“Tactical Safety: Understanding Aggressive Interior Attack”…
By thehousewatch | November 2, 2009
“Examining the process of firefighting to see if there is a better and safer way to operate”
Tactical Safety – Understanding Aggressive Interior Attack
Photo by Michael Dick
By: Ray McCormack
Aggressive interior attack does its job every day across this country; it is how most fire departments operate the majority of the time. It is our common game plan when we head out the door. When we arrive, we will determine if the plan is suitable for a particular fire or building; or if the plan needs modification. The American fire service saves the most lives and property by fighting fires from inside buildings Aggressive interior attack is a coordinated, well thought out method of interior fire extinguishment. There are two reasons why we enter structures for extinguishment, the protection of life and property.
The majority of dwelling fires are extinguished utilizing the initial handline. This tells us several things. First we are arriving in a timely fashion; we are stretching the correct size handline, and aggressive interior attack gets the job done efficiently and effectively. Tactically safe interior fire extinguishment begins with the correct hoseline choice, sustained water for extinguishment, and the ability to determine if the interior fire fight is winnable. ‘Winability’ and safe operations are at the heart of interior attack. Safety is the biggest factor that weighs on initiating this form of firefighting. What will the building do next? How far has it been compromised? Most times it is evident and sometimes it is cleverly hidden from us.
What does the word aggressive mean when it comes to attack? Is it just a slogan or does it quantify a select method of operation. I believe it is the latter. If the hoseline’s not moving we’re losing! For any interior fire to be extinguished quickly we must move (march) a hoseline from the building entrance to the fire. This is the where aggressiveness comes into play. Remember aggressiveness does not imply an unsafe advance or reckless disregard for operational safety. Aggressive is the opposite of passive; we must fight fires with determination or the job will not be done in a timely manner. Time is what aggressive attack is about. We wish to extinguish the fire quickly while maintaining egress protection.
Determination is something most officers and firefighters arrive on scene with. However, difficult conditions often test our determination. Tough firefighting is like climbing a steep hill. The fire (climb) is intense and hot but finally we make it to the top and then we can relax just a bit realizing the worst is over, and we then proceed downhill; we have the fire knocked down. It is not just technical skill that gets us through a difficult fire, it is often headlong determination. We improve our chances of success by getting all of our ducks in a row. We flake out the line, we get properly dressed, we check for good water, and we continue to evaluate our attack progress and conditions around us while pushing forward at a pace compatible with fire conditions.
Officers evaluate the fire and look for evidence of progress. Looking at a whole host of variables is part of every IC’s job, with steam conversion being high on the list of favorite sights to see. Aggressive interior attack usually presents quick results and gives the IC the non verbal inside view of what is occurring. It will be a back and forth conversation between inside and outside as to how well we are progressing in our fire attack. The IC always has the option of pulling the plug and switching tactics if he feels or is told that we are losing; or that even winning the battle could be too costly.
The interior of the building is a tricky thing; some appear common while others are more intricate. The path to the fire may be decided upon using several factors: the most direct route, timeliest route, egress route, or building entrance. The need to go interior for your attack is not based on machismo. It is based upon the fact that fires are extinguished more rapidly from up close. Fire knock down is not fire extinguishment. When the risk to personnel rules out interior operations, we will hit the fire from an exterior vantage point. Will it take longer that way? Yes, because you can no longer get close to open up a wall or move debris to get to hidden fire.
How much of the building is involved in fire? What is the tipping point for either suspending or abandoning this attack method? It is different for many officers and IC’s as it is for buildings and occupancies utilizing various amounts of light weight components. Total losers however, we all can agree upon, such as well involved buildings, structurally degraded, and derelict structures. All fire buildings need to be constantly evaluated relating to interior attack commencement and viability.
