Click here to follow STATter911.com on Facebook (hit “like”)
The most recent video from Highland Park, MI via HPZ1442. Here’s his description:
We arrived to find this house fully involved, with occupied exposures on both sides. A defensive attack was decided due to obvious reasons. A quick search of each exposure house was done and we set up our ladder for tower operations. Contained to one home.
Do you want to sell a rig? Click HERE to find out how with SellFireTrucks.com.
Also on STATter911 …
- Helmet-cam video: Three homes burn in Highland Park, Michigan. One person dead. – February 22, 2013
- Helmet-cam: Highland Park, Michigan house fire. – July 12, 2012
- Pre-arrival video: Five-alarm fire in Santa Clara, CA. Townhomes under construction threaten occupied buildings. Video from four sides. – May 12, 2012
- Helmet-cam: Two more from Highland Park, Michigan. – August 1, 2012
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Here is a prime example of grabbing a crosslay for everything! Heavy fire showing, and we pull a 1.75″ crosslay. Do you know why we do that? Because we always pull a crosslay. I bet if the video went further, they would pull another and another and another! Please somebody out there find a video where the department uses the proper size line for the amount of fire on arrival. Does anybody lay a supply line in to a fire anymore? Are we becoming too lazy to pick it up after we put out the fire? Somebody needs to rewrite the basic firefighting handbook. It should say: 1. Drive past and ignore all hydrants. 2. Always pull crosslay no matter what fire conditions are. 3. Take all 2.5″ preconnects off rear of engines because nobody seems to know what they are used for.
People should actually think before they post. Think about the fact that you can only see so much in a short video clip. A. there was a hydrant right in front of the truck that we know works because we have had multiple fires on this street. B. yes, 2 crosslays were deployed to protect the exposure houses. We had 3 FIREFIGHTERS on this scene. @ homes needed a quick sweep, and 2 homes needed water on them quickly. This worked out perfectly as it always does. C. The ladder is being set up for your BIG WATER. withing second of the close of my video we had large amounts of water on this home. The fire went out. No one got hurt. And no other homes were burned in the process. Thanks and be safe.
That looks like a nice neighborhood.
Great work as usual.
What are you you using for a camera?
Thanks brother. Contour ROAM
Have we abandoned the Big Fire = Big Water theory? I gotta question a 1-3/4″ line as 1st line pulled on a fully involved structure fire.
I’d say that heartfelt “Damn!” on arrival was one of the best understatements I’ve heard lately…..
Probably would have pulled a 2.5″ for this one? Just saying.
Not a real bad time running the line (1 min 10 sec). If you were going defensive how about the wagon pipe quickly to darken down the fire while a hand line was run for the exposure. Not there so not sure how sound the fire building was but how about cooling down the exposure for 10 seconds then darken down the fire and push in, (best way to cover an exposure is put the fire out if possible) Strike Da Box! K
Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Come on guy’s SEATBELTS!!! At least the driver, remember we come first.
What the heck kind of hose load is that? That pulled horribly.
Heres a thought. To protect the exposure that is obviously not on fire yet put out the big fire.
Posting video to the internet that shows members of your department not wearing seatbelts = PRICELESS!
Great work with pulling the line to protect the exposure. No “moth to flame syndrome.
Wow.could of made an attempt to darken down the house and make a push..put water on the fire and half your problems are over. So, if it’s too much fire does this dept. ” let it burn”?
The house is literally “fully involved”, nothing will be salvageable and it will likely be torn down sooner than later. What exactly are you going to “make a push” on?
In areas with a lot of arson and abandoned property, “let it burn” is not exactly an inappropriate strategy with this level of involvement. If history shows that burned houses frequently don’t get razed and removed, then protecting exposures and allowing the building to burn up can be wise. What’s better for the neighborhood, a burnt shell of a house that could be there for a long time and possibly burn again or a vacant lot?
From the one who posted the video. “When you have 3 firefighters to perform searches and deploy exposure protection, an 1 1/2 does the job. Our ladder was being set up for big water.” There is your answer
Can’t argue with the ones asking about a larger handline but you really should do some research on Highland Park before going all out on your comments. Plus you saw only 2:30 of a working structure fire and think you have all of the answers! I am no where near Highland Park but can’t seem to get the BMA (brotherhood my ass) slogan out of my head that Fire/Rescue’s Nozzelhead coined a few months back!
It always amuses me how supposed “brother firefighters” can watch a small, limited view clip of an incident and come to some of the conclusion they do.
Having the 1st engine go straight in while the 2nd engine establishes the water supply is a valid, proven tactic in the fire service. Since the video doesn’t clearly show the 2nd engine not dropping a supply line, comments asserting a lack of water supply are inappropriate.
