RngrVnc33
Forum Captain
Keepin' It Moist
Posts: 131
|
Post by RngrVnc33 on Dec 22, 2007 15:38:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wellingcountry on Dec 22, 2007 16:00:50 GMT -5
|
|
RngrVnc33
Forum Captain
Keepin' It Moist
Posts: 131
|
Post by RngrVnc33 on Dec 22, 2007 16:06:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 3105 on Dec 22, 2007 20:46:40 GMT -5
I just want to be 100% certain before launching a rant.....are those %^&*34 PPV fans running in BOTH videos?  |
|
RngrVnc33
Forum Captain
Keepin' It Moist
Posts: 131
|
Post by RngrVnc33 on Dec 22, 2007 22:46:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by opsoverkill on Dec 23, 2007 1:28:22 GMT -5
First two have the PPV in place do not see it on the 3rd. I have used PPV with initial attack many times and have had great success with it. In both video the PPV is not being used correctly. 1st video the window next to the door is already compromised so are they are doing is fueling the fire with the air. If they used the ppv in the rear of the structure and just used the front window as the vent hole condition would have been drastically different. As for the second in appears either they have not created a vent area at the fire or the vent area is to small. You can realize that due to the smoke pushing out of the area where the PPV is sent up. PPV is a great tool to have in your toolbox only if it is trained on and used correctly.
|
|
|
|
Post by 3105 on Dec 23, 2007 6:09:57 GMT -5
Ops....you and I are going to disagree (respectfully) on this one. It is my belief that in theory, PPV can be beneficial for fire attack, provided you have intimate knowledge of:
1) The structure's physical layout - rooms, voids, corridors, and stairways as well as...
2) The present location and condition of the fire
In my opinion, anything less means you're taking a gamble that an adjacent room or void that just about ready to rock doesn't light off when the crews enter....as the one video clearly shows.
I understand completely that the method is actively used on a daily basis by many departments, although it seems as though its popularity has declined a lot since being introduced, no doubt because of poor training and/or size-up. I also know that properly used, it "lifts" the smoke and makes the attack crew's job easier to find the fire, although I would also submit that improperly used, the reverse will happen: the fire will find the attack crew.
I know I'm something of a dinosaur, but the thought of having fresh air pumped up my ass as I going inside a burning building gives me a severe case of the willies. Using PPV to let the fire "show" is (IMHO) a "finesse" technique that should only be practiced by personnel who know its limitations as well as benefits.
Motown learned the hard way several years back never to use it with a balloon framed structure..there are just too many unseen/unnoticed pathways and void spaces to push the fire into....
So how can I explain all the times it works well? Either both of the above conditions were present OR just plain luck.
Now, having vented my spleen, I think that PPV is a superior method of ventilating once the fire has been located and knocked down.
|
|
Reverend
Forum Lieutenant
"Well done is better than well said" BF
Posts: 84
|
Post by Reverend on Dec 23, 2007 10:55:46 GMT -5
Ops, you make some good points, some of which have been proven. But I have to go with BC Bickmore on this one. There are two many unknown variables that can not be accounted for.
Building Construction- Old,new,alerations,renovations in progress
Search- How can crews search above the fire if we push it on them
Victim survivability- Structures are clear when WE say they are not when we are told they are. If the PPV fan is used in the initial attack before search is verified, any victims are DEAD. Yes the smoke may clear quickly, but only after we cooked the victim caught between the vent hole and the fire.
Training- this is a very cooridinated tactic. You better make sure all fireground personell are on the same page. This technique will certainly test the most well oilied machine.
Again it is a tool but I dont belive its place is on the initial attack, before we have more info on whats going on inside. Stay Safe Brothers
|
|
|
|
Post by opsoverkill on Dec 23, 2007 11:02:13 GMT -5
I agree with what you wrote and when I was writing my first post. I thought who would disagree? And you came to mind. Not because of you but the location you are from. Morrestown= Older structures=more balloon construction.
I have read countless of articles and trained many hours on PPV so I guess I am comfortable with it. But, you are correct if not used correctly you danger Firefighters and the people you are attempting to save. It comes down to training training training doing doing doing in a controlled environments.
|
|
|
|
Post by wellingcountry on Dec 23, 2007 13:07:03 GMT -5
Here is a webcast present by Fire Engineering about "Positive Pressure Attack for Ventilation and Firefighting" by Kriss Garcia and Reinhard Kauffmann. Kriss and Reinhard have played an important role in researching the tactical applications of PPV for structural fire attack. Tempest Technology is committed to supporting the efforts of fire service professionals to develop new Positive Pressure Ventilation techniques and applications. www.fireengineering.com/webcasts/webcastDetails.html?id=516 |
|
|
|
Post by shader101 on Dec 28, 2007 22:35:24 GMT -5
i think rev hit the naill on the head "cooridinated tactic. You better make sure all fireground personell are on the same page. This technique will certainly test the most well oilied machine".
how many FD's does that cover here or anywhere!
|
|
|
|
Post by wellingcountry on Jan 3, 2008 14:23:38 GMT -5
After watching the web cast I would have to agree that coordination is key. You also have to know what you are doing. The vent hole has to be just right and the fan placed inservice at the right time or everything is going to go south in a hurry.
|
|
