12/17/07 84 W, 1 I - + 15 - 12 This Evening's Fire


Furniture store at 8740 Glenwood Avenue. Engine 23 first fire unit on scene at one-story, 5,000 square-foot structure with fire showing from roof. Defensive operations, with heavy fire throughout building. Two additional engines called for suppression. Raleigh and Durham Highway units included E23, E24, E16, E17, E14, E4, E9, P1, P4, L23, R14, B4, B3, C5, C2, C198, A8. Six Forks EMS and Wake EMS also on scene. Alarm time approximately 7:00 p.m. Control time approximately 8:15 p.m.





Judging by the pictures, it definitely appears to be a job well-done. I was listening online and never heard command call for the master stream out the aerial and from the looks of it I assume it never happened. It’s nice to see a company who isn’t afraid to make a call, stand by their decision, and get the job done! Awesome job, guys! Proof that an aggressive attack can still be made even under defensive operations without the use of an aerial master stream.
Henry P. - 12/17/07 - 23:42

Good job bro’s…. “risk vs reward” on this one, good call.
Silver - 12/18/07 - 01:31

Thank God it didn’t turn out like the furniture store fire in Charleston, SC over the summer…
Trev (Email) - 12/18/07 - 11:10

“Risk vs. Reward” is right. Understand latter size-up post smoke removal revealed the roof metal structure was pretty compromised by the heat exposure. Good call on the strategy guys.
Olson - 12/18/07 - 12:12

Pictures: http://www.legeros.com/ralwake/photos/20..
Legeros - 12/19/07 - 20:18

Perfect opportunity to use smooth bores, anyone know if they were put in service?
Silver - 12/19/07 - 21:21

Rhetorical question?
Silver - 12/20/07 - 18:07

Just a question out of curiosity, but would the use of smooth bore nozzles actually have a benefit over the nozzles this company officer decided to use e.g. would the fire have been put out faster? Or should the s.b nozzles have been used just to be used i.e. the larger depts. use them so we should also?
Henry P. - 12/20/07 - 20:04

7Driver, this is your specialty. After reading many editorials from you about this very topic on “the watchdesk”, I think you can help educate Henry a little.

Henry P., it has nothing to do with the size of your department. My friend, for a lack of better words, that’s ignorance and/or lack of training. With a smoothbore, you would have had better reach and penetration, as well as a steady “column” of water, versus a bunch of water droplets. Also, let’s not forget an increase in GPM’s with lower operating pressures.
Silver - 12/20/07 - 20:47

Well said Brother Silver…Smoothe Bore for reach and penatration Low PSI Higher GPM Vs. Fog Nozzle Higher PSI and Lower GPM and not to mention a broken stream being devoured by the heat…...
[jdkay] - 12/20/07 - 21:04

Both smoothbore (SB) and fog nozzles have their place in this world. Personally, I am partial to SB nozzles. They allow higher GPM flows, greater reach and penetration, less disturbance of the thermal layer, and lower nozzle pressures allowing for less reaction forces being put on the nozzleman and backup man. Lower nozzle pressure also allows for lower pump discharge pressures. I was not at the fire, so I do not want to speculate, but tried and true practices have shown that a SB is well suited for defensive fires, as well as aggressive, interior firefighting. Defensive fires require higher GPMs to extinguish the fire due to the heavy fire conditions, and since a SB won’t evaporate as quickly as the fog spray will, more water will reach the seat of the fire, thereby extinguishing the fire faster. Larger attack lines, such as a 2.5”, are also well suited for defensive fires because they are capable of flowing much more water than a smaller 1.5” or 1.75” line.

Should we use tactics of a “larger” department (my guess would be you’re talking about FDNY?) just because they do too? No, but we can learn from different methods across the country and apply what works for us here. It may be that if you combine portions of a tactic from Philly with portions from Denver, that you find a method that works well in your area. This is achieved by staying open minded, always learning and always training.
Rides An Engine - 12/20/07 - 21:09

Dang it Silver, you beat me to it! :)
Rides An Engine - 12/20/07 - 21:11

Quick on the draw, sonnnnnnn!!!!!
Silver - 12/20/07 - 21:17

Ahhh, so what you’re saying is that even though you previously said that they did a good job, they could’ve done better by pulling the proper line that is equipped with a s.b. nozzle (does Raleigh even have s.b. nozzles on any preconnects?) or even worse pull the line, delay getting water on the fire even more by stopping to swap out nozzles, just to use s.b. nozzles? Lower pressures? It was a defensive attack so there isn’t any hose advancement. That point is null. More GPM? They only had 2” hose on the ground. If I’m not mistaking, you can’t have a s.b. nozzle over half the diameter of the hose, right? 1” s.b. = 200gpm. Doesn’t Raleigh have fog nozzles on the 2” lines capable of flowing 250gpm with the flick of the wrist? So that point is null. Steady column of water vs. water droplets? Only thing I can think of by that is you’re saying the fire would have gone out faster with the s.b. nozzles. So, again, they did good but they could’ve done better. I, personally, am very impressed by their actions and didn’t think this needed any mon. morning quarterbacking.
Henry P. - 12/20/07 - 23:06

