Perhaps the most important advantage of the two-pump operation is that it enhances firefighter safety by providing a measure of redundancy in the fire attack.
Measure success of two in/two out
It has been a couple of years since the fire service has begun to implement the two-in/two-out rule. It is time for us to take an objective look at the changes that have occurred as a result of this rule, particularly in residential fires. We should compare statistics of civilian deaths and injuries, property damage, and firefighter injuries nationwide with those prior to the rule. It is also time to use better measurements of our effectiveness. Just as in EMS incidents, where response time is no longer an effective measure (time to patient contact is a much more revealing measure), there should be less emphasis on response time to residential fires and more emphasis on the time that members start and finish primary search (from the initial call), as well as extinguishment time. These measurements would more likely show variances that may have occurred since the rule.
Have there been delays in searching residences in cases where there are no outward signs of victims inside? Probably not, but it would certainly be worth looking into. If there have been delays, then perhaps the rule needs fine-tuning. Many departments follow their own interpretation of the rule, which results in a lack of continuity. The citizens are not aware of many of the regulations and standards we follow. They simply expect that firefighters will show up and perform the job they have always performed. It is up to us in the fire service to ensure that the people we are paid to protect are not shortchanged by our own interests. The best way is to measure the impact of standards on the safety of citizens as well as firefighters.
Ray O’Dell
Captain
Dallas (TX) Fire Department
Operating and supply pumper concept
For many years, firefighting in the District of Columbia has relied on the operation Michael Terpak describes in his article “Water Supply: The Operating and Supply Pumper Concept” (October 2001). We refer to this as “two-pump operation.” Prior to budget cutbacks in 1992, each engine company was equipped with two pieces of apparatus-the hose wagon and pumper-which greatly facilitated this method of operation. This also gave us the ability to split each engine company complement during emergency conditions. We have continued to use two-pump operation after changing to single-piece engine companies.
In our experience, it is important and required that the engine company in the attack or operating position lay out a supply line before entering the block. This generally en-sures that we can establish a continuous water supply rapidly, even if the supply or hydrant company is delayed.
Perhaps the most important advantage of the two-pump operation is that it enhances firefighter safety by providing a measure of redundancy in the fire attack. In the event of a mechanical failure of either engine during pumping operations, the remaining engine generally would be able to maintain an effective pressure. This is done by the attack engine pumping inline without added pressure from the disabled supply engine or by the supply engine’s increasing its discharge pressure to “pump through” the disabled attack engine.
In the normal midrange of capacity pumping situations common during interior firefighting activities, this redundant capacity can generally maintain adequate flow and pressure to keep the troops out of trouble because of mechanical breakdown. This safety factor alone is a good reason to consider using the two-pump method.
Richard Sterne
Battalion Chief
District of Columbia Fire Department
They are alive in you
Regarding Bill Manning’s “They Are Alive in You” (Editor’s Opinion, October 2001), while I have not always agreed with Manning’s thoughts and opinions on fire service issues, there is nothing more I can say about this editorial. This superb piece speaks for itself and espouses so eloquently the thoughts that so many of us were unable to put into words. Thank you.
Joseph F. Sauerwein
Chief Fire Marshal
Town of Brookhaven
Long Island, New York
Beware the truss
I just wanted to thank Francis L. Brannigan for his wonderful articles in Fire Engineering. I never miss them. I have been a part-time firefighter for the past eight years in a small department in northern Indiana, and his teaching is something I look forward to in every issue. One thing that is etched in my mind and that is on my mind at every fire is his warning, “Beware the truss.”
Tim Berger
Firefighter
Auburn (IN) Fire Department
Correction
The October issue mentioned that FDNY lost more men in one day than in its entire history. This is not true. I believe FDNY lost 774 firefighters in the line of duty prior to September 11 and 341 members on September 11.
Matt Beatty
FDNY Ladder 103
Brooklyn, New York