The “big fire = big water” line of thinking isn’t necessarily wrong, but considering that in this limited view, the small handline was used predominately for exposure protection, the criticism of pulling that line isn’t well founded IMO. Supposedly the ladder’s pipe was being prepared for use and anybody with experience with this type of fire (a SFD literally fully involved) would know that a 2-1/2 line is not going to put this fire out. Exposure protection is the priority on this fire and the smaller line is adequate for that job.
The wagon pipe would certainly be a good call on this type of fire, but you have to be in the position to use it. I don’t think they had the positioning to use it, but since their truck was in a good position to use the ladder pipe I don’t see a problem with the engine placement.
The fire building is a small, woodframe house. It has heavy fire showing from every opening. Applying the deck pipe into the main body of fire until it is knocked down followed (quickly) by a couple of handlines to complete the knockdown of whatever the deck pipe can’t hit. Darkening down this fire quickly limits or e liminates any exposure problem. An aerial master stream is probably not the best tool for this small structure. Glad none of the Brothers were injured at this job. Stay safe.
2.5″ for exposure protection. Great idea. Especially when you are checking 2 houses for possible victims.
Seat belts: you guys are saying you never unbuckled while pulling up the block as these guys were? Sure
We’ve seen enough videos that had they tried, they could have darkened the fire down with the line he had.
Nice work.
Dear 8truck,
A ladder pipe is of limited utility in this situation and though it is not a ‘wrong” answer, the better answer is to use the wagon pipe or at least a large caliber stream to darken the fire down and then mop up with a smaller line.
While the concern for the exposure is laudable the question you have to ask is whether you are removing heat from the exposure faster and/or more efficiently that the fire is generating heat.
The likely answer to that is no. It therefore becomes logical to take another tactic, put the nozzle in the window. By so doing you are able to put the water on the burning surfaces, halting the pyrolisis, and therefore conducting exposure protection. In other words you are killing two birds with one line.
Now for sure it can be reasonably argued that a pumper mounted master stream would have only been effective on a small part of the structure with the interior walls providing a barrier to effective penetration. But even if i accept that argument I still resist the notion of not putting water onto the burning surfaces. Thinking about this one compartment at a time even a 1.5″ line will make an impact. The only thing the 2.5″ line does is to make that impact faster ( but with the trade off that it is too hard to move around with just a coupla guys….oh well the fire went out I suppose, what’s there to talk about really? Except for the seatbelts of course….
I wasn’t saying that I would handle this fire the same way but everyone asked why and a firefighter from HP left an answer on youtube. I was just relaying the information.
I think you have your comments backwards regarding the ladder and wagon pipes on this fire. The ladder pipe is clearly the better choice from what I can see in this limited view. The wagon pipe would be deployed from the street and be able to hit at most 2 sides of this building. There appears to be no overhead obstacles and it looks to be a “full-size” aerial so with good positioning they should be able to hit 3 sides of the building from up close along with being able to apply water from above.
While some of your point regarding exposure protection are for the most part correct, it assumes that suppression efforts on the main fire are inadequate or non-existent for an extended period of time. The lines pulled were adequate for exposure protection for the short amount of time it likely took to get their ladder pipe into operation.
Dear Mark,
Ray Charles can see that you know these guys. What were they searching the 2 houses for, victims you say. Victims of what?
Why yes, yes I have taken my seatbelt in the fire block. But I never stored it behind the seat as is the one behind this guys seat. And, NO, as a driver I don’t remove my seatbelt until the truck stops,,, why would I.
Here is a quote for you, ” It is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” …
LOve you guys. So quick to armchair QB. Its all good. This fire scene was not perfect. I personally would have liked to see the deck gun used when we first arrived. I dont make those calls. But the OIC who does has 18 years of experience fighting fires in this city. He has seen a lot. Though he does not know everything. All in all, job well done. The houses were searched for people…sometimes, even though it seems obvious to get out, people dont. Sometimes, people are in wheel chairs. Sometimes we have to help. Had we not searched these homes quickly, and the fire spread and there was someone inside, could we live with that? NOPE.
The seatbelts…yep, He took his off as we pulled up. I usually do. Our chief has seen this video. And he has no evidence to say that we did not have our seatbelts on while enroute to the fire. Nore did he even mention it. He knows we wear them.
The LET IT BURN deal. That was a policy that DFD commish came up with. We are not DFD. We are just surrounded by them. We have no such policy. And if you watch my other videos, and read the comments, you will see that we are incredibly aggressive. Even when MOST of YOU do not think we should be.
