10June/July 2020Oklahoma Firefighter
n
NEAR-MISS REPORT
By Greg Lindsay
The Way Things Were Change in any job is inevitable. The fire service is not immune to change, just reluctant. We have learned to do our job in a way that has proven effective over the years, and because of the dangerous nature of our jobs, we tend to want to stick to what works. It’s not hard to see why we choose to rely on our good experiences. There have been many studies identifying how firefighters make decisions. Mostly, we recognize a situation and decide on a course of action based on a previous experience; Recognition Primed Decision Making. We use the things we have seen and experiences we have used, then apply those lessons in the things we do daily. Having this skill saves time when making sound decisions quickly under pressure. For the most part, fire does not change. The things that are changing are the fuels we have in our structures. The furnishings we use are different than they were in the past, the building materials are different, and even the way we live has changed. We all know how an ordinary combustibles fire will progress. We just need to consider what the ordinary combustibles are these days and adjust our tactic to address these changes. Reluctantly, we are changing. How should we go about making these adjustments in our decision-making process? One of the things about how we work is to rely on proven practices to safely perform our job. Without the proven experiences it’s difficult to implement new tactics under pressure. Changing practices may look good on paper, but when firefighter’s lives are at risk it’s hard to elect something other than what has worked well in the past. The time to try new tactics is in a controlled training environment. The indication for trying new tactics should be before an injury occurs, but we have to understand how the tactics work in the first place. The featured report for this month uses a tactic fire companies employed 10 years ago. Before the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) and Underwriters Laboratory (UL) studies helped explain how different nozzle streams effected fire behavior, few departments used a transitional attack and opted for the direct method.
PORTFOLIO MONITORING with CLAIMS FILING and LEGAL GUIDANCE With Kessler Topaz’s robust, integrated, and comprehensive monitoring, claims filing and legal services, institutional investors have come to rely on our one-stop program to fulfill all of their fiduciary obligations related to shareholder litigation around the globe.
CURRENTLY PROVIDING LITIGATION MONITORING SERVICES WITH COMBINED ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT EXCEEDING $3 TRILLION
FILED MORE THAN 20,000 CLAIMS ACROSS MORE THAN 800 CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS
SecuritiesTracker.com
OKC Fire Department
Consider this report and use the outcomes to identify how we may have changed the flow of assignments in the first few minutes of an incident.
Stove fire quickly grows with help from wind Published: 12/30/2010 (http://firefighternearmiss.com/Reports?id=5220)
Companies responded for a “stove” fire. Initial reports from 911 center were, “Fire on a stove, occupant thinks fire is out.” Response time for initial companies, (two engines [heavy rescue OOS], auto-aid engine and command officer) was less than 5 min. Initial first-in report was light smoke showing. By the time the command officer jockeyed his vehicle into a good position, the report was heavy black smoke with flames out of roof. First-due engine was making the hydrant at time of first-in report. They lead out with a 1 3/4” pre-connect, performed a 360, and readied to make an attack. The engine officer reported flames out a kitchen window starting the siding and soffit area on fire. The first engine company began an initial push where they were met by thick black smoke. They were being assisted by the second engine. The ladder company was given the assignment of ventilation. Companies were inside, trying to make a push. The ladder officer was in the process of a 360, when the entire back of the house (kitchen, dinette, family room) flashed over, and the windows failed. Companies never made it further than 10” inside the front foyer. At this time, the wind began pushing the fire back inside the structure toward the companies inside. This lasted for approximately 2 minutes, until companies were pulled out by the ladder officer (C-Division) and a defensive stance was taken. Accountability checks were made. Crews brought a line around to C-Division and knocked down Division 1 fire. Lessons Learned • Fire growth was faster than anticipated due to building construction. • Weather conditions affected fire growth and travel. • Foyer was 2-story open area and wind was pushing fire towards the interior companies. • Second company needed to bring additional attack line instead of assigned S&R. • Companies moved with purpose, but speed needed to be increased.