STATter 911

If I was the owner of the exposure home, I would be a bit upset right now. What the hell were these guys doing? The fire was obviously already too far ahead of these guys, how about containing it so that it doesn't burn the whole freaking block down? Boy, you guys really know what you are doing. Oh wait - it must have been Montgomery, Howard or AA county there screwing this up right??????
 

What the hell was that ladder doing over the garage? Why throw a ladder to a structure that has fire through the roof? Who is going up there? What for?
 

I don't like to throw stones. But as a firefighter in a small rural community, even us po'dunk USA fire services would not let an atrocity like THAT take place!!!
 

What ever happened to RECEO?

Clearly no viable rescue, so why not deal with exposures? Whybreak out windows in fully vented house when it's running down the block?

Pi@@ poor use of resources, some IC ought to have his head handed to him/her. Did this IC go to the Charleston school of incident command?
 

Obviously none of you Donkeys were there. An aggressive interior attack was initiated. Fire was then found to be on 3 floors and into the cockloft. I know that all you monday morning quarterbacks are critiquing this video, but, if you had one ounce of firefighting knowledge you would know that once the shingles start burning down there is no way to knock it from the inside. RECEO - no rescues - then move onto exposures. If you put the original fire out then you don't have an exposure problem. The IC did a great job.
 

I will agree with the comment that if you put the fire out you don't have an exposure problem if you will agree that if you don't know how to put out a fire you will always have an exposure problem. Come on, get serious. Are you really going to try to justify turning a single family house fire into a block burning? You don't need to be a quarterback to figure this one out. The football would be smart enough to know the residents would have done a better job with a garden hose. Then incident commander should be removed from operations and held liable for the destruction of property.
 

Thats a joke if the IC did such a great job then why didn't anyone take care of the exposure till the dam thing was on fire, with the amount of fire they had when they arrived they should of put a line on exposures instead of trying to be glory boy's like always and making parking lots!
 

I didn't see any sign of an aggressive interior attack such as smoke turning to steam. I guess when you have that much fire on arrival and pull a 100 gpm line, your going to a gunfight with a plastic knife. No wonder the lady was so upset-she expected firefightters to show up and it looked more like a circus. this would be a good video to be used for purposes of training-what not to do.
 

In 37 years of very busy duty this is one of the worst examples of a department burning down a structure. The interior attack is fine but the IC has to see the bi picture. The Delta or 4 exposure was smoking and finally lit off with no one the wiser. Then the garage was attcked from the left pushing fire further towards Delta.

This will be in a lot of firehouses around the nation under "What Not To Do."
 

WOW!! In P.G. they can't even surround and drown the right way!!
 

It sure is easy to critique a fire after it is out. It isn't as easy to be one of the ones putting it out or trying to put it out. It's a shame that there are people posting on what a mess this fire was. I bet that 90% of you belong to departments that run fires like this once every twenty years.

Using RECEO and line placement, answer me this. At what point do you decide to redirect lines to exposures? I certainly don't think it is when you have three floors of fire - companies searching/operating on the inside - and - are unable to confirm if there are rescues to be made? When do you jeopardize interior/search crews safety, for the sake of an exposure.

Three floors of fire, three lines operating, where does the forth line go? It goes to back up one of the 3 lines working the fire.

The IC did a good job. If the interior crew would have rescued civilians, the IC would be hailed a hero for his actions.

---- And again, obviously none of you Donkeys were there. An aggressive interior attack was initiated. Fire was then found to be on 3 floors and into the cockloft. I know that all you monday morning quarterbacks are critiquing this video, but, if you had one ounce of firefighting knowledge you would know that once the shingles start burning down there is no way to knock it from the inside. RECEO - no rescues - then move onto exposures. If you put the original fire out then you don't have an exposure problem. The IC did a great job. ---
 

It's not a lie if you believe it.After 30 plus years in the fire service, all of it at busy houses that went to at least 10 fires a week like that one, the worst run operation I was ever on pales in comparison to this. I don't know by what standard you guage the IC 's performance, but it must be some scale I am not familiar with.
 

I think the Donkey that you are referring to is the guy on the ladder. During most of the video he is seen getting his butt whipped by the window and the screen. Good thing he wasted all that energy doing that. Absolutely no smoke vented from that window. Another fine job by the heroes from PEEGEE.
 

