The San Bernardino City Fire Department was kept busy this weekend with several vegetation fires and two working structure fires. Besides the regular gambit of medical rescue calls and traffic collisions, the SBFD started Memorial Day weekend with five vegetation fires in moderate wind conditions on Saturday. All of the grass fires were in various locations of the city and did not seem related.
Sunday followed with a working structure fire in a commercial building. 39 SBFD firefighters responded a ACE Radiator Shop. The commercial building was approximately 2500 square feet and was well involved with fire when the initial companies arrived on scene. Firefighters encountered several access problems along with an electrical panel that was involved with fire.
Due to the heavy fire involvement and the electrical problems, the SBFD was initially forced to fight the fire defensively until the electrical and access problems were resolved. One firefighter sustained a minor electrical injury and was transported to St Bernadine’s Hospital for observation.
On Memorial Day The SBFD responded to an occupied single family dwelling fire. The first arriving units found very ugly smoke conditions with no visible flame. The fire conditions were very near explosive or what firefighters refer to as back draft conditions. Very quickly, the fire conditions changed as firefighters were attempting to vertically ventilate the structure. Once the dwelling was adequately ventilated the fire was quickly extinguished.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
The house fire looked pretty hairball. I bet you guys thought you were going to lose it for a minute. Great job to the truck guys. I never realized how aggressive SB City was. Awesome job to the BC for keeping a good eye on everything and announcing it.
Looks like a vacant abandoned structure on the second one. Pretty cowboy.
Mr. Tuff, Not cowboy at all. I don’t know were you work but this kind of fire is bread and butter for us we see this a lot! I do see were you might think the risk was high for the gain if in fact this was a vacant/abandon home but it was occupied and lived in. Fortunately the residents were not home during this fire. The cowboy thing to me just implies lack of experience or not being safe. That could not be further from the truth here. This was a 900 sq. foot home conventionally constructed cut and stack, the roof on this was so solid there were no worries at all. I know this cause I was on the roof cutting the holes. Like I said above this is a bread and butter fire for SBFD in my eight years assigned to the truck I have been on this type of roof at least two or three dozen times. So if you could please, in the future try to get some more info on the fire before making such a flagrant remark. There are no Cowboys on Truck 221-A
Sounds pretty defensive. I am not attacking or criticizing, I was just stating that the house did not look like it was worth the risk from the video.
At one point, it looks like you had fire all around you. That my friend is pretty “cowboy” for a small house with no one trapped.
Enough with the stick waving as well, SB City is not the only department out there that gets fires on a regular basis.
LOL, Let me apologize to you Mr.Tuff. I did not realize that you were throwing down a compliment to the truck crew using the word “Cowboy” thanks for that we try our best here at the SBFD. I do, however, have to make a comment or two regarding your comments, that is if you don’t mind. First off, I can see your point about risk versus gain if in fact that house was vacant and abandoned. That being said, does that mean we would of let the house burn to the ground. Absolutely not! What we do is assess the risk versus gain by conducting a constant Dynamic Risk Assessment which includes a 360 around the structure, the fire conditions, building integrity, exposures, rescue, etc. and then based on that assessment the company officer will declare a mode of attack, offensive or defensive. This is what we do on every fire occupied or unoccupied. In this particular case even if this house was vacant we would have done exactly what we did because we DO NOT PROTECT SLABS we protect property and as long as the risk is worth the gain we will safely and aggressively attack the fire to protect that customers property.
Second, Mr. Tuff, our you insinuating that vertical ventilation is only necessary when some one is trapped? Now, I will say that vertical ventilation is a very good tactic for indirect rescue, is that what you meant? Ok, I will skip the ventilation class in this post. As for why we were on this roof cutting holes, look at the video again and check out that smoke. Would you want to be that guy going in to attack that fire with out vertical ventilation? I think not, you would not get very far into the structure and you would get very hot very fast. Right? Now I guess you could squirt the wet stuff through the window and try to put the fire out. Is that what you would do in this case? Just wondering. :)
Lastly, Mr. Tuff I was not trying to wave any sticks here just merely trying to educate you on the fact that the SBFD is a professional fire fighting organization with a great deal of firefighting experience and that we do not take the risks of our jobs for granted. Thanks for the dialog it’s been a pleasure.
By the way, who do you work for?
Okay Scuba.
Good job breaking it down Scuba. Tuffstuff did come across as sarcastic with the cowboy comment. What is you definition of cowboy Tuffstuff. You seemed to have ruffled some feathers.
You must log in to post a comment.