Houses Without Hydrants Nearby

[x635 4,066]

This comment recently appeared in an online publication regarding a recent fire, which brought me to thinking.

which was complicated in part because there were no nearby fire hydrants.

Should having no hydrants nearby be a "complication"? If the area does not have a hydrant system, and the FD is preplanned for that area, shouldn't the water supply (tankers) be the norm?

Should residents in non-hydranted areas be advised that, hey, there are no hydrants near your house. This may delay putting water on your fire. Would that prompt funding for hydrants or modern technology dry hydrants for areas that used to be rural farmland, but now contain million dollar homes?

Just another idiotic thought of mine.

[FireMedic049 597]

This comment recently appeared in an online publication regarding a recent fire, which brought me to thinking.

Should having no hydrants nearby be a "complication"? If the area does not have a hydrant system, and the FD is preplanned for that area, shouldn't the water supply (tankers) be the norm?

It's hard to say without reading the article or knowing the department/area involved, but I think you may be misinterpreting the statement.

Yes, typically a FD covering a non-hydranted or sparsely hydranted area will preplan their water supply for calls into that area and yes, tankers would be the norm to provide that water supply. However, even with a good preplan, not having hydrants nearby can still be a "complication" for the operation.

It takes a lot longer to establish a constant water supply when setting up a tanker shuttle operation than it does to just drop some LDH from a hydrant. That in and of itself can "complicate" how the incident is handled. Some other things can further complicate the situation like how far from the scene is the water source for refilling the tankers and how long will it take for a sufficient number of tankers arrive. The first arriving units could easily find themselves on scene for 10-15 minutes before the full water supply and shuttle is established.

[E106MKFD 56]

Again like FireMedic049 pointed out without knowing the full extent of the article or incident it is hard to fully respond to a comment like that but many people forget the difficulties of fire operations in a non hydrant area. This time of year especially becomes a hassle to a non hydrant fire because you encounter some back roads that don't get the same plow attention as the main roads, noted water sources are now frozen over making some inaccessible for appropriate drafting, and as always you are at the mercy of your mutual aid and how quickly they mobilize to get the shuttle operation in motion.

Preplans are extremely helpful and when paired with SOP's and practice you can turn a shuttle ops to a bread and butter fire operation. Its easy for these incidents to get complicated due to the numerous variables involved and as we all know Murphy's law when crap hits the fan it all goes down hill. On top of that I think we would all agree the trade of firefighting is a complicated job in general. I think more then a few departments in this county find fires within hydrant areas complicated as well and they have plenty of water at their disposal. Complication of fires in non hydrant districts comes with the territory and you can break down the issues found at these incidents with drills, training, and overview of company/department SOP.

But as I said before its hard to really break this apart without the full view on the incident.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

My suggestions?

From an operational standpoint:
TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN until shuttle operations becomes second nature. And not just by yourselves, get your mutual aid partners involved. Train in the summer, train in the winter, train often and make it realistic. If more than a tiny portion of your area is not hydranted you need to be expecting these kinds of calls and preparing for them. Hydrants are (by comparison) easy. Move and flow water until you don't have to think about it.

Ensure tankers are on your first due assignment (yes, even for AFAs) in that area. Then ensure your mutual aid tankers are automatic on confirmation of a working fire.

From an administrative standpoint:

Work with your local zoning board/fire marshal/whomever to ensure that these new developments have a cistern system installed to give you at least a few thousand gallons to start with. New Fairfield did this years ago, at least a 10,000 tank in each new development. If you can't put out a residential fire with that you're probably going to lose the building anyway, but its definitely enough to buy you the time to get a good shuttle operation going with plenty of mutual aid tankers.

Edited February 10, 2014 by SageVigiles

[sympathomedic 383]

This is one of those exceedingly rare cases where I can offer a valid comment: 1- we had a fire, 2-I was there and 3- I think the article referenced was about the fire.

This came in as a working fire, and one of our officers confirmed it in less than 3 minutes. It took me 10-12 minutes to get there in an engine, going from first tone to on-scene, and I was there third, I believe. I was then directed to a hydrant at BOCES, which google has as 1.9 miles away and a 6 minute drive (by car, not tanker.) in order to fill tankers.

Our chief called tankers from Yorktown, Katonah, Goldens Bridge and Millwood. And we had our own 3000 gal tanker and a 2000gal tank engine. At times I was filling two tankers at once with a 5 inch line to each and maxing out the hydrant- to which I was hooked with a 5 inch and a 3 inch intake line.

Being that I was out of the engine setting up, and running 200 yards to cut a chain on a gate to help the tankers with their approach, I missed a lot of radio traffic. It sure seemed to me they arrived at my spot fast and empty.

What I am trying to get across is there were no complications, but it was a big hassle as compared with the hook-up and look-up type of water supply that many of my less rural brother MPO's are blessed with.

[Dinosaur 844]

This is one of those exceedingly rare cases where I can offer a valid comment: 1- we had a fire, 2-I was there and 3- I think the article referenced was about the fire.

This came in as a working fire, and one of our officers confirmed it in less than 3 minutes. It took me 10-12 minutes to get there in an engine, going from first tone to on-scene, and I was there third, I believe. I was then directed to a hydrant at BOCES, which google has as 1.9 miles away and a 6 minute drive (by car, not tanker.) in order to fill tankers.

Our chief called tankers from Yorktown, Katonah, Goldens Bridge and Millwood. And we had our own 3000 gal tanker and a 2000gal tank engine. At times I was filling two tankers at once with a 5 inch line to each and maxing out the hydrant- to which I was hooked with a 5 inch and a 3 inch intake line.

Being that I was out of the engine setting up, and running 200 yards to cut a chain on a gate to help the tankers with their approach, I missed a lot of radio traffic. It sure seemed to me they arrived at my spot fast and empty.

What I am trying to get across is there were no complications, but it was a big hassle as compared with the hook-up and look-up type of water supply that many of my less rural brother MPO's are blessed with.

Yup, it's your fire. Here's the link to the whole article.

http://www.lohud.com/article/20140208/NEWS02/302080051/Somers-house-no-nearby-hydrants-heavily-damaged-by-fire

They call it a complication and it probably is - especially to a lay person or the media - but it's the way most of the county (probably the country) operates, with tankers.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Should having no hydrants nearby be a "complication"? If the area does not have a hydrant system, and the FD is preplanned for that area, shouldn't the water supply (tankers) be the norm?

While lack of hydrants does make fire operations more complicated, Preplanning or the failure to preplan is more the norm in communities without hydrants.

1) Having tankers is not preplanning. Having sufficient water sources at regular intervals, that are mapped out and clearly laid out is. NFPA & ISO has standards on this, but few depts. follow them. How many water sources (lakes, rivers, streams) could be used if they were just a little closer to the road? Communities with hydrants pay for them and get discounts on insurance for having them. Why not plan out dry hydrants at every water source? What about cisterns?

2) Having enough tankers, Regions that have better ratings then Westchester run with 1 tanker for each engine. Westchester has too many engines and not enough tankers.

3) The correct type of tanker, makes a big difference, but of more importance is standardization. Every tanker in a shuttle needs to fill, dump and maneuver in the same time frame. Generally Pumper/Tankers perform worst than Tanker/Pumpers in shuttles (they are much better as an attack unit in their own district, if they fit up the driveways).

4) Proper design of the supply system (fill, dump etc.) is critical to success. Their is a huge reluctance to improve on this.

[Bnechis 3,961]

From an operational standpoint:

TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN until shuttle operations becomes second nature. And not just by yourselves, get your mutual aid partners involved. Train in the summer, train in the winter, train often and make it realistic. If more than a tiny portion of your area is not hydranted you need to be expecting these kinds of calls and preparing for them. Hydrants are (by comparison) easy. Move and flow water until you don't have to think about it.