We must train our firefighters to utilize effective extinguishment tactics and proper nozzle technique within the fire compartment. We must train our companies to quickly get a handline in service so that extinguishment can begin within the quickest time frame after arrival size up is performed. Remember time is not on anyone’s side at a structural fire. Different buildings and occupancies within buildings can be vastly different. Some homes have more of a fire load than others. Some occupancies have shapes that can make extinguishment more difficult. If we have decided to enter an occupancy/building then we must have our (gun drawn) hoseline ready to attack at a seconds’ notice. The importance of hoseline protection should never be an after thought. You must understand how building methods and materials can dramatically accelerate the collapse potential. Could we successfully extinguish an occupancy that has fire through out it? Yes we could but what we have to worry about is the structure degrading in the amount of time it will take to progress through the occupancy. This is why it is important to fight dirty against the enemy. We must be ready to bring overwhelming (force) water to the battle. That does not always equate to multiple small hoselines. Remember initial attack gives us our best punch in the shortest amount of time.
However with all things being equal an engine company that covers all the bases, and uses a systematic approach to extinguishment, will win more battles than one that is unprepared. Initiating an aggressive interior attack demands strong leadership, tactical safety, good nozzle technique, knowledge of engine emergencies, and fire behavior. There are many fire behaviors that we learn about such as flashover, backdraft, and rollover which often overshadows the more common threats associated with fire extinguishment. Firefighters must know how to combat battle multi-room fires, deal with cluttered conditions, fire wrap around, extension, black fire and accelerated fire growth just to name a few. Hoseline management must be understood and appreciated by everyone on the fireground, especially understaffed departments. Back up hoseline positions must be placed in advantageous locations that do not restrict the movement of the guarded handline and commanded by officers who understand line placement.
The use of larger handlines is predicated on many factors such as the D.A.L.L.A.S. acronym as well as occupancy type and building size. The post incident action report of difficulty using a large handline and low staffing is often just an excuse that attempts to mask a lack of relevant and comprehensive hoseline training. Is a larger line more difficult to use? Yes, it may be more difficult, but the results are what we are after, not a sob story. All handlines should be properly staffed in order to facilitate a timely extinguishment. Safe extinguishment comes with a through knowledge of engine company operations and interior attack hazards and how to counter them. Absolute safety can never be achieved unfortunately, but that is no reason to abandon or put down aggressive interior attack, which is by far our most powerful and effective life saving tactic once we are engaged in structural fire operations.
Look at all the statistics the fire service collects on fires and firefighters and you will see multiple negative categories. Many in the fire service look to the private sector for ideas and trends. Corporate reports don’t dwell on the negative. Maybe we should start keeping statistics on how much property and how many lives we save; and they way they’re saved instead of always focusing on loss. These new numbers would help to display the positive impact our service has on the community and our value.
Next Tactical Safety – CANceling Fire
Topics: Training and Development | 2 Comments »
“The Constant”…
By thehousewatch | October 30, 2009
One of the draws to this job for me was the fact that I knew I wouldn’t be doing the same thing everyday. Each day would be it’s own 24 hour career and I would do 122 of them each year. What I later realized however, was that there is actually a tremendous amount of repetition in this job. I’m not referring to the mundane, rather the very things we do best that we want to do every day we show up to work. It could be forcing doors, opening roofs, searching, estimating the stretch, the nozzle, et. al. Everyone has that one thing they do best, or rather, that thing they enjoy doing the most. The latter is what I’m going to talk about here.
I recently went to a fire in a private dwelling with fire that was extending from the first floor to the attic space thanks to its fire-friendly balloon frame construction. I knew the first due Truck would be taking a shot at getting a hole in the roof for the Engine; and sure enough, through the gangway came the Truck with ladders and eagerness in tow. I noticed that one of the Roof Firefighters on this Truck was a classmate of mine from the academy days. After the customary friendly its-been-a-while nods, he went about his work getting the 35′ to the eave line. The first line was being stretched while the door was being forced, clockwork. What gave me pause during all of this is that I immediately heard the saw start and sink into the roof after what seemed like milliseconds after my courtesy nod in the gangway. I took a step back and saw the Truck already pulling the roof boards as the line was getting wet after being flaked-out, perhaps the fastest roof I have ever seen.