Look, I get it, we do it a little different. A little old school. But take some things into account. The guys on this FD have seen more fires in one year, than most will see in a career. We have a very small amount of manpower with extremely limited mutual aide. We have the bare minimum equipment. We have to make it work the best way we know how and we do. We pull up to houses like this ALL THE TIME. Yea, sometimes our hose pull might be a bit sloppy(sometimes it gets loaded very fast in order to leave a fire scene for another). Yea, sometimes we could have done something different. But all in all, you really cannot think we dont know these things. And that we dont train on them, or read about them. Or watch these very videos and critique them. Take a video of any fire scene from anyone of your FDs and I promise you that someone on here will pick it apart.
You need to also remember that these are clips of fire scenes that last for hours. And its a view from the eyes of ONE pipeman. You cannot see half of what is going on.
I am glad there are so many firefighters out there with so many great ideas. And so much training/experience. Thats a good thing. It really is. But before you get on here, and bash a dept, or a group of “brothers”, think about it. Be careful how you word things.
Stay safe brothers. Thanks for watching.
Hey good video – shows what you can do with 3 guys. I ride a 2 man crew as well, and love it when these KIC’s always hem and haw about how big fire = big water. That’s all well and good when you have initial manpower to do it effectively.
(RANT) But in the real world, pull a 2.5? HAVE YOU EVER PULLED STRETCHED OPERATED A 2.5 BY YOURSELF?!? Have the other guy help you? Who is gonna tag the hydrant? Who is gonna run the pump? Great, I’ll believe it once you strap a camera to your head and post your video to youtube. I’ll love watching you drag a charged 2.5 hose/sequoia tree across the front lawn by yourself, remember to keep it flowing and pointed at the fire too. I bet the owner of the exposure will love it when you blast the siding off their house and blow the shingles off their roof, and break out every window with the 2.5 stream…(END RANT)
HPZ, keep the great vids coming. Hopefully someday we’ll have the manpower in the world of the KIC….until then stay safe and keep doing what you’re doing.
HPZ, I’m not sure what’s more entertaining with your vids, the video itself or the comments that follow. This one was definitely the comments.
Your Friend, I do know these guys, as HPZ has posted a bunch of his vids. I know them as brother firemen. But I don’t know them personally, I’m about 150 miles west of them. And as far as I know, never even been in Highland Park proper. Been in Detroit, not sure about HP. And I believe your comments were answered by HPZ in the above post.
Have a lovely day, though.
Thanks for the support brother! Stay low and be safe!
“Stay low and be safe”
Ironic coming from the guy and his crew who have their seat belts tucked away. Even if it was just for the block, you have 2 other apparatus rushing down that same block who’s to say they aren’t paying attention to the fire and don’t see you guys brake.
Sooooo, what you are saying here is that we should keep our seat belts on until the incoming apparatus comes to a complete stop???? Really? The guy popped his belt off because the driver slowed for a hydrant. Then the OIC told him to continue because there is a hydrant right in front of the house. You can kinda hear the confusion in the back as to whats going on with the hydrant. Sorry to offend you by saying “stay low, be safe”. Since the job we have is inherently dangerous, I probably should stop saying it all together, because running into a burning house is DEFINITELY NOT BEING SAFE. (sarcasm)
Stay low, be safe. Take a breath. Calm down. Ill take a picture of me wearing my seat belt on the next run, just to make you guys all feel warm and fuzzy.
With the amount of work Highland Park FD gets, and their very limited resources, I think they know what they’re doing.
Line deployment was pretty lax, pull the shoulder load onto your shoulder and then the dead load. Looks like the crosslay was packed pretty rough giving some problems pulling the line.
I think they did a great job, keep up the good work guys.
They had the entire department there and did a great job. All these negative comments are total BS. Highland Park, do the best you can with the least amount of resources. Stay safe, keep your pride and moral as best you can. The Brotherhood needs to cut these guys some slack.
The defense of attending hundreds or thousands of fires gets as tiring as the constant criticism. It is possible to be come tactically stale. Take some 20 year vet of a department that has “alwyas done it this way” and add the next few generations of hire who also continue the same type of operations and you get the same approach to the same problem year after year, fire after fire. But it’s ok because we have responded to and extinguished more fires than…(fill in the blanks). That’s NOT to say there are no some well-experienced, capable, and down right excellent firefighters and officers in the organization. Some of us have never responded with a ful NFPA-SUGGESTED staffing on engines and trucks. Some of us have never had the warm fuzzy feeling of “2 and 2″ with 4 on each. So you adapt. However when you ARE always short-staffed, you learn to apply the most amount of water in the shortest amount of time, evaluate the priorities, and decide…engine or truck work first? Anyone who says you can’t stretch, charge, and apply a 2.5″ line with only ONE firefighter has not been doing there “out-of-the-box” training homework. Put TWO on that big line and you CAN, in fact move it. Especially on the exterior. There are ways to get more gpm capability from just a couple “back-step” firefighters. Application of a bigger line here between the exposures would certainly give you much more knock-down power. However, most of this is beyond the ability of the nozzle-welding firefighter. Tactics and equipment are usually addressed by admin and ops command. You can’t blame the borthers who follow policy or are doing what they are told. Give them a garden hose and they are going to work their butts off to make it work, somehow. and in the end, NOBODY wants to hear their department get verbally beat-down, especially after doing the next to impossible with so few guys.