Yes!! Train till you do not need to think about it, but you can spend hours improving or just reinforcing the same poor concepts. Too many places do not try to improve their water transport, "they way we have done it is best, why change". I have watched depts. in other regions (& in other countries) run circles around us. 1 engine, 150 vertical lift from a bridge to a canal. then 2000 gpm delivered 1 mile from the unit (and it was cheaper than the standard American pumper). total manpower 3 ff. And they picked up the 5,400' of hose mechanically.

From an administrative standpoint:

Work with your local zoning board/fire marshal/whomever to ensure that these new developments have a cistern system installed to give you at least a few thousand gallons to start with. New Fairfield did this years ago, at least a 10,000 tank in each new development. If you can't put out a residential fire with that you're probably going to lose the building anyway, but its definitely enough to buy you the time to get a good shuttle operation going with plenty of mutual aid tankers.

Agreed, their are many code issues to help us and adding cisterns or other water sources is a big one. But the minimum size required to get insurance credit is 30,000 gal., if your within 1,000 feet of that in a development, its counted as a full hydrant system. Anything less get no credit. And overtime the cost will be covered by the insurance discount.

[Bnechis 3,961]

At times I was filling two tankers at once with a 5 inch line to each and maxing out the hydrant- to which I was hooked with a 5 inch and a 3 inch intake line.

Even on a good hydrant, it is sometimes difficult to maintain the flow needed to fill 2 tankers at once. Since the minimum fill rate is 1,000gpm (NFPA) most engines will fill one tanker as the other is hooking up and not start to fill the 2nd tanker until you complete the 1st fill. Then fill it while the 1st is disconnecting.

Another alternative (particularly for a poor hydrant) is to hook up to the hydrant with 1 length of hard suction to the steamer valve, then add hard suction to the other steamer valve (on the opposite side of the engine and place it with a low level strainer in a folding tank, then open the hydrant, The water will flow from the hydrant thru the pump into the tank and fill the tank. Pull a draft, then start filling tankers. Make sure you place a recirculating line in the folding tank.

When you are filling tankers you will be drawing from both the hydrant and the folding tank, when you are between tankers, the folding tank will automatically refill.

[sympathomedic 383]

Hey Barry, that is a cool idea about the hydrant/hard suction. A less effective but way easier idea is to use the source pumpers tank, in addition to the hydrant, to fill the tankers. Then re-fill the source engine tank in between tanker fills. We have 1000 gal engine tanks here, so that is 1/3 the fill right there. (holy crap, I almost sound like a fireman!)

The second 5" fill was more to allow two tankers to be filling and/or hooking/unhooking at the same time. Since the 5" were 25' long and one off the side and one off the back of the source, it allowed the two tankers to stop close enough to the source at the same time, rather than line up and wait. The amount of time actually flowing 5" water to both simultaniously was rather short- but enough to brown a few loads of laundry I am sure.

As for my favorite people, the NFPA, I will ask the Town about altering the zoning so the next time we build a river, we build it closer to the road. Actually there was river near this fire and be thought about using it. It was nearly all frozen, with a pretty low water level, and maybe a water flow too small to support the fire needs. It would truly suck to stage the engine, set it up, cut the hole, only to find a trickle under the ice.

Did you say above you saw an engine lift water 150 vertical feet and still put out 2000 GPM through a mile of hose? I MUST not be reading that right.

[Bnechis 3,961]

1) Hey Barry, that is a cool idea about the hydrant/hard suction. A less effective but way easier idea is to use the source pumpers tank, in addition to the hydrant, to fill the tankers. Then re-fill the source engine tank in between tanker fills. We have 1000 gal engine tanks here, so that is 1/3 the fill right there. (holy crap, I almost sound like a fireman!)

2) The second 5" fill was more to allow two tankers to be filling and/or hooking/unhooking at the same time. Since the 5" were 25' long and one off the side and one off the back of the source, it allowed the two tankers to stop close enough to the source at the same time, rather than line up and wait. The amount of time actually flowing 5" water to both simultaniously was rather short- but enough to brown a few loads of laundry I am sure.

3) As for my favorite people, the NFPA, I will ask the Town about altering the zoning so the next time we build a river, we build it closer to the road. Actually there was river near this fire and be thought about using it. It was nearly all frozen, with a pretty low water level, and maybe a water flow too small to support the fire needs. It would truly suck to stage the engine, set it up, cut the hole, only to find a trickle under the ice.

4) Did you say above you saw an engine lift water 150 vertical feet and still put out 2000 GPM through a mile of hose? I MUST not be reading that right.

1) correct, while that's easier to set up you are limited to 500-1,000 gal (vs. 3,000). Well done.

2) That's pretty standard to set up for 2, usually with a little more distance, but that depends on the layout of the fill site. It is better to not start the 2nd one, till the 1st is done. When you calculate the times over a series of fills, its actually slightly slower.

3) You do not need to build the river, but dry hydrants can be 100+ Feet from the water. And in this case, NFPA & ISO standards for developing water supplies is what most depts. without hydrants fail at. Maybe they should consider reading.

4) You read it correct. They don't draft, they use hydraulics to push the water. But what do they know.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Barry, I'll double check the tank size for NF but I'm pretty sure it was 10k. Maybe they couldn't sell the 30k to the board, I'm not sure. I've been out of the game there for awhile so my numbers on some of this stuff may be off... I now volunteer in a place with a much higher percentage of hydranted occupancies and no cisterns, so they do things a little different.

New Fairfield also parks the 3000 gallon "nurse" tanker and drops the folding tank behind that, giving you 750-1000 on the first due engine, 3000 on the big tanker and an empty 3000 tank for the smaller tankers. If you can't put it out with that it's gonna be a long night anyway so it at least buys you time. Nice thing is that in NF you're never too far from a huge lake or pond in the event that you aren't in a neighborhood with a cistern.

[sympathomedic 383]

In our Town, (Somers) we have one entire resevoir in Town (The Amawalk), and our entire Eastern boundary is made up of the Muscoot Resevoir and (I think) the East Branch Resevoir. Yet there is pretty much no draft sites. There are a few DEP boat launches, protected by a heavy duty gate with a big lock with a metal shield around it. Yeah we could k-12 it off if the draft engine had a k12.

My point is that there are many gallons of water sitting around, but the owner (DEP) has no abligation to be fire friendly, and I am guessing their laws trump ours. I can see their point- a site easy for us to use = a site easy for a guy to dump a truck full of poison in there and screw up the water supply.

We have about 8 dry hydrants and at least 3 cysterns that I know of.

[antiquefirelt 994]

Another alternative (particularly for a poor hydrant) is to hook up to the hydrant with 1 length of hard suction to the steamer valve, then add hard suction to the other steamer valve (on the opposite side of the engine and place it with a low level strainer in a folding tank, then open the hydrant, The water will flow from the hydrant thru the pump into the tank and fill the tank. Pull a draft, then start filling tankers. Make sure you place a recirculating line in the folding tank.

Forgive my probable senior moment, but can you explain how the supply pumper changes back to reflling the the dump tank after a fill? Is this done just with the recirculate line, as my brain is saying that if you don't lose the prime, the suction lone will remain pulling even if it's not moving any where except through the pump and tank?

[Bnechis 3,961]

My point is that there are many gallons of water sitting around, but the owner (DEP) has no abligation to be fire friendly, and I am guessing their laws trump ours. I can see their point- a site easy for us to use = a site easy for a guy to dump a truck full of poison in there and screw up the water supply.

We have about 8 dry hydrants and at least 3 cysterns that I know of.

There are a number of ways to access it, but the 1st question is do they allow it?

Does anybody else have dry hydrants in NYC watershed?

[Bnechis 3,961]

Forgive my probable senior moment, but can you explain how the supply pumper changes back to reflling the the dump tank after a fill? Is this done just with the recirculate line, as my brain is saying that if you don't lose the prime, the suction lone will remain pulling even if it's not moving any where except through the pump and tank?

The water that is flowing thru the pump (from the hydrant to the tank) does the refill automatically the moment you throttle down (because your not actively filling a tanker).

