I am very new at firefighting and don't have much training or experience. I'm also new to the RR board and don't know much about communications technology or principles. If you believe that one, I'll tell you another.
Thirty-one residents displaced from 5 dwellings. Wow, sounds like maybe they were overcrowded a bit. And yes, there was extensive damage to many occupancies, but not necessarily due to fire. Since you've got so much firefighting experience, maybe you can tell me the tactical advantage to breaking out windows in the first floor of a rowhome in which there is a small bit of fire extension in the third floor from a fire three doors down. NONE! That's right, NONE. These are the actions of inexperienced "break stuff" firefighters with bad attitudes, poor training, and who have forgotten the goals of the modern fire service...
1. Protect life and human safety
2. Preserve property
3. Protect the environment
I am AMAZED that
Tommahawk said:
...each additional alarm brought two or three pieces of apparatus from the city?
since the city of York has only four front-line pumpers, one front-line ladder truck, three reserve pumpers and one reserve ladder truck. According to my arithmetic, the city would have run out of apparatus at the third alarm, assuming they could get recalled firefighters that quickly to staff reserve apparatus.
Now to calling additional alarms due to weather... umm, it was clear and cold. The weather problems didn't start until after second and third alarm companies started flowing water into windows from the street, causing extensive, unnecessary water damage to uninvolved portions of the exposure dwellings AND a nice glazing of ice on every exposed surface on the city block. But yeah, it's possible you're right.
So now you want to know my strategy for handling this fire... gladly...
How about sending the first arriving engine companies INSIDE the fire building and attacking the fire with handlines, while the truck company goes to the roof, makes a hole for vertical ventilation, then pulls the cornices along the front of the building and stops lateral fire spread (this simple action would have contained the fire to the home of origin and one other home as opposed to the fire or six homes it eventually affected). Second alarm engine companies enter exposure dwellings and prevent/stop interior lateral extension (using very little water to prevent unnecessary water damage to otherwise-minimally-affected occupancies), while the second alarm truck company opens up hidden fire in the origin occupancy and the main exposure. Third alarm companies stage their manpower to relieve initial personnel as needed. Yep, that simple. One alarm per occupancy involved. No more, no less. It works like clockwork in modernized, organized fire services.
But they did save a dog. And for this, KUDOS!
Then again, I could be wrong. Thanks for discovering the forum, Tommahawk, it gives me something to do and keeps my intellect in high gear.
