Fight Fire or Rescue

[S. Cook]

A local industrial fire brigade trains its firefighters that you DO NOT fight any fire in a structure until all occupants are rescued and accounted for. Search and rescue with a hose for safety but don't spray any water, even if you go through a room with fire in it, because you'll steam anyone that may be in the building.

I can see closing the door on a room and contents while a search is made, but what do you think of the above mentioned tactic?

[nsfirechap]

Yes rescue is our priority, but if we do not fight fire as we go - will we and the victims we are attempting to rescue make it out????? But don't get preoccupied with the fire. Get in, get them out, then put it out!


Jeff

[PTFD21]

Sometimes the best way to save lives is to put the fire out. The fire could be in the room where the victims are hiding in the closet.....



------------------
ED C.
http://members.aol.com/PT10FD/info.htm

[Halligan84]

In our industrial setting our priority is to extinguish the fire. This is based on several items, 1. Limited manpower. We can expect to get help in about an hour for most areas of our site, till then its the 6 of us.
2. People in industrial settings are hopefully awake and alert. When a fire occurs, they leave. 3. People trapped in the fire area may have been injured by the triggering event of the fire and are most likely still in the area of origin. Protection of the search crew by a handline will be necessary in this case. 4. Not extinguishing the fire in many cases within an industrial setting will make things drastically worse not only for us and our co workers, but possibly our neighbors outside the site.

[Bob Snyder]

This can be really incident-specific. In general, I don't like unsupported searches. They are often unnecessarily dangerous, and, as someone pointed out, one of the best ways to stop further injury is often to just stop the fire. If the manpower is there, I prefer simultaneous search and supression, done by different teams, with ventilation very close behind.

To be fair, I can also remember a few incidents where rescues were made only because immediate, directed search & rescue was done without stopping to pull a line. In my experience, these are decidedly in the minority, but that's why I say that this is sometimes an incident-specific issue.

[Paul Grimwood]

Any visible rescues - ie; on ledges or at windows are a priority. After that, ensure water is being applied to the fire and the escape stairs are also covered before any interior search operation begins. If there's too much steam from the water being applied then the nozzle operator needs practise!

------------------
www.firetactics.com (http://www.firetactics.com)

[BURNSEMS]

Scott in your setting that can be two fold remember the drills we use to run, The fire can add Light but however your choices of ventilation are limited due to Hazmat conciderations, but in some areas if my memory Serves me Right is very condensed and absolutly no place for smoke/heat to go therefore you suffocate or crispy if Your not Rescued Quickly and with the amount of Electrical componets I would Say Smoke would be VERY Thick, Not to mention Lube OiL and the Likes. I would say yall would have to measure your Risk vs Benifit Quickly to Determine Your Priority and go for it, Here in the Hospital Setting we Confine, Rescue, Attack, but each situation dictates your actions Just my Opinion.

------------------
Here today for a Safer Tomorrow

[Truckie from Missouri]

I would say that each situation dictates it's own tactics. Not a simple answer. But, it's not a simple question, either. Time of day, weather conditions, occupancy type, the list goes on. Initial tactics depend on initial size-up. Sometimes it's more productive to rescue occupants. Sometimes it's more productive to fight the fire.

As to the local industrial brigade, I won't make a judgement. I don't know what their product is, nor how water reactive it may be.

In general, however, I tend to lean toward the first in Comapny hitting the fire, thus reducing/stopping the production of toxic gases and heat. My department uses this practice, and it works well.

------------------
Be safe.

Ken

[Capt. Ed]

Yes, our first priority is rescue of occupants, but I believe a good, coordinated attack team and search team can function together to pull off both jobs simultaneously.

In fairness to the local industrial fire brigade, I do not know their situation or thier procedures based on what they operate in. It probably works for them, but here at my district, we regularly coordinate the search and the attack.

[Paul Grimwood]

Get water on the fire before interior searches begin. There is the odd occasion when a 'snatch' rescue is the obvious priority....however, the philosophy of rescue as the priority can lead to a dangerous form of 'tunnel' vision where the rescue operation leads to serious delays in firefighting ops. I have seen it several times where crews become preoccupied with 'the kids' that are reported trapped inside!
See the 30 page report on my website where 2 firefighters were killed in a backdraft whilst searching for kids. It was 15 minutes after firefighters arrived that fire attack began - after the backdraft had occurred! Your right Cap' - 'coordination' is the key......fire attack and rescue can function together. However, if its a choice - take the fire attack option first. In 1991 I put forth a 'fireground action plan'(7 primary actions & 6 secondary actions) that placed fire attack ahead of interior search ops. In 1994 John Mittendorf (LAFD) clearly made the point that 'controlling the atmosphere and conditions within a structure' was increasingly being viewed as the PRIMARY action over search ops. These views were not popular and were considered highly controversial! However, if the firefighters that died in our backdraft situation could do it all over again.....I would like to think they would take the fire attack option first!

------------------
www.firetactics.com (http://www.firetactics.com)

[e33]

Grab the visible victims, stretch the line, get water flowing and vent the building to assist escaping occupants. Search with or without a line is dept policy based. Minimally staffed companies may be better off searching with the line so that they can advance it as they perform a search. Also the line provides a very good route of exit is poor visibility.

If I have interpreted the tactic correctly, in some cities...the truck co will open up stairwell hatches to assist with smoke/gas evacuation as occupants flee and the engine will be doing its duties at the same time. Trying to evacuate mass numbers of people who are ambulatory is best done by letting them go the way they are used to, so make their trip a bit easier. Aerial evacuation and ground ladder removal pose a risk to panicy residents. They are very used to going out a certain way (stairs).

The longer the fire burns, the better chance it has of rapidly advancing and getting out of your control window. Get the fire in check as fast as possible. And I dont believe in the crap about steam getting to and killing victims. If they are in a smoke charged atmosphere, they are either dead or unconscious most likely, the steam ain't gonna do a whole lot more.

[This message has been edited by e33 (edited August 15, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by e33 (edited August 15, 1999).]

[LOCAL 2493 MEMBER]

"PUT THE FIRE OUT AND EVERTHING ELSE WILL GET BETTER"

I work on a 2 man engine on the far side of town. faced with reports of entrapment and limited resources, i have been taught and learned from well staffed departments that the above statement is fact.
if you go where the fire is then by definition these are the areas with the greatest danger to people still inside.

[Steamer]

This type of situation is precisely where the fog vs straight stream scenario should be applied. Without getting into a detailed fire science discussion, in many cases a direct attack with straight streams on the burning fuel supported by an aggressive ventilation operation away from the victims will give the best chance of rescue rather than recovery.
If a fog stream isn't introduced into the upper thermal layers, there won't be nearly as much steam conversion, and no where near as much heat pushed down onto firefighters and unprotected victims.
I've learned over 28 years that there are VERY few times when you should say ALWAYS or NEVER in the fire service, and "this ain't one of em". To say you should NEVER fight fire until everyone has been rescued (without a BUNCH of qualifying statements) reeks of over-simplification of a very complex question.
I boils http://www.firehouse.com/interactive/boards/wink.gif down to a simple concept. If you aren't making progress against the fire, it's making progress against you...and the victims you are trying to rescue.


[This message has been edited by Steamer (edited September 14, 1999).]