As everyone was taking up from the fire, I made a bee-line for my classmate to congratulate him on his and his crew’s solid performance. A humble man, he chidingly reminded me that he never left the Truck or took a promotional exam like me because he simply loved opening roofs. He liked that constant about his work. And that’s not a bad thing at all; His performance was proof of that. Is he good at the other Truck acts too? Perhaps, but I know who I want on the roof the next time I’m working in the Engine.
Pictured is Matthias Schlitte, famous German arm-wrestling champion. Yes, that's his real forearm. When you get good at one thing, everyone knows it and can see it a mile away. Who would you want on your arm-wrestling team? I'd want this guy too.
The fire service often looks at things from the perspective of a generalist. The Chief on the curb has to be a generalist looking at the fireground aggregate and ensuring everything’s coming together like the last one. Others however, should look at things from a positional perspective (always thinking about the first line though). Read Ray’s latest ‘Tactical Safety’ post to see said perspective in context. For this post, I’m not simply referring to which side of the fire house you’re on or good at, the Engine or the Truck; I mean the specific thing(s) you do in these companies; the sub-constants. Everyone knows who’s the best with the irons, getting to the roof, ladders, stretching, the door position, standpipe outlets, etc. It shouldn’t mean that’s all you’ll do when you put the costume on the rig for the tour. It means that you should not keep this talent or specialty to yourself. Teach everyone what made you good at it. Brag about it to the companies in your Battalion. That way, when they need a hand filling an area of responsibility, they’ll know who can. Or who will when they can’t! That’s not elitism, that’s professionalism. And professionalism is the constant we all need to strive for.
Topics: Editorials | 1 Comment »
“Tactical Safety: SOPs, Standard Operating Positions”..
By thehousewatch | October 26, 2009
“Examining the process of firefighting to see if there is a better and safer way to operate”
Tactical Safety – SOP’s Standard Operating Positions
By: Ray McCormack
Photo by thehousewatch.com
All sports teams and business organizations use positional models to streamline command chains, improve task accountability and deliver successful and efficient results to a challenge. The fire service is no different. The positions are there for all of us to see. The operational plan can be specific or general depending upon the level of pre-operational research that went into plan development. However, many departments suffer from: weak command chains, low task accountability monitoring, and questionable successes. Why is that?
When we examine positional modeling on the fireground, we often see fluid models that vary at the whim of commanders. These commanders themselves may have only temporary discretionary powers but their decisions often live on throughout the firefight despite additional resources or solutions. Some department still do not subscribe to operational guidelines or a more organized/standardized approach to company functions/tasks and positional firefighting. Is there a reason why some make up their operational chains at every fire? Is there a benefit to increasing the demand on the IC, or temporary IC, as to placement/roles of arriving companies? How efficient are we when we must await routine commands to get a water supply initiated or stretch an attack line. All that extraneous radio traffic leads to is increased opportunities for misinterpretation or missed communication; and does not enable a more comprehensive and better managed fireground.
Guidelines and procedures that are standardized help us to comprehend the fire situation quicker and with improved focus. A more defined focus for the IC, company officer and firefighter increases tactical safety. Having positions and known plays that are understood by all attending; and implemented without prodding, makes the fireground more efficient and safer. Clearly defined positions do not handcuff the IC or company officers; rather it frees them from having to deal with the mundane.
Firegrounds are all different and at the same time identical. The mission is to extinguish the fire. When companies are dispatched, either their arrival placement is understood or assigned. Companies may arrive out of sequence or may be from different departments or areas. This does not dismantle positional standards. Operational positions should be disseminated and understood no matter who is responding on the first alarm. Standard operating positions makes for great accountability as tasks are pre-assigned and the potential for a misinterpretation of roles and tasks is virtually eliminated; plus, we know who to seek out if something was overlooked as opposed to just dealing with the either the excuse of “I didn’t know it was my job,” to the IC forgetting to assign a specific task.
