Building Construction in your response area

[firebuff860 54]

I thought I would start a new thread regarding building construction and what your department does/does not do regarding awareness of different types of construction in your response area. Fire Departments need to be proactive regarding this, since it is obvious current codes do not take our safety as one of their top concerns. With all of the available technology out there, it should be pretty easy for Fire Departments to get their hands on different construction types and input it into your pre plans. A couple of questions regarding what your department does to protect it's members:

If you have MTD's, have you linked it through your building department to have access on construction type?

If you do not have MTD's, are you aware (thru pre plan) of what type of construction type you are responding to?

If you do have a plan, let us know how it works.

If you don't have a plan, what are you going to do to put one together.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Our Fire Marshal, along with his interns, have entered almost all of our preplans into the Firstlook Pro MDT software we use. We also had another team of interns check and identify all vacant/unsafe buildings (in coordination with the Building Dept.) With a red sign with a white X.

Edited July 21, 2012 by SageVigiles

[50-65 205]

No MDT's. Nothing or very little in our pre-plans. We have a mix of residential, light commercial, and industrial in our district.

Our residential structures run the gammet of older balloon frame to newer light-weight construction.

The commercial/industrial also are greatly varied from strip malls to large open warehouses.

To my knowledge, only the bowling alley with its bow-string truss roof, is designated as exterior attack only assuming no immediate life threat.

[Bnechis 3,961]

To my knowledge, only the bowling alley with its bow-string truss roof, is designated as exterior attack only assuming no immediate life threat.

Just because its a truss ( and no immediate life threat) does not mean an exterior attack. If the fire is not a threat to the truss do you just wait till it burns the building down?

[wraftery 1,275]

Just because its a truss ( and no immediate life threat) does not mean an exterior attack. If the fire is not a threat to the truss do you just wait till it burns the building down?

Agreed, Bnechis

So would we rather have SOP's written in stone, or people that are experienced in the art of firefighting?

"You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, know when to run.

[antiquefirelt 994]

Just because its a truss ( and no immediate life threat) does not mean an exterior attack. If the fire is not a threat to the truss do you just wait till it burns the building down?

We touched on this in the Hackensack Ford thread a month or so ago. It seems that often the Fire Service latches onto something and then ends up taking the "lesson" to the extreme. Two decades ago we beat into everyone's heads that the bowstring truss was the firefighters widowmaker, thus the reaction is to stop interior operations where they're present. We've done nearly the same thing with lightweight trusses and engineered wood products. I know that in my area vertical ventilation is made into such a big deal in FF I&II that it seems to have elevated itself to be equal to putting water on the fire. It seems many places cannot leave a fire without putting a hole in the roof, which often in the smaller towns is after knockdown anyway!

I think in the end, due to the millions of things we are forced to do (haz-mat, EMS, public ed, inspections, etc. etc.) we start cutting time out of training, now focusing on the "how to" and leaving the "why to" out.

[50-65 205]

Just because its a truss ( and no immediate life threat) does not mean an exterior attack. If the fire is not a threat to the truss do you just wait till it burns the building down?

I should have expanded on that. No. We would not wait for the building to burn down.