I'll bite as a "Donkey."
Presuming this raw footage was in the sequence it was shot . . . and since it was "raw" it had to be . . . you're right. There were no rescues and none to be had.

This building was a goner when the first company arrived and there would have been no survivors. Had the IC done a 360 before establishing command and reporting the size up, he/she would have been able to discern there would be no salvageable victims in the structure. As the one who evidently was on the scene has acknowledged twice, there were no rescues . . . and none to be made.

The IC also would have felt the radiant heat on the side of his/her face as he/she walked along Side D.

Three interior lines in this structure are a waste. This building is a write-off and the first lines should have been protecting exposures.

This appears to be an example of the "moth to a flame" syndrome of which all of us are guilty from time to time.

BTW, 36 years experience here from tailboard to Chief of Operations.
 

Just confirming that this is the raw tape as it was presented to us by Tom Yeatman. Tom provides unedited tape from his camera that we put into our system and then edit for stories in our newscasts. In this case I just had them stream his entire tape (about 13 minutes).

Statter
 

Glad the Volunteers Saved another one... Idiots
 

Looks Like a good time for a 1619 task force...they would have known what to do...
 

WOW... Too many cowboys, never loose seeing the big picture or in this case the block...
 

I have been a career firefighter in PG for 20 yrs. I am also active in my union (Local 1619). This usually doesn't happen at night. Generally fires like this only occur during the day when the majority of the apparatus is staffed by us. I was suprised to come from Bowie and see this amount of fire.

I am not sure what the best thing for exposures is. I know that I teach my crew that rescues are the most important.

Also, I don't think that the career major that was in charge did anything wrong. He has a lot of experience with large fires, especially in strip malls, which are far more complicated than a simple house.

If it is found that the career Major that was in charge did anything wrong, I am sure the first thing they will address is him standing in front of the building with out proper PPE.
 

Everybody loses buildings at some point in their career. IF you have been an IC for more than 10 years at a busy department this will happen.

Still this was one of the worst performances on video in my memory. The homeowner and neighbor should demand an investigation.

As to experience, I've had 18 years as a District Chief in a large department with 34 total years.

Is the reporter going to look into this or let it die?
 

Don't you guys have SOP's telling what companies to go where? Which company (3rd or 4th) was suppose to go to the back of the house. Obviously these tards have no clue of what to do on the big one... Try a drill on SOP's, Fire Fighting Ops in Single family homes every once in a while. I would hang my head in shame to say to someone that I was on that fire, what a joke.
 

I don't care about career/volly. We are talking about standard firefighting procedures! This is embarassing for any department. You guys need a back to basics course for IC. A clipboard is fine but you still have to put people where they can also protect exposures. Terrible.
 

Guess who they sent in to finally get the job done. RESCUE ENGINE 33 KENTLAND.
 

How many of you back seat drivers were at this fire? The crews did there jobs. what else can you ask for? you place that fire in any other fire district no one would have mad an interior attack and act like the OUT-STANDING fire men they are. so what the boys went in and had a little fun. That was a Volunteer fire and well the paid men i saw were out side riding the BLS and ALS units and or looking atthe fire and thinking about what time they were getting off. Good job boys.
 

That last post was funny. It was definitely a volunteer fire-lack of command and accountability of units on scene. Go ahead and live in your fantasy world thinking this was a fantastic job done. What crews went in and "got it"? From the video it looks like the only water put on the fire was from the exterior of b quadrant.
 

No excuses please! chalk this Incident up to a lack of experience and mistakes made.

By passing the blame or making excuses for one's actions, will only create questionable leaders and future politicians.

How can we expect change if we can't except responsability for ourselves.
 

Rescue Engine 33 from Kentland.Wouldn't that be like having a fork and a spoon combined,and calling it a spork. Neither function of the spork works real well, too much lost with the other function.
 

The crews on this fire should be ashamed of themselves. Aggressive interior attack? Maybe they should have recognized that the fire had already gained more momentum than they could compensate for upon arrival. Don't use the excuse that crews were inside trying to make rescues. There was verbal confirmation that everyone was out. Sounds like a lack of communication to me.
"At least they went in" is not the commentary the homeowner wants to hear. What a great decision that was. An evac tone was given and the response is "Fire isn't out yet and we have a partial collapse." YOu guys are lucky you didn't kill someone.
A ladder pipe early on would have done alot more and kept the exposure from lighting off.
Looks like the 1st alarm companies responding need some refresher training.
Why is it shameful for people to post about this. Most of you clowns have no problem providing all of your vast knowledge on everyone elses fires. Why wasn't all of that experience used on this one????
Sorry to say - a donkey would have done better in my opinion.
 

i heared more glass breaking and almost no water being applied on the fire no mater what sum may comment with that many firefighers on the scene the ic or even an engine or truck officer should have delegated someone to protect exposures to aid the ic were supposed to be there to look out for each other
 

Is there any way to change the audio on this to circus music?
 

Agressive interiror attacks work. I'm all for them. However, in this case the fire was badly mismanaged.

The spread to the D exposure didn't have to happen. You need to pull your heads out of the mythical kingdom you live in and work on training to put the fire out-not spread it.
 

This is not an example of all IC's in Prince George's County. They have some very competent IC's both Career and Volunteer.

This is just ashame and that is putting it lightly, I can tell by most of the comments of back patting and hi 5's they are coming from volunteers that have no accountability demanded upon them. For anyone to make a comments of we just went in and had a little fun you should be immediately thrown out of the department, the hell with due process, career or volunteer that is just an absurd statement to make. Look at whose expense you are having fun and if that is why your here your in the wrong business. I am not career, I am volunteer, always have been and this was the most disgraceful fire I have ever in my 35 years been on. Volunteers wonder why they are loosing ground in PG? This is the perfect picture example, no accountability or professionalism shown and then they publicly icing it with their stupid idiotic attempted justification comments. This excuse can't be justified, people need to be disciplined and disciplined hard and immediately. I'd say you'll get your due process when you show accountability.

Oh, and Rescue Engine 33 from Kentland didn't put that fire out, this time they did what they were told to do and did it well which is surprising because they are usually the largest part of the volunteer problem of freelancing and lack of accountable actions.
 

In my 18 years of service, the past 5 as a company officer, I have always had it drilled in my head to "risk a lot to save a lot, risk little to save little" and "do everything you can to keep one structure fire from becoming two".
I'm as aggressive an officer as there is. In my opinion the fastest way to put out a fire is to get up close and step on it's throat. However protecting an exposure that's in imminent danger is a higher priority than making an interior attack where the residents have confirmed that everyone was outside and the fire was obviously in a well advanced stage. Nobody likes to be stuck outside on an exposure line...but it's a job that has to be done from time to time. Sadly, because too many departments have now become "exterior only" departments it's become a "manhood" thing to go inside no matter what, and that anytime you work exterior you aren't doing your job as a firefighter no matter what.
 

I am still not sure why their is all this talk about Volunteers having made all the IC mistakes. The Incident Commander was a Career Major. You can see him running around on the video with his coat open, helmet on, and clipboard in hand. If things were that bad, I am sure that the Career Major would have corrected them.
 

WOW, 36 years tailborad to Chief, 37 years in a busy dept. 18 years, 5 as an officer yet NONE have the N#Ts to post there name and where they are from.

Dave, looks like you have you own little version of the watchdesk.
 

I'm 36 years from tailboard to Ops Chief, and there is no need to post name or home department.

The video speaks for itself.
 

NO, you're anonymous, the fact that you say you have 36 years and are a Chief is your story, post something to back it up. Otherwise just cheap words like the rest of the anonymous quarterbacks on here.

Yes the video speaks for itself, but what does that have to do with your credentials?????
 

1st of all, for those of you who weren't there, and that pretty much means most of you, what makes you so knowlegable about what happened? You only get to see what the camera sees. 2nd, for all of those who like to fantasize of having 30 plus years on the job from tailboard to chief whatever, you'd better get ready for school this fall, I hear the first year of college can be quite stressfull if you don't prepare correctly. You are nobody to anyone if you are too much of a coward to state who you are and where your from in fear of being caught out by someone who might know who you really are. 3rd, there were both career and volunteer firefighters at this fire. They both had a hand in how this incident played out. And for all of you paid personnel who think you are so much better than volunteers are, take this into account. You work two mabey three days a week. Volunteers work 24/7 and receive no money for their services at all. Not only that, but you yourselves were most likely volunteers at one point, remember where you came from.

I myself am David Y. from station #13 (Riverdale Heights) in PG County Maryland, 8 years experience in the busiest true combination fire department in North America.
 

Hey David Y from Riverdale.

Get over It. Everyone makes mistakes. Learn from them.