Modeling positional standards doesn’t mean all objectives are written in stone, however, there are basic features to the game plan that should occur enough times that they form a standard of operation. It doesn’t matter what model you choose as long as your choice makes sense and it works for your response area. These positional assignments allow for smooth transitions in command as well because the tactical objective are known, and filled following a standard of operations. We know that supply was handled, search was assigned, and an attack group was formed; and all have operated in an organized fashion. We don’t always know the script the fire is following but we should be aware of our own.
When it comes to the company level we generally follow a model of a designated leader/officer in charge of several firefighters. The span of control is tight which should maximize effectiveness, integrity and safety. The officer will be the link to the next higher level of command, usually the IC or sector. Teams or companies are assigned areas of responsibility and control the fire with extinguishment, search, and support tasks such as: ventilation, RIT, and back up. Each group will have several team members to tackle the tasks inherent at every fire.
- We have company officers whose job it is to lead a group of firefighters.
- We have pump operators whose job it is to get and maintain water supply for extinguishment operations.
- We have a nozzle firefighter and other firefighters assisting the hoseline advance
- We have a search and rescue group
- We have an IC, Sector Officers and Safety
We comply with national standards and track our companies and our people; keeping a close eye on progress made or lost, so that the players can be rearranged and tasks shifted from the original plan if needed. To arrive at a fire and do it from scratch does not show much in the way of leadership. We should have plans and SOP’s in place so that when we arrive on scene things get done in a timely fashion and done safely.
Next Tactical Safety – Understanding Aggressive Interior Attack
Topics: Training and Development | 3 Comments »
“Son of Brady St.”…
By thehousewatch | October 20, 2009
Photo by Milwaukee Fire Department Historical Society
It’s great to see good press in bad times…
We should all remember that Firefighters not only protect the socioeconomic vitality and health of neighborhoods, we also know them better than anyone.
Topics: Editorials | 5 Comments »
“Tactical Safety: Winning Fires With Water”…
By thehousewatch | October 19, 2009
“Examining the process of firefighting to see if there is a better and safer way to operate”
Tactical Safety – Winning Fires with Water
By: Ray McCormack
Winning fires with water is based on several key factors such as: the amount of water brought to the battle, from supply volume to actual usage volume, to proper targeting of each individual water stream, and the selective placement of streams for maximum coverage and timely extinguishment. Firefighting is war. To win our individual daily battles, we must strategize on which tactics will safely and effectively give us the upper hand against the enemy. We can have multiple streams in operation, but if they are missing the target, we are loosing the battle. We must use our primary attack tool (water) effectively in both the advanced tactical mode and in offensive/defensive platforms in order to win.
Water supply both upon arrival and after supplementation gives us a foundation and reserve for continuous operations. The higher the number of supply and supply methods used the higher our level of safety should be. Supply provided by only a single source no matter what the number (volume) is never as prudent as having multiple sources. All of our water sources should be maximized with total volume pulled surpassing need.
When we arrive with our pumpers, provide a static amount of water to initiate some type of fire operation. If you feel that your fire race is equal to 1,000 gallons then starting off with a pumper that only contains 500 gallons can lead to a disappointing finish. We must be able to judge the effect of our actions prior to implementing them. A fire that requires thousands of gallons of water for extinguishment may be quickly reduced if the sweet spot is hit with those 500 gallons of water. These are judgment calls based on many factors; two of the leading contributors being urgency and growth potential.
Having a sustained water supply is one of the keys to an effective offensive/defensive operation. Many times our offensive water demand will later be dwarfed by the increased water supply demand of defensive operations. Defensive operations that switch from small handline suppression to appliance assisted suppression require a tremendous increase in water volume to work effectively. This transition time can allow for exponential fire spread. When larger handlines are used, this transfer works better because these lines double nicely as supply lines for appliances, thereby saving time and effort. Any appliance that can be feed from multiple supply lines with separate water sources allows for a fail safe(r) operation.
