Question: By no stretch of the imagination am I an “expert”on firefighting or roof operations, yet I constantly see pictures of firemen, excuse me, firefighters on residential and garden-apartment, lightweight-trussed roofs. I am very much in favor of aggressive roof operations, and I understand that I was not at any of these incidents. But when is it reasonable to risk our lives for an effect (vertical ventilation) that can be accomplished as good, if not better, by any other means (horizontal ventilation).

This really seems to go back to the adage “you perform how you train.” Open almost any training manual (IFSTA etc.), and it shows firemen on roofs or residential buildings accomplishing vertical ventilation. SUPERDANGEROUS!!!! If this were removed from our training and our manuals. I believe we could prevent many fire department funerals. And this is what it is all about.

Is this a plausible topic for discussion in your column? I really believe something has to be done.”

Answer: Well I guess (without any insult intended) you are at the stage in your career that you are questioning procedures — and that is good. If you are questioning for reasons to understand and gain knowledge instead of rote, that is one thing; but if you are questioning because you now believe you know “enough” to make changes, it is another. My guess is that you have between two and five “years on the job,” because I was there myself and led many great firefighters through those years.

You mention alternates in the same sentences, such as, “I am in favor of aggressive roof operations,” and then you beg off operations on lightweight roofs that cover America’s human beings — apartments buildings and garden apartments.

The greatest life-saving thing we can do on the fire ground is to put the fire out before anyone, including firefighters, suffers serious injury or death. The second greatest life-saving effort is in effective ventilation to allow the fire fight to proceed with all possible speed and efficiency — including search and including location and removing (rescue) victims.

Also, there are fireground events or phenomena that can cause catastrophic results during the fire fight, and they are flashover, smoke explosion, and roll-over. All three events can be controlled by primary ventilation and secondary cooling of the fuels.

Horizontal ventilation is a secondary consideration to vertical ventilation for interior firefighting operations. As a matter of fact, without it being accomplished, you may be defensive in your operations shortly.

Lightweight truss construction becomes a danger to firefighting operations when the fire is INTO the truss assemblies. That means that the fire is on the top floor and has already gained access to the support members of the roof and is in immediate danger of burning itself through the roof.

That means that most of the fire experiences in apartment buildings and in garden apartments or townhouses or condominium groupings are NOT ON THE TOP FLOOR, at least on arrival.

Prompt vertical ventilation:

1. Provides for rapid entry of the firefighting team to the seat of the fire — locate the fire and extinguish it.

2. Prevents mushrooming of products of incomplete combustion, most of which are toxic and all of which are combustible.

3. Alleviates conditions on upper floors and staircases such that civilians trapped within may assist themselves to evacuate rather than be rescued as casualties.

4. Raises the toxic level of gases (that which is responsible for most all of America’s fire deaths) above the floor levels so that civilians that are trapped have more time for us to find them.

5. Reduces and reverses the positive and exponential heat buildup that causes flashover.

6. In the case of trapped and pressurized products of incomplete combustion within ceilings under roofs or under high roof membranes, frees it to outer air above the structure where its ignition is of no consequence except the increase the ventilation. This prevents the “cold smoke explosion” in remote areas of the structure that has been trapping our firefighters.

7. More…

Remember, it is the primary and ongoing responsibility of all on the fireground, but especially those conducting truck functions, to LOCATE THE FIRE. If the fire location makes the vertical ventilation at THAT structure not possible because of the risk analysis of THAT fire structure, so be it. But for you to suggest that vertical ventilation should be removed from texts like hand pumps and manual aerial ladders is nonsense and irresponsible thinking. Slow down and spend some more time in dialogue and texts and critiques before you “throw the baby out….”

We are in the most dangerous profession in America, not because (as most critics proclaim) we have the greatest life loss, but because we operate in an uncontrolled environment all the time. It is up to the truck functions to make the environment of the fire building controlled to an acceptable risk level for professional firefighters to operate in. If that is impossible, we must change our strategy to achieve a relative amount of safety commensurate with out responsibilities and mission.

Without vertical ventilation, we have no choice except defensive strategic concepts on the structural fireground.

Now with all that said, there are three times where vertical ventilation is too dangerous to perform, ineffective and wasteful of time, and more important than vertical. (Just so you have the whole picture.)

1. Peak-roof dwellings that are NOT of balloon construction — delay ventilation of the roof until later, get the people out.

2. High-rise structures especially apartment dwellings — horizontal ventilation, not vertical, is the great asset to the firefight.

3. Buildings and structures wherein there is a release of heavier than air combustible gas.

But these three things are enough for another lecture.

BACK TO Q & A TABLE OF CONTENTS

© Copyright Firenuggets.com 2001 • Click here for Terms and Conditions of Use