I asked a question, that was all. After no answer was given, I asked if it was a rhetorical one. Mr. P, there are agencies in this nation that do this everyday, not just once in a while. Maybe you can learn from them, maybe not. Open your eyes, just a little. If bigger cities are using them, for fire attack in buldings that are hundreds of years old, there must be something good about them, don’t you agree?

It all goes back to training. If your fire attack is delayed that much by switching tips, or nozzles, maybe it’s time to train some more. No interior attack was made, ok, I understand that. But, by looking at the pictures, plenty of hoseline movement was, so don’t you think lower pressures would help that?

C’mon, are you one of those that thinks the almighty fog nozzle is the know-all, be-all of the fire service? I can recommend two books to you, Engine Operations by the late Andy Frederick and Officer’s Handbook of Tactics by John Norman. Check ‘em out, you can even borrow mine if you’d like.

The guys and girls did a great job, the fire went out and nobody got hurt. That doesn’t mean that we can’t learn from fires and see if there was something we could’ve done a little better.
Silver - 12/21/07 - 00:07

Even the best operations have room for improvement.
A few points:
“delay getting water on the fire even more by stopping to swap out nozzles” In a defensive fire, the time it takes to change nozzles not going to make or break the operation. Like Silver said, it’s time to train if you can’t do it

“Lower pressures? It was a defensive attack so there isn’t any hose advancement” The fact remains that with lower nozzle pressures there will be less reaction force on the nozzleman & back-up man, which means they don’t have to work as hard to operate the line.

“Doesn’t Raleigh have fog nozzles on the 2” lines capable of flowing 250gpm with the flick of the wrist” Fog nozzles need higher pressures to operate properly, which means more pump pressure and more reaction force at the nozzle. Lest we forget that it’s a broken stream, which will be turned into steam before it hits the seat of the fire. In most cases of a defensive fire, the steam conversion will not be contained and assist in extinguishment. The solid stream of a SB will penetrate the fire more before it breaks up and turns to steam. A 2.5” line will allow you to significantly increase your flow while still being able to maneuver the line. Is it tough? Heck yeah, but nobody said this job was a cake walk.

Nobody questioned the operation, just asking if a tool was used. You asked about SB vs. fog. Facts were provided to you about why SB are superior to fog nozzles. Stay safe out there! Train hard!
Rides An Engine - 12/21/07 - 00:43

You said that “Doesn’t Raleigh have fog nozzles on the 2” lines capable of flowing 250gpm with the flick of the wrist?”. The answer of a fog nozzle changing gpm’s with flick of the wrist is a yes and no answer. If that fog nozzle was set up to flow 200 gpm and you flicked that wrist of yours and changed it to 250 gpm, you would still not be flowing 250 gpm. This wouldn’t be accomplised until the pump operator adjusted his discharge pressure for the added friction loss for that handline. Now with a fog if you were flowing 250 gpm you could switch down and flow less gpm’s, but now you would have a lot of unnecessary pressure on that line unless you again have the pump operator lower your pressure.
Mike - 12/21/07 - 13:09

Silver, thanks for picking up my slack I’m just reading today.

In addition, half the diamter of the hose for the tip is only a reccomendation, as is 50 psi for handlines. You can increase both diameter and tip pressure as needed up until you reach critical velocity.

Whats wrong with putting 3” on the ground if it doesnt have to be advanced? then you can up to the 1.25’ tip and flow 325gpm.

and as far as lower nozzle pressure it not just about back pressure and firefighter fatigue but also you dont work your pump as hard which gives you more capability if you are near your maximum pump capacity.
7driver (Email) - 12/22/07 - 21:33

Incredible photo
Ginny (Email) (Web Site) - 12/28/07 - 12:18



  
Remember personal info?

/ Textile

Comment moderation is enabled on this site. This means that your comment will not be visible on this site until it has been approved by an editor.

To prevent spam we require you to answer this silly question
 

  (Register your username / Log in)

Notify:
Hide email:

Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.