When we miss the target by not hitting the seat of the fire we have a problem. You can lob all the water you want at the fire but if it is not getting there it is a wasted effort. Many times we follow standards of line placement that embrace interior attack; when we move to defensive operations, hoseline placement considerations change. We must place stream reach high on our list of priorities to keep us outside the collapse zone. Proper stream placement helps to prevent many things including collapse, due to reduced burn time and water/absorption.
Fires don’t exist in a vacuum; most times they leave behind a debris field for us to examine. If you are not standing on top of or amongst a pile of burned out rubb, then you may still have more work to do. An even bigger problem is when we think we have extinguished the fire and we have not. I once had this happen to me. Just as I reported “all visible fire knocked down” I knew I had spoken too soon. The IC quickly countered with “What about the fire blowing out the window into the shaft”? I replied “I haven’t gotten to the invisible fire yet!”
We must make sure that we also understand volume. The volume of space contained within the fire compartment and the need for effective hoseline selection and a heightened awareness for usage. Compartment height is often a dimension that gets little consideration for its relationship to dramatic fire growth, and potential fireground emergencies. Water does a great job of extinguishment; it is up to us to know the correct amount to bring to the battle, to reinforce the battle and to win the battle. Redundancy and independence are the two foundational blocks of water supply that increase tactical safety on any fireground.
Next Tactical Safety – SOP’s – Standard Operating Positions
Topics: Training and Development | No Comments »
“The Long Stretch”…
By thehousewatch | October 19, 2009
The definition of a long stretch varies among departments nationwide. If you ask me, I’d consider a long stretch anything over four lengths. Whenever you stretch more than four lengths, you’re probably stretching above the second floor and or have a deep setback; it also seems the potential for kinks and finding car tires, bumpers, fences, newel posts, lawn gnomes, etc. with the trailing line increases exponentially. It is incumbent upon Engine Company members, actually it should be all members on the fireground, to remain ‘heads-up’ with the line’s maintenance and progress. If your pressure sucks or your line goes limp on the fire floor, notify the pump operator and IC immediately. If the pump operator states the line appears charged or ‘fine’ outside, then your problems are inside. With that, the pump operator is responsible for all hose maintenance from the engine to the building entrance. That way problems can be handled on the inside and outside simultaneously and systematically by the inside and outside Engine Company assignments.
Video hat tip Bill:
Topics: Training and Development | No Comments »
“Moment of Zen”…
By thehousewatch | October 17, 2009
Topics: Editorials | No Comments »
“Budget-Buster”…
By thehousewatch | October 14, 2009
The Pentagon is rushing to production a new “Bunker-Buster” bomb, aptly named the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, or ‘MOP’ Bomb. It’s a weapon that packs quite a punch and its design makes it virtually indefensible. Times are admittedly tough and Cities are furiously defending their justification of cuts to fire departments. In order to take on politicians on their own battlefields, you need an indefensible weapon yourselves that destroys their ability and desire to wage war. A similar weapon was rushed to production in the Milwaukee Professional Firefighters Association’s “War-Strategy Center.” It’s called the “Budget-Buster” and it also packs quite a punch; and it’s time for us all to drop our own…
AP Photo
Click on the link below to see the Milwaukee Professional Firefighters Association’s “Budget-Buster:”
Local 215 Frontline Analysis ‘09-1
Topics: Editorials | No Comments »
“Fighting Bob”…
By thehousewatch | October 11, 2009
Photo by Michael Sears: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Democracy has become a contemporary virtue in our polarized political spectrum. The Country was founded upon principles related to freedom to practice religion and transcended religious ideology. This gave us free speech and the right to assembly. This was epitomized this afternoon in Milwaukee when the public safety dichotomy of Police Officers and Firefighters met not at the scene of a fire or vehicle accident, but in a meeting hall. “Fighting Bob” Donovan, a Milwaukee Alderman, organized a rally to protest the forthcoming public safety cuts to Milwaukee’s Police and Fire Departments. And the turnout was enough to send the Mayor’s mouthpiece into spin mode.