Steve Hartman, Fairfax County, Retired with 32 years of service.

Ps: and yes I was a volunteer and saw a lot of screwups on calls and still see them, by both volunteer and career.
 

David Y of Riverdale

I agree with you. If you don't have enough courage to post your name, then don't go running off at the mouth.

Steve Hartman, Fxco Retired
 

First, I would like to say thanks to Mr. Anonymous. I believe that the fire could have definitely have gone better. For example when we rolled up and dropped the brake, it could have "MAGICALLY" extinguished itself, but unfortunately this did not occur. One has to remember that we are trying to restore order to a chaotic scene. For those of you that were not there, here is a little glimpse of what was going on. Units arrived and reported heavy fire from the structure. The bulk of the fire was running up side "C" into the cockloft. Every floor was not engulfed in flames contrary to the opinion of Mr. Anonymous. This is clearly evident if you watch the footage from side "A". Therefore, the house was not written off and an interior attack was initiated. Also I would be ignorant to not perform the proper searches of the structure when there is a possibility for survival. Exposures were taken into consideration, hence the request for a "Task Force". Once, additional crews were available, they were redirected to the exposure. The safety of crew members on location was of paramount importance. If you listen to the audio tape of the incident, you will hear repeated requests for a size up from side "C". Crews were given the opportunity to do what they are trained to do. No, you don't always come out on top, that's one of the facts that comes along with this line of work. Burn down the block! I don't know where you came up with this one, but it's your opinion. My outlook on it is this, I don't and I believe that most of the people I run with go into a situation with a "write it off attitude". I am all too familiar with this train of thought. The organization I work for has many officers that have one of the following attitudes. They don't believe in the abilities and training of their personnel, They are afraid that some one might get hurt or the property and possessions of the people we are sworn to protect are not worth our time effort and resources unless we are protecting them from something less dangerous, like a busted sprinkler; then we will do what ever it takes.
Other factors that had to be dealt with were two injured firefighters, a lady who was clearly upset (about her daughter, not our operations. If you take a second to listen to the video you will hear this) and numerous injured citizens. I am sure you could have done a better job and maybe you should apply or volunteer here so we can all marvel at your wisdom, but I sure you'll say "P.G. county, I would never go there they are out of control, the volunteers suck" or some other excuse. As far as training goes, I am well trained and educated. I have technical training as well as management training from both volunteer and a professional organization. I am only posting this for additional information about the fire. This is not an excuse for how operations went or how command was handled. This will be my only post; any others will just be someone stirring the pot. I do want to say that I have full confidence in all companies that went to work that morning.
Charles D. Fowler IV
 

You should have put a line on the exposure early on. End of story. It's OK to make mistakes, just admit it and move on. Excuses only make you look worse.
 

chief - Thanks for your comments. As someone having spent a lot of time commanding incidents in a large urban setting while volunteering as a chief in my town.

The fire was a screw up. There's no reason not to get a line to the delta exposure. Zero. Put a line into the house, do your searches but you have to protect exposures. Once the fire starts venting through the roof it's time to move at least one line into place.

Best of luck in the future
 

You guys are silly.

What the problem is, and there is a problem is that command has to hold hands. I bet that most of the companies committed themselves, even the 4th due engine, without once thinking how their actions would affect the operation. I am willing to bet that no one thought, maybe the best thing to do is to protect the exposure.

So let's take a look at this. Can we blame it on command? Well sure!
But he is not alone. The way the system is configured we send 4 engines and 3 special services on this run. The first engine starts the attack with the primary function of protecting the search. The second engine backs them up with the primary function of protecting their egress. The third engine is supposed to go to the most threatened exposure and finally the fourth engine is supposed to standby, awaiting orders from command.

This system has redundancies, like the secondary water supply. It is redundant because the primary water source is usually a WSSC hydrant capable of well more than 1,000 GPM. The engine on the hydrant could have supplied the entire fireground. Another redundancy is the back-up line. It is not there to fight fire but just in case the first one fails, or becomes overwhelmed.

Finally, we send more than one chief, just in case the first one was having a bad day. Four engines and three specials means only seven pieces of apparatus, the upper limit of recommended spans of control but still manageable. the other chiefs are not for fire control, they are there to ensure that mistakes are correct, and deficiencies covered.

