LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Safety concerns regarding methods and techniques of vertical stokes lower
This letter is in regards to Kenneth Brennan’s article “Vertical Stokes Lower via a Roof System” (FIRE ENGINEERING, June 1986).
With eight years of technical climbing and high-angle rescue experience with county search and rescue groups, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service in Wyoming, I must say that this article was a dis-service to your readers, being inaccurate and incomplete.
I understood it to be a basic orientation to lowering systems, but sometimes, as in the case of high-angle rescue work, not knowing enough is more dangerous than knowing nothing. Furthermore, even the “urgency of the situation” does not preclude safety for fire personnel or the victim.
In reference to Mr. Brennan’s discussion on anchors, I found several problems:
- Anchors are either single or multiple, the equalizing and non-equalizing systems being subgroups of multiple. Outlines aside, these are my concerns:
- Multiple. The description and illustrations under this section in the article basically depict a single anchor, since they are all tied together in a non-equalized fashion. While it is true that the system will hold if one anchor fails, it is not true that employing such a tie-off distributes the load to each point equally.
- Equalizing. This system is moveable, yes, but more definitely, it distributes the total load to the anchor system more or less equally to each point in the system. By design, it allows for the re-distribution of load if one or more points fail or if the direction of the load changes. The equalizing anchor system is the only acceptable type for rescue work, since it provides the greatest margin of safety.
- Non-equalizing. This system is described to be useful when acceptable anchor points are some distance from the location where they are needed, creating an “artificial substantial object” from which you will lower. Again, unless available ropes are not long enough, these remote points should be tied together in an equalized fashion.
- Except in rare instances, the anchor points are selected based on where the lowering edge is or where the anticipated direction of pull will be from—not the other way around.
- Another problem I saw was the consideration given to the most important part of the lowering system, the belayer.
1 would also like to stress the need for inspecting the working edges of the anchor points and the lowering edge(s). Any edge that isn’t round and smooth must be padded or the rope or webbing will be damaged or fail under loading.
From the standpoint of safety, this person must be anchored separate from the system. The belayer’s anchor should be tied so that when he is in position, he is tight with the anchor. Fie should have on a harness or a loop of webbing to which is connected the anchor rope and a carabiner on the side which the belay rope passes through, to act as a safety. This safety carabiner, should the belayer lose control of the rope, maintains the rope along his waist. The belayer should be wearing gloves, especially when using a Figure-8 descender for a lowering device.
The Figure-8 can be used for lowering weights of 300 pounds, but for greater loads or longer lowers, other devices are better suited. With many hours in using Figure-8s, I have found it difficult to steadily lower any load, since one must allow for the brake hand to always maintain control.
No matter which lowering device is used, however, there should be prusiks on the active end of the lowering rope(s), connected to the anchors, to serve as a backup brake system should the belayer lose control, become unconscious due to smoke or injury, or lowering device failure.
Rescue rope systems must provide the greatest margin of safety to the rescuer and the victim if they are to be employed. Becoming familiar with the equipment and the forces at play involves a lot of time and practice, and insures that unexpected events can be managed without additional tragedy.
Pete Brewster
Coordinator
Emergency Management Division
City of Indianapolis Indianapolis, IN
Additional considerations on initial master stream attacks
Lieutenant Jeffrey B. Coffman’s article “Using an Initial Offensive Exterior Attack” (FIRE ENGINEERING, Training Notebook, June 1986) was well done. I would like to offer a few words of caution, however.
When considering the use of a master stream, we must first be as certain as humanly possible that no one is on or above the fire floor. This may seem basic, but it is not as simple as it sounds. Position and supply the master stream, but do not start water into the fire building until you are sure that no one will be exposed to the resultant heat and steam transfer.
When the absence of people inside the fire building is assured, another life safety consideration is necessary. If there are openings in the wall opposite the direction of stream penetration, a blow torch effect through these openings can be expected, especially if the fire is on an undivided floor. I have seen potentially lethal flames extend 10 to 15 feet from rear windows under these conditions. Obviously, anyone in the path of these flames will be seriously burned.
And, finally, beware of exposed openings in buildings across a narrow backyard or alley. It is entirely possible to drive the fire into one or more exposed buildings if this consideration is not made.
In my experience, interior attack often proves inadequate because of the initial use of attack lines which are not large enough to deliver the quantity of water necessary to meet the challenge.
Master streams have many valid uses, but, remember, great power must be used judiciously.
Roger P.Lanahan
Deputy Chief (retired)
New York City Fire Department
New York, NY
Getting a better grip on pike poles
Having finished reading Volunteers Corner in the May 1986 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING regarding hand tools, I’d like to make a suggestion. When hooks (pike poles) with either wood or fiberglass handles become wet, I have found that applying 3M’s coarse safety tread on the handle keeps your gloves from slipping off. Use contact cement to apply the safety tread to the same side of the pole as the hook. It has proven quite effective in our department and I hope it will benefit others with the same problem.
Jeff Rolfe
EMS Captain
Murwonago Fire Department
Mukwonago, WI
Our Letters column is becoming more informative thanks to you, our readers. Please continue to share your comments with the fire service community to help make the nation’s most unsafe profession a little safer.