Times are tough, no one needs to be reminded of that; but everyone understands what a decimated Police and or Fire Department leaves for their municipalities. Just take a historical look back to the 70’s when we saw the previous cycle of layoffs and company closures. History is repeating itself. Moreover, this time we (and our cities) may not recover or feel like we even work for the same fire departments we were hired by. They will look entirely different when it’s time for the gold watch. Always remember however, that no one can make you hate the job or tell you the mission has changed. It hasn’t and we can’t become defeatists. Furthermore, we all need to get behind our own “Fighting Bobs,” and others with a proverbial set of balls to ensure we never do.
Topics: Editorials | No Comments »
“Tactical Safety-Attack Supervision: One Box That Should Always Be Filled”…
By thehousewatch | October 11, 2009
“Examining the process of firefighting to see if there is a better and safer way to operate”
Tactical Safety – Attack Supervision: One Box That Should Always Be Filled
By: Ray McCormack
Photo by thehousewatch.com
There are several boxes in an attack strategy that should be filled at every fire. Under supervision we have several layers, and the ability to segment our operations into manageable chunks. Initial supervision on arrival and command-control is generally handled by the first in officer. Under certain departmental operational models, this officer’s role is lost at the task (company) level. The merits of any operational model can only be judged over time as to its effectiveness and overall operational safety. Taking a supervisor and placing them in a different role may fill one box, but what about the other box that is now missing its supervision?
Having an officer assigned to the engine company is extremely important and doubles that company’s attack efficiency. Staffing for most departments is an issue that is ongoing. Depending on the type of fire occupancy and layout presented, a lack of hoseline supervision should be criminal. We can have enough people for a timely hoseline advance; however when the officer takes on the role of back up firefighter we are operating less efficiently and less safe.
The command model that allows for the first hoseline officer to be pulled off the engine company and into another operational position is sacrificial in nature; as important as command is to overall operational effectiveness, so is command at the company (task) level; and especially for the primary attack hoseline. It is a judgment call for some departments; it is policy for others and it is always inherently tricky. Where is the IC? The true IC: the fire chief? This person must be assigned right away on any potential structural fire call.
When a nozzle team consists of just ‘workers’ and no supervision, it is not only understaffed, it is ineffectively staffed. Yes, I know the realities of real world staffing and there isn’t much we can do about severe staffing shortages, but many times the loss of the engine boss is an obligation and is not about numbers. Having someone with the nozzle team, that is solely concentrating on extinguishment and tactical safety without other operational distractions, raises the effectiveness of that team, period. Can we do things over time (luck out) that allow us to develop a skewed prospective of operational effectiveness and the proper deployment of resources? Is every fire difficult? No, but that’s not the point. The point is where do we place value? Is it only found in the command role? Or do we find value at the end of a nozzle?
There is a lot of emphasis on the whole picture or exterior view/perspective of a fire, the typical view of the IC. However nice that view is, it is only a portion of what is occurring inside. Let’s not forget it is the interior view that is leaking to the exterior. That interior view is much more telling and the IC needs someone to share that view with everyone on the fireground. We can not move to a place in firefighting that we just read the cover of books/ buildings without further exploration or venturing inside. The engine company officer will supply that critical interior view. He will also supply the encouragement and quiet confidence of forward movement that puts fires out.
Many seem to be concerned with outside views and what it says, and that’s fine for awhile; but when you become overly concerned and can not move past that feature then no matter what you think you are seeing you are only seeing a portion of the fire puzzle. To solve most fire puzzles we need to go inside. We need to be lead by someone who is solely looking out for our safety up close and personal and who has their eye on the prize – putting the fire out and saving lives in the process. If you do not subscribe to the platform of hoseline supervision being the foundation of operational effectiveness and tactical safety then you have much to relearn. Leaving the primary attack line without supervision is bad firematics, because one day the results you will get will add up to more than just poor tactical safety; and ineffective extinguishment; it will add up to something much worse. If we have to choose boxes to fill, the engine company leadership box is at the top.
Next Tactical Safety – Winning Fires with Water
Topics: Training and Development | 2 Comments »