The recirculating line can be a small hand line, so not much water used there, it just helps maintain prime. An alternative would be an automatic air primer, to maintain the prime (and allow more water to be pumped to the tanker.

An alternative method is to hook the hydrant to the dump tank only and simply draft.

[antiquefirelt 994]

The water that is flowing thru the pump (from the hydrant to the tank) does the refill automatically the moment you throttle down (because your not actively filling a tanker).

I think I can wrap my head around this. Would this also mean that if you were filling slower than the hydrant could supply, you'd not be drafting? Now it's coming to me, this is akin to tandem pumping- something I read about long ago, yet never had the opportunity to see in practice.

[antiquefirelt 994]

An alternative method is to hook the hydrant to the dump tank only and simply draft.

That is the method out area has utilized when utilizing poor hydrants for fill ops. Sadly we have many hydrants that won't flow 1000 gpm, and of course these are most prevalent in the areas nearest the non-hydranted areas.

[sympathomedic 383]

Maybe I should clarify: None of our dry hydrants are attached to the resevoirs. They hook to private ponds or in two cases a lake.

Small side story- about 6 years ago there was a big project in Town to tear down and re-build a shopping center that had been abonadoned due to poisoned ground water. To get it done they had to lay a quite a bit of water main from route 35 to Baldwin Place. I am guesing about 5-6 miles. Since the water main was to serve the shopping center and NOT the homes along its route, the origianl plan DID NOT INCLUDE HYDRANTS! After an effort, the put in hydrants about every 500 feet.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Maybe I should clarify: None of our dry hydrants are attached to the resevoirs. They hook to private ponds or in two cases a lake.

Thanks Bill.

My question was does any other district have them in the DEC system?

I know they are allowed in reservoirs, just don't know if they are allowed in DEC ones.

Also, their are other ways to get at that water without vehicle access.

[wmetech 2]

Wow a lot of great responses here already. I'll try not to repeat anything that was already said.

I read that article after thr Somers fire and the lack of water supply issue mentioned stood out to me as well. Though I cannot comment on the state of water supply prior to my arrival (I was on one of the mutual aid trucks dispatched after the fire was confirmed) I know there were other issues at play in this specific instance. For example, we had difficulty because the Somers first due engine would not draft from the portable ponds, which was later determined to be due to a frozen valve. This caused a break in water supply to the scene for probably 5-10 minutes while the issue was isolated and another engine backed in and drafting. Of course water supply is always more challenging in an area with no hydrants, but by the time the tanker shuttle was running smoothly, it seemed we were barely pushing a tanker evey 10-15 minutes.

The extreme cold hasn't been much help either. From freezing dump chute vales to blowing air brake tanks to frozen tire chains, the weather has complicated water ops as well as other aspects of firefighting. Great job to everyone continuing to brave the weather to get the job done and improvising when necessary.

[dave0820 50]

In NH we used a water supply system called the "Rural Hitch". The first due attack engine lays a 4" supply line with a clappered siamese at the end of the driveway. The second due hooks into the siamese with a short length of 4". On the other side of the siamese the second due operator lays out a long length of 4" with a second siamese on the far end. The third dues hooks into the last siamese and duplicates what the second due engine did with another length of 4" with a siamese at the end. This can be repeated again and again as engines arrive. When the second due engine has pumped off its water, the third due increases his pressure. Because of the clappered siamese, the second due can now disconnect and head to the water supply, refill and then get back in line. The next full engine can hook into the open spot. This system requires good radio communication between pump operators, but it works very well when everyone involved is well trained. I should also say the in that area of NH most pumpers carried 1000 gallons or more of water.

Just my two cents on water supply where there are no hydrants

[Bnechis 3,961]

In NH we used a water supply system called the "Rural Hitch". The first due attack engine lays a 4" supply line with a clappered siamese at the end of the driveway. The second due hooks into the siamese with a short length of 4". On the other side of the siamese the second due operator lays out a long length of 4" with a second siamese on the far end. The third dues hooks into the last siamese and duplicates what the second due engine did with another length of 4" with a siamese at the end. This can be repeated again and again as engines arrive. When the second due engine has pumped off its water, the third due increases his pressure. Because of the clappered siamese, the second due can now disconnect and head to the water supply, refill and then get back in line. The next full engine can hook into the open spot. This system requires good radio communication between pump operators, but it works very well when everyone involved is well trained. I should also say the in that area of NH most pumpers carried 1000 gallons or more of water.

