.e. a warehouse) it does take several firefighters to accomplish a vertical ventilation task, but that's for another discussion. I counted at least eight before one slipped beneathe the shingles. Granted, only one firefighter fell through the roof, but that's one too many.