Boarded Up: What Would You Do?

[10EngineLt]

Open it up and take it slow. Like bones42 said we take calculated risks all the time.

[fireman4949]

So, you are going to put FF's at risk for "a vacant house"? I'm not saying you don't have to open it up and find the fire, but this should be one situation where you place more emphasis on your FF's safety than anything else.

That's the kind attitude that just fries me!

Define "vacant house"! Now, please tell me the current occupancy of this structure. Are you 100% certain it's "vacant"?
How?!
Are you willing to write-off any possibility if saving someone's life because you 'just didn't think' anyone was in there?

Now, please tell me why in this "one situation", your tactical priorities should be different from any other structure fire you are called to.
Is it because there is plywood on the exterior of this structure that you are guaranteed there is no possibility of it being occupied?????

Sometimes I just really wonder.

[WestTac1]

There is no right or wrong in this scenario. The purpose was to get people thinking, to excercise the mind with a little tactical game.

With that said, let's kick this up a notch:

You open up where the front door was suspected to be. At the same time, a girl in her mid twenties who looks extremly disheveled runs up to you and says that her and her boyfriend were just trying to start a fire in the second floor fireplace to stay warm. She thought he was right behind her crawling out through the basement window, but now she can't find him. Also, she thinks an elderly drunk man may be sleeping in the basement.

Here's what the house looks like after you expose:

[johnny46]

So she was in the basement trying to start a fire in the 2nd floor fireplace.

[ccfdblehman]

Her and her boyfriend were on the second floor, and she thinks that someone else is in the basement. That's how I read it.

[MarcusKspn]

In the original post there was a coment about the access to the boarded up house is a small basement window.

Fire started on the 2nd floor, escape throught the only access in the basement.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

In the scenario provided , there are either going to be some heroes or some dead people. Or both.

[johnny46]

Ahhh. Thanks.

Well, it don't look like the fire is contained on the second and I wouldn't put my crew through a basement window. That's too confined a space, too risky a position.

We'd have to open more than one exit, ventilate and make an interior attack if we could find the stairs. The building looks pretty sturdy from pictures and it's not new contruction so it could hold up (judging by my territory, not by how things are done wherever this is) under fire.

[Bostonjake1240]

This might add lite to the subject, In New England the rule of thumb is this ( atleast in my city) 2.5 wood frame buildings are Ballon frame until proven other wise. Smoke from the eaves on these buildings are usually bad news. That story he writes about, Women with her Boyfriend lighting a fire to keep warm...Sounds familiar to me!!

[MalahatTwo7]

In the scenario provided , there are either going to be some heroes or some dead people. Or both.

And its the potential for dead heros that have been working in my mind since the thread first opened.

I've always been taught to use the tools you have for the job at hand. If you dont have the tools, do the best ya can, but dont be "stupid" about it. And something mitigation/risk assessment of greatest gain for the greatest good. In all aspects of the given scenario, argument can (I think) be made effectively for and against an aggressive interior attack (I dont currently support that, with the facts as given) vs a surround and drown.

[MIKEYLIKESIT]

Rick I see where you are coming from. It all comes down to many things. There are no easy answers. Pulling up to a building like this one with a normal FDNY response is a way different animal then pulling up with a normal Malahat response. I have been blessed in my career to get to experience urban, suburban, and rural structure fires. Fires pretty much burn the same way. It all comes down to the basic resources (manpower), training, equipment, and experience. I would like to believe that no fire department is "better" then another, but we all know this is unrealistic. Some fire departments are better then others. But, what I would like to think that any firefighter does his/her best with whatever they are dealt with.

[kprsn1]

Let's make some assumptions (we all know what that does ). First, we know from witnesses that someone was in the building most likely the basement. Second judging from fire conditions described and in the picture we have heavy involvement on the second and possibly first floor (I'm assuming the fire started on the second). If we determine that this building has/had squatters and the likelyhood of a quick 911 call is not a very good possibility due to no utilities, how long could this fire have burned uncontrolled or unreported? Third, where will savable victims be? Probably only the basement so the question would be do you have the resources (manpower, water, etc.) available to you to make a quick knockdown on this size of fire and then hit the basement looking for victims? If the fire is above, then the most survivable place for a victim is the basement or floors below the fire. What do the smoke and shingle conditions tell you regarding fire in the roof/attic space? Balloon-style construction? Roof ventilation an option? Based on the information, available to me, I would get a TIC to the basement window area the female escaped from first and then check any other basement window areas. Pull some heavy artillery from the truck like 2 1/2 inch and put the fire out. If my only access to the basement was a small window there would be no way I would send any of my crew down there until I have control of the conditions, minimized the risk to my crew, secured a viable exit point, and determined the building's collapse potential. In my mind it's all about risk vs. benefit when factoring in your own department's capabilities and resources and judging from this particular scenario, for my department anyway, the risk would unfortunately outweigh the benefit.

[Rescue101]

This has been a pretty good thread.Put the Hi-ex generator in the front "door"and float it.hehe T.C.

[Catch22]

Go big or don't go at all. Pull out the big lines and the sticks. To me the only option is to get the fire out (at least under control) and then get in. Gonna have to do it in a hurry though. I still think it's a good move to start pulling plywood and keep pulling it. That'll help vent and open things up so you can see.

The you get into if there are any victims that are salvagable? If they're in the basement, maybe. Like kprsn1 said, how long has this thing been burning? Is it worth the risk to send guys into the basement? How are they going to get in? Where's the secondary egress? Can someone get a look in the basement with the camera, and how cluttered is it? If it's a good clean view and no one in the basement, I don't see how there's anyone that can be saved. If there is someone in there, then I think it's probably worth a shot if there's no heavy fire there. After all, if the fire don't get them, they may drown down there.

[DeputyMarshal]

It's what we are supposed to do. We take calculated risks all the time.

Bullsh*t. That's what kills firefighters needlessly. Unless we have a credible reason to believe there is a rescue to be made, we should stay out. That's why I suggested a preplan now -- before the building burns.

No firefighter's life should ever be placed at risk without good reason. "We didn't do our job and preplan" isn't a good reason.