Just my two cents on water supply where there are no hydrants

Interesting variation on the "Rural Hitch". The "Rural Hitch" is usually used as a great initial attack tool. Very useful with very large nurse tankers (6,000 - 8,000 gal) and also very useful where a small engine or even a manifold unit drops line up narrow lanes to make an attack.

Dave, what is the minimum gpm you can maintain with this arraignment (for 2 - 3 hours)?

The downfall with using multiple siamese set up like this is it is very hard to increase the fire flow or in some cases maintain it for long periods.

[Tanker 10eng 140]

The RH is similar to what we have been using in the Millwood/Yorktown/Croton area... depending on the size of the fire, the engine up the driveway will drop its 5 inch LDH and we connect a 5 inch gated Wye to the end. Two 5 inch lines are attached and the first tanker connects to that and pumps off ( 3000 gal is norm ), when the 2nd tanker arrives, it connects to the other 5 inch LDH and once the first tanker is empty, it starts pumping... then the 1st one disconnects and heads out to refill... but this needs to be looked at first and placement needs to be thought out, as once things are up and running, its hard to change your mind...

And... I have found that filling one tanker at a time is the best approach, to maximize water flow ( until we had the Yorktown fire and we used the hydrant at Millwood's sub station.... we were able to fill 2 tankers at the same time, with very little loss of time, if any )

[dave0820 50]

Interesting variation on the "Rural Hitch". The "Rural Hitch" is usually used as a great initial attack tool. Very useful with very large nurse tankers (6,000 - 8,000 gal) and also very useful where a small engine or even a manifold unit drops line up narrow lanes to make an attack.

Dave, what is the minimum gpm you can maintain with this arraignment (for 2 - 3 hours)?

The downfall with using multiple siamese set up like this is it is very hard to increase the fire flow or in some cases maintain it for long period

I think we could flow around 750-1000 GPM, how long we could flow it would depend on arriving units and their capacity. We used this system to make an initial attack and or a rescue, When copious amounts of water is needed portable tanks would be set up and a tanker shuttle would be activated. When I was there (18 years ago) our first due attack pumper carried 1250 gallons, the second and third had 1000 each, so pretty quickly we could have up to 3200 gallons to mount an attack and or make a rescue. The nice feature with the clappered siamese is the ability to disconnect a unit without disrupting the flow.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Ok, so this is what I have learned;

Any community can get dry hydrants into the reservoirs, at the communities expense.

The require an engineer to design it. and DEC will issue a revocable 5 year permit.

While their is a lot of hoops to jump through, is it not worth it to protect the community?

[velcroMedic1987 330]

Ok, so this is what I have learned;

Any community can get dry hydrants into the reservoirs, at the communities expense.

The require an engineer to design it. and DEC will issue a revocable 5 year permit.

While their is a lot of hoops to jump through, is it not worth it to protect the community?

1. It's DEP, isn't it?

2. Wouldn't any such construction require an engineer to design it? You're not just going to stick a pipe in the ground and hope for the best, right?

3. Not many hoops and very cheap access to a BIG supply of water. I don't understand why more agencies don't do it.

[Bnechis 3,961]

1. It's DEP, isn't it?

2. Wouldn't any such construction require an engineer to design it? You're not just going to stick a pipe in the ground and hope for the best, right?

3. Not many hoops and very cheap access to a BIG supply of water. I don't understand why more agencies don't do it.

1. Yes. My fingers were not typing what I was thinking

2. Generally yes. But I know a lot of places that have done it without an engineer.

3. I AGREE!!! I don't understand either, but I see many FD's that do not put any effort into water supply. & then they complain when they have a fire and they have no or poor water.