Sure, it’s possible to become “tactically stale” and “we’ve always done it this way” can be a warning sign that we may be falling behind and not keeping up with current fire service trends. However, there’s an important underlying point that you seem to have just dismissed out of hand – if it still works, is there truly a need to change just for the sake of changing something? So yes, the fact that a tactic has worked “year after year, fire after fire” does make it OK to continue its use. When you are always short-staffed, you learn how to work quickly and efficiently. Simply applying “the most amount of water in the shortest amount of time” would mean that we always deploy a master stream first, which is hardly the case.
Love the videos HPZ, keep them coming.
Also like it when you can add what the videos don’t show, even if it’s a rebuttal of the kic.
HPZ,
I saw nothing wrong with pulling the crosslay for exposure protection. Why lose another home when you can protect it while the other guys are getting the “big water” going? Sometime we KiCs get enlarged keyboards when we see something that we “think” or “know” is wrong. And really, if you’re half a block away, why not remove your seatbelt and get ready to go? At any rate, stay safe. You guys see more fire there in a week than my deparment gets in a month.
Pedro… YES!!! One firefighter can easily pull and operate a 2 1/2 handline using the pin and hit technique. Do it all the time. It just takes training. There is no reason why one firefighter couldnt have streched the 2 1/2 to a tactical position and operate it on the fire. We have had this fire many a time as well and majically when using the 2 1/2 the fire gets darkened down really fast. Our last one was 4.5 minutes from mostly involved to knock down. I would take that long just to set up a ladder pipe as some here think is a good idea.
If it takes 4.5 minutes to get your aerial set up and flowing water, either your personnel or the aerial itself are slow, maybe both. I know my department can set our aerial (E-one HP75) and be flowing water in half that time. While it’s true that the 2-1/2 could be used as you describe, we’ve had this fire many times as well and have had good success doing it the same way HP handled this one.
William Loo
I agree, the solo 2.5 is a do-able technique. I agree with big water big fire. Where I disagree is the KIC’s assessment of THIS video; our KIC’s have raked HPZ over the coals for “foolishly” and “stupidly” pulling the smaller crosslay. The 2.5 is an aggressive and offensive move. It’s also risky. If you don’t have a guaranteed water or 2nd plug, you can go from hero to zero really quick. You empty the booster tank in 2 mins, but what if no one brings water right away? So just conserve water, right? Well, what the hell is the point of pulling the 2.5 if you’re gonnna conserve water or wait for it? The primary merit for the 2.5 is volume (rate of application), and the calculated risk of deploying it as the initial attack line, is how much water you brought and how quick you can bring more. This house was a loser on arrival (That is the one thing no one has disagreed upon so far). The initial tactic was defensive. There are a lot of situations where 2.5 as the initial attack line is the RIGHT move, even if you have to do it solo. This video is NOT one of those situations. Based upon the conditions seen on this video (volume of fire and staffing particularly) I don’t believe the advantages of the 2.5 outweigh the drawbacks, not conclusively, not definitively, and certainly not convincingly enough to warrant the comments that would seem to indicate such proof exists.
smart man right here. Stay safe brother
I figure all you experts could offer up some training to the HP guys.
HP, like Detroit sees more fire, than 95% of you experts.
The whole dept has less men than some fire stations in this country.
I am guessing that this building is about 15′ by 50′ ? Multiply that by 2 stories and you have 1500 square feet. And it looks like the bottom story is not completely involved yet. So let me get this straight, there are some departments that would set up an aerial master stream on this?!?
Yes, and it works quite nicely. Now I can’t speak for other departments, but I’m not talking about simply pouring water on this from above in “surround and drown” style, but rather using the aerial in more of “blitz” fashion.
You have a good point. They absolutely could have saved the back wall of the 1st floor
if they had just charged in with a 2.5….
I love the armchair Battalion Chiefs who comment on these fire-rescue videos. First of all, if you’ve got time on the job, you would recognize that there’s no such animal as a perfect firefight. These are not training films — they’re real world firefights — complete with changing conditions and staffing limitations. Not much you can do with a 3-man engine company as there’s only 1 firefighter available for the first-off handline. Protecting the exposures is the primary role on this job — as the firefighter says, the ladder company was preparing to deliver the big water. Think before you type!!!