My last point is that the fire department in general and PG County in particular simply does not know when it is licked. Just because we can put out 95% of our fires with an 1.5" line and two firemen, does not mean that we can put out 100% of our fires with an 1.75" line and four firemen. Sometimes you have to take the wagon pipe, or the 2.5" with an 1-1/4" tip@50 psi NP and use that to darken down the bulk of the fire. We have to learn that there is no shame in that.

I have never posted in this venue before and probably won't again. When this forum arrived I hoped that it would not devolve into some twisted mirror of the watch desk, but it has. One would think that Mr. Statter would have some interest in maintaining some credibility but that does not appear to be the case. Hope is not lost though. This forum can be the place for the constructive exchange of ideas about this business. It can be a breeding ground for information exchange locally. But that will take some effort on the part of Mr. Statter.

This fire did not turn out well, but this man, Mr. Fowler is not alone. Everyday the radio is alive with the sounds of people making mistakes, incident priorities getting all twisted, units not taking their assigned position, special services vying to the right not to be the RIT. Ah....it was a screw-up but in the grand scheme it was not a big enough screw up for people to be this mean and unproductive. This is some silly ...
 

First of all, thanks to Chief Fowler for his perspective on the fire.

Second, to the above anonymous poster concerned about the comments section of STATter 911, it may surprise you to learn that I agree with most of what you are saying.

Despite what some may believe, I would much rather read the type of comments you and Chief Fowler and some of the others have made. The ones where people disagree, but do it without the attacks and the bashing. The ones that focus on the issues.

While I moderate the comments, there are some guidelines I have to follow. I have rejected only a very few (almost all of them for language). I will go into detail soon on the blog about these comments and the general guidelines.

If you look around at the comments sections on firehouse.com, washingtonpost.com, charleston.net, thewatchdesk.com and just about every other one I have seen, they have the same problem.

It would help me if you and anybody else who wanted to participate, would do the following exercise for me. Look at this single thread of more than 40 comments. Pick out the specific ones you would reject and tell me why you would reject them. Send me an email (dstatter@wusa9.com ... I will keep your anonymity) or just post a comment with the information.

I will use that as part of the blog entry I am working on where I will discuss the comments section. I think it may help you understand the dilemma that I face in this issue, and may shed some light on all of this for me.

Thanks,

Statter
 

Dave,
My thoughts. I think for a start you should eliminate "anonymous" as a signature choice. I think that should not be allowed because I think even though if you log in it is still essentially anonymous at least you can follow a person posting multiple times. Personally I don't see that any of the posts here are worthy of censuring. In my mind that is a big step to try and figure out plus a bigger headache for you to actually do it. I think language censorship should be the limit although I can see how it would be tempting on some entries. But this is still the US and freedom of the press, etc. Overall, good blog, keep it up!
 

So a champion of free speech is going to start....never mind. I won't visit again.
 

To NamesChuck or is it just Chuck,

Now there you go jumping to conclusions. Actually what I am trying to show is just how slippery the slope is when you start censoring. I have already received some emails on this topic.

Look, there is no one who is more a target on here than me. It goes with the job. I wouldn't couldn't censoring that criticism.

Personally I would like to see the discussion elevated a bit and fewer attacks. Sometimes that seems impossible on the internet. But I have been impressed with many of the emails and comments that have come along since we started 3 months ago. I have learned a lot from them. Even the ones I might not agree with.

I will have more in a few days on my thoughts and some of the emails and comments I am receiving on this topic.

Now Chuck, if you thought I wasn't going to censor the comments, would you have complained and said I should? Just wondering. But then again, from what you wrote you may not be reading this. You are always welcomed back.

Statter
 

To NamesChuck or is it just Chuck?,

Now there you go jumping to conclusions. Actually what I am trying to show is just how slippery the slope is when you start censoring. I have already received some emails on this topic.

Look, there is no one who is more a target on here than me. It goes with the job. I wouldn't couldn't censoring that criticism.

Personally I would like to see the discussion elevated a bit and fewer attacks. Sometimes that seems impossible on the internet. But I have been impressed with many of the emails and comments that have come along since we started 3 months ago. I have learned a lot from them. Even the ones I might not agree with.

I will have more in a few days on my thoughts and some of the emails and comments I am receiving on this topic.

Now Chuck, if you thought I wasn't going to censor the comments, would you have complained and said I should? Just wondering. But then again, from what you wrote you may not be reading this. You are always welcomed back.

Statter