FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Operational => Topic started by: mark on December 20, 2005, 07:13:00 PM
-
I am just after any views that people may have on chimney fires.
Currently my employers are trying to get us away from using roof ladders and try and utilise the HP more as it a safer working platform, whilst i understand that this is not always practical/usable at all incidents i was hoping that some of you may know of any brigades that have changed PDA's to reflect this or are most brigades waiting for OIC's to "make up" for HP's.
Any feedback gratefully received
-
This is happening more and more. One of the most hazarous 'routine' jobs is that of a ff on a roof scenario, especially at this time of year. If you've got a HP close by, chances are its not turned a wheel all shift, so why not eliminate the risk of ff's on roofs and use something that made for it.
I Know some of the N/W brigades are doing this.
-
I would utilise the aerail applaince as well, whenever possible. Particularly in view of the number of log burning stoves and ranges that we now come across. However the aerial is not exactly easy to get to rural parts due to distance and the access on site is more often than not insufficient. We have extended the number of stations with safet roof work training facilities and will continue to use roof ladders at most incidents for the reasons above.
-
I agree with fireftm
Once again, it's all about risk assessing. If you have an arial nearby and a possible achievable pitch for it, for God sake use it. But make sure you are satisfied it'll do the job.
I have experience of attempting to use a ALP mounted on a huge Volvo F10 8x4 chassis for a chimney in a listed building in a surburban street. It took quite a while to move cars to get it in position. The huge outriggers then smashed the paving stones damaging the cable TV wires underneath and then the ALP operator told me it wouldn't reach!!
Needless to say the punters whose chimney was (still) burning weren't too impressed (neither was I with the ALP operator who had previously said it was "no problem" !!!)
-
I think most brigades are encouraging the use of ALPs & TLs when you need to go on a roof. Why not if you can get one in there its alot safer! I never feel safe on a roof ladder.
-
I have (for too many years) used and seen used Chimney Rods & hose from the hearth, - with 99.9% success provided the flue has no sharp bends. It works in my book.
I have been told it can be achieved using PPV & DP - I have no doubt it works but am curious as this would provide limited cooling - why no reignition? Any experience out there?
As for ALP I'm with messy, nice idea but practically impossible at many sites.
-
Talking of messy: I have little experience of PPV fans but I reckon it'd take a brave IC to committ the use of DP and PPV in a domestic dwelling!!
Can you imagine the embarrassment if something went wrong and little old Mrs Smith's terraced cottage was filled with DP?? - A white Christmas indeed!
-
Working within Tyne & Wear, and also being Tactical Ventilation Instructor I have never heard of PPV being used to tackle a chimney fire!
-
use ALL the 'tools' you have or can get in order to provide a safe and effective method of dealing with the incident - simple principles are always the best ones to follow
dave bev
-
Rips we use the fan regularly, to remove the smoke, more often we find log burners and ranges where the chimney fire has also filled the house with the products!
Of course you see somewhat less of these fires. I am not sure that the fan can be used in anyway in an offensive attack on the fire itself though.
-
fireftrm,
i do not mean not using PPV for clearing smoke after during a chimney fire, of course that has happened. what i meant was that i have never heard of anyone using to tackle a chimney fire in an offensive manner!
this is what i was referiing to as a previous message had suggested using PPv to tackle a chimney fire.
-
In that case I wholeheartedly agree, I cannot see how it could be used. After all the fire is driven by the fact that it is a flue, so adding movement to the air in the flue will do nothing except help it burn faster. Of course using the 'let it burn out' technique for chimney fires this may well be a way of tackling them? The idea of forcing DP into the flue using the fan is interesting and may have some merit, but I have little confidence about the extinguihment having sufficient cooling power to prevent reignition. Also this does seem rather like the sledgehammer to break the nut.
-
If you used DP, even if it was ABC Powder you'd have to still break up & damp down the burnt fuel or hang around for a couple of hours (at least) watching for re-ignition whilst natural cooling occured. AS you know DP chemically inhibits, ABC additionally fluxing over particles, but zero cooling effect.
Mind you if you want rapid knockdown its useful, but you still want to cool off later.
Although DP is notoriously messy, it could be argued it is easier to hoover up a lot of DP than deal with the effects of tens of gallons of water - perhaps this is why it was suggested
-
Why would any professional firefighter cause damage with tens of gallons of water outside the chimney?
This is one of the bread and butter jobs where the FRS excel. We pride ourselves on leaving the property as clean, if not cleaner, that before the fire. Great care is taken to ensure that no more than the required water is applied and the hearth is cleaned thouroughly on leaving. Our main attack is from the roof with water trickling from a hosereel, or from the hearth, usually with one bucket of water and a stirrup pump. The latter is becoming less common as fitted stoves and ranges seem to be prevalent and roof attack is required here. In either case the attack involves someone at the hearth/fire grate checking for any water coming down. This indicates that the fire is either out (no longer turning to steam), or is above (if fighting from the hearth) the area where the water is being applied. It is often easier to trickle water from the top and wait for the first drips at the hearth, but the tactics will depend on the layout of the flue and the safety considerations for the firefighters. Never do we cause damage from tens of gallons of water in the house. So another destruction of the rationale behind using DP as any clear up would only be needed if the messy powder system was used.
-
"Never" is a strong word.
But are you saying fireftrm that the old stirrup pump technique is not the most common now? I thought a hose reel on the roof was old fashioned and almost taboo with all the H & S zealots today!
-
Well thats fair enough if you use the method you describe - I was trying to rationalise why someone was considering DP as a fire service attack rather than a purely first aid attack.
It seems that no one can find a reason to use other than the tried and tested methods (adjusted to H&S as appropriate)
-
Ian - never is not a strong word, it is an accurate one though. Perhaps the importnat point is the first line description of professional firefighters.
As to the hosereel from the roof, perhaps you could explain how to attack the sealed flue of an AGA, or the fashionable stove, from the grate? As these are now as common as, if not tending toward more than, the traditional open fire the attack from the pot is necessary. You will see a discussion about this in another thread. As to the stirrup pump being the modern preferred method quite the opposite is the case, indeed they are becoming very difficult to replace.