Skip to content

Archives for

See all posts in the network tagged with

The Daily Drill: Part 3-Forcible Entry

1 comment

Here is another great post from my friend Lance Peeples of the Webster Groves Fire Department in St. Louis County.  Thanks Lance and now for some fire-thinking to occur.

 

Review the following videos and answer the questions:

 

 

 

1.  Who is assigned the “Irons” or “Bar” position on your first alarm assignment?

 

2.  List EVERY tool the forcible entry (FE) firefighter (FF) should carry when he dismounts the apparatus for an alarm investigation at a multiple dwelling.

 

3.  Are these tools mounted near the riding position of the FE FF?

 

4.  Who is the FF on your first alarm who is designated to use the axe to drive the halligan while the FE FF holds the halligan in place?  What tools should he or she carry?  Are they mounted immediately adjacent to that riding position for quick access?

 

5.  Will a Rabbit tool (hydraulic forcible entry HFT) work on a door with angle iron shields?

 

6.  How would you defeat an inward opening door with angle iron shields that cover the entire length of the door?  What if another piece of angle iron (or a “U” channel) was attached to the door frame and thus prevented placing the fork of the halligan between the frame and the angle iron attached to the door?

 

7.  Is it acceptable to attack the hinge side of an apartment door in a multiple dwelling?  Why or why not?

 

8.  At multiple dwelling fires is it standard practice in your department to force an adjacent apartment door before forcing the fire apartment door?  What might be an advantage of doing this?

 

 

9.  Will a Rabbit (HFT) tool work on outward opening door?  What does an outward opening door in a multiple dwelling suggest to you?

 

10.  What do bolt heads projecting through a door suggest?

 

11.  Should the fork bevel be against or away from the door?  What are the advantages and disadvantages of each position?

 

12.  Some departments order halligan tools that are longer than the standard 30” length for increased leverage.  What is a serious disadvantage of longer tools?

 

Posted by on July 28, 2011 • Filed under: buildling construction, firefighter-safety-health, firefighting-operations, forcible entry • Tagged: , , , , ,

Basic Tactical Considerations

7 comments

This post is just a simple challenge of tactical considerations.  The photos that are posted show a single-family house that had fire venting from the C/D corner when first units arrived.  The first in crews could not make the entire hallway on the first push do to intense heat and smoke.

The smoke was banked almost to the floor even with the fire venting from that corner bedroom.

What are some considerations that must be looked at with this fire?  What would be your next plan of action?  Why ist there so much heat and smoke with the fire venting the exterior?  What is your size up?

Share your thoughts and answers with everyone and use this as discussion with your crew.  

As always, train hard and stay safe,

Jason

Posted by on July 23, 2011 • Filed under: buildling construction, command-leadership, fire-rescue-topics, firefighting-operations, fires, search, situational awareness, size up, training-development, training-fire-rescue-topics, Uncategorized, vent, ventilation • Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

The Daily Drill 2: VES

2 comments

Here is a post from a very good friend and very wise fireman, Lance Peeples.  Lance is a firefighter/paramedic with the Webster Groves Fire Department in St. Louis County.  Check it out and give some feed back.

 

Review the following video and consider how YOUR fire department operates when answering the following questions:

 

 

1.  Is VES indicated if PPV is used by your department?  What safety precaution should the operator of a PPV fan perform before starting the fan?

 

2.  Notice how the VES firefighter enters head first.  Very experienced instructors often recommend grasping the window frame with the head and upper body protected by the wall and then entering with the opposite foot.  This permits the firefighter to make an emergency ladder slide if necessary.

What is another advantage of this technique?

 

3.  On your first alarm assignment who is the firefighter assigned the responsibility for VES.  Who is the firefighter that will assist him in this technique?

 

4.  If the assisting firefighter ascends the ladder to orient the searching firefighter how can the ladder be butted?  Does it always need to be butted?  Could a tool be driven into the grounds at the butt of the ladder to prevent it from sliding?

 

5.  Are the tools (hook and halligan) needed for VES mounted near the riding position of the member who is responsible for this function or are they mounted on the other side of the apparatus underneath the water rescue rope and drinking cups?

 

6.  Notice how the roof ladder projects into the window slightly.  However, the ladder is already at a very low angle that could result in the butt kicking out.  Should the ladder tip be removed from the window to allow for easier emergency exit/victim removal or does the angle of the ladder preclude this?  What are possible solutions?

 

7.  Some of the commentators below the video are critical of opening the door upon preparing to leave the room…what say you? 

 

 

 

Posted by on July 12, 2011 • Filed under: RIT, search, self rescue, situational awareness, training-development, training-fire-rescue-topics, VES • Tagged: , , , , , , ,

The “Me” Environment

12 comments

I have to admit that I am a proponent of safety.  I believe in wearing seat belts. I believe in wearing all of your protective gear and equipment. I believe in being healthier.  I believe in doing a 360 and situational awareness.  These are just a few of the safety issues that I believe in.

What I will never understand is a statement that puts us, the firefighters, above the victim that could still be saved.  This is not new but something that I just have to get off of my chest.

I recently wrote an article "Techniques for VES".  The beginning of the article specifically states that two firefighters are always ideal for operating.  With that being said, I understand that there will always be those that disagree with things that I write, and I'm fine with that.  What I am not fine with is the recurring theme of "never" do this and "never" do that.

When I instruct I am very careful about not using "never" and "always." We know that in our business those two words can come back to haunt you.  Although the article was about VES, I know that that is a hot button topic. What prompted the article was a training I attended and questions about the tactic.

The fact is that we train for ideal conditions and we want to always have a 2 in 2 out situation.  But, we know the real world is not always so kind.  Statements like, "Safety of your crew and yourself always come first, no matter what the situation" are troublesome to me.  Where does this leave the people in the burning building or under the debris?

Text books are great and operating in this manner is great. But, what if you are the one checking the windows in the rear and you see a hand on the glass? Your by yourself and your equipped to make a quick grab from the window.  Do you wait for three more people? Or, do you take a calculated risk and perform VES that you have trained for?  I for one am going to do what I can to give that person every opportunity to live.  This falls in the same category of an officer that told his guys to "never" search without a hose line.  Is that really the case?  We know that it's not.

Out of the norm tactics are dangerous, but not necessarily reckless.  There is not nor should there be a "cookie cutter" way of doing things in a figurative sense.  Our job and environments are dynamic. Should we have standards and guidelines based on best practices and methods that have worked for decades? Absolutely!  But, we should not be so entrenched in our own ways as not to perform to what situation we are faced with at the time.  The only way to be able to do that is to train for those situations and in order to train for them you must believe that those situations can happen.

All fire ground activities are best performed in teams.  Is it possible that one firefighter may need to make a save utilizing VES? Yes.  Is it dangerous? Yes.  So, it lends itself that if is is possible, dangerous, and we could be placed in that situation, that we should train for it.

I just don't see our profession and our tactics in a "black and white" world. I see the need to adapt and overcome.  But to do that we must expect these situations and train for them.

Stay safe,

Jason

 

Posted by on July 2, 2011 • Filed under: administration-leadership, fire-rescue-topics, firefighter-safety-health, firefighting-operations, rescues, RIT, search, self rescue, situational awareness, size up, VES • Tagged: