LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
More thoughts on fire investigation texts
I am writing in regard to the outstanding article “Fire Investigation Texts: How Good Are They?” (June 1989 FE). The author, David M. Birk, has opened my eyes to many astounding myths that only one hour ago I believed to be facts. His informative and inspirational style of writing proves to have originated from experience, knowledge, and love of the fire service.
I am currently working on my associate’s degree in fire science and have taken several courses relative to the material Birk refers to in his article. I hope that Birk will consider publishing a text with proven and relative material for use in future training courses.
This article and others like it have convinced me to subscribe to Fire Engineering. Keep up the good work!
Michael B. Nicholson
Firefighter
United States Air Force
I applaud David Birk’s article. I, too, have found that many fire investigation texts are riddled with unsubstantiated conclusions.
However, I was disappointed in that while Mr. Birk states that he finds the absence of references indicative of the lack of credibility of the books, he commits the same error. He fails to reference those same books that he is criticizing. This leaves me frustrated. How can I use his criticism if I don’t know what books he is criticizing? It’s not good enough to say that this includes all of the fire investigation books in the NFPA, NIST, and other libraries. Perhaps it was the Fire Engineering editors who deleted these references?
Birk is correct in that the use of “char patterns” is overworked in determining the origin and growth of a fire. However, he says that the charring rates are based on tests subject to the standard time-temperature curve of ASTM E-l 19. I wonder where Mr. Birk gets this information. ASTM E-l 19 doesn’t say anthing about char depth that I know of.
I was also disappointed that Birk didn’t give page numbers in his references. He made statements based on information from various sources such as the SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering. This is a thick book, and I’d have a tough time finding where he got his information.
Sure, the standard time-temperature curve doesn’t necessarily represent the temperature conditions in a specific fire. And sure, there are a lot of other factors that determine char depth besides time of exposure to heat. But at the same time char depth can be useful in establishing the origin of the fire and direction of spread. Just take the simple case of comparing an area where there is no char with an area with char. The conclusion that the fire was burning in the charred area is obvious.
In spite of some shortcomings in the article, I believe Birk is correct. There are a lot of “sacred cows” in the fire investigation business—information and conclusions that are incorrect but universally accepted by many fire investigators. I also agree that we should work together to move the fire investigation literature out of the dark ages. But I also think those technically trained, such as Mr. Birk, should lead the way. In view of this, perhaps he should consider joining the International Association of Arson Investigators Engineering Committee. This committee is comprised of engineers and scientists dedicated to just what Mr. Birk is proposing.
Robert G. Purington
Fire and Safety Consultant
Livermore, California
Air bag article right on target
I have recently read the article “Air Bags, Part 1” (June 1989) written by Capt. Ray Downey. I cannot tell youi how thrilled I was to see someone from the industry write an article so accurate and precise.
Please advise Ray that I am always happy to read his fine articles, especially when he writes about equipment I am acquainted with. No doubt I wish my company’s air bags had been pictured in the article, but I am more than glad to sacrifice that for the type of article that was written.
Keep Ray writing for you. He is sincere, is accurate, and wants to do the best for the industry. I’ll have that type of man working with me any time! Ray has done a super job, and the industry will certainly benefit from it!
Harry Metcalfe
Vice-President/General Manager
Vetter® Systems, Inc.
Warrendale, Pennsylvania
Building a stronger ARFF sector
First off, I must once again comment on the excellent publication you produce. “Timely,” “accurate,” and “informative” are key words that must be used to describe Fire Engineering. These adjectives particularly apply to Franklin G. Ausmus’ article “Haz Mats in Commercial Air Transport” (May 1989).
Hazardous material in air transportation has been a limited problem in the past and thus there have been no good training materials or articles on the subject. As this problem increases, it is reassuring to see the problem finally being addressed.
Unfortunately, articles such as this regarding aircraft rescue & firefighting (ARFF) are very scarce. The ARFF sector’s access to information and training material has been very limited. 1 think the ARFF is often treated as the orphaned child of the fire service. This assumption is changing though. To assist in this change, a new organization is being formed —the ARFF Working Group. Its goals will be 1) to disseminate information and training material regarding ARFF, 2) to develop a “goteam” to research aircraft emergency incidents from the ARFF perspective and to disseminate the lessons learned, Your recent article “Orange County Fatal Fire” (July 1989) is a fine example of this continued effort. However, nowhere in this investigative report or in the “Lessons, Reinforcements, and Directions” is there a mention of what was, in my opinion, a contributing factor in this incident: The lack of adequate manpower on the initial response, which is necessary to ensure the proper size up, setup, and attack, is contributing to needless injuries to firefighters.
3) to be a common voice of the ARFF industry strong enough to be heard by budget administrators and politicians,
4) to encourage other agencies (such as USFA and FAA) to develop a national focus on ARFF, and 5) to develop standards on tactics and operations.
Please send your suggestions to ARFF Working Group, 1561 Pensacola St., Honolulu, HI 96822-3881.
Paul G. Fox
Photo No. 1 Fire Sennces
Honolulu, Hawaii
Post helpful hints
When I first started in the fire service my encounters with Fire Engineering were few and far between. Being a young fireman, I didn’t know how or where to order the magazine—I could only count on finding a copy in the station. It didn’t take me long to realize the importance of having my own subscription.
I was reading “Yours or Mine?” (“Editor’s Opinion,” May 1989) about the importance of feedback. As I read through your articles, I find key points—things I feel are important for me to remember, such as acronyms (HA HA MINCE) and other tips, such as never going through a fire door without blocking it. Blocking a fire door seems like a very simple thing to remember but is the first to be forgotten in the haste of a fire situation. More than once I have found myself moving through sections of very large warehouses with few or no other exits except the fire doors.
During training, the goal of an exercise is to get water on the fire, make a rescue, get needed tools to the roof to vent the fire, and then wrap it up and go home. I know there is no substitute for a good, thorough training program; however, the smaller, more meticulous areas of firefighting are often overlooked. As I read articles in Fire Engineering, I find these overlooked points and write them down, placing them on my locker door to look at and remember on a daily basis. Keep up the good work!
Larry Bennett
Firefighter
McClellan AF.B. Fire Department
Sacramento, California
A simple tool for a tough incident
Regarding “Thinking About the Unthinkable” in the July issue of Fire Engineering, although the serious injury/death of a member is (without question) something tough to deal with, Joe Defors of the Lansing, Michigan Fire Department has provided us with a very simple tool that will enable us to handle the toughest of incidents in a simpler manner.
By using your magazine as a “clearinghouse” of good ideas, it saves all of us from having to “reinvent the wheel.” We sure appreciate helpful tips like this and will make a concerted effort to reciprocate by submitting similar ideas for other organizations’ use. I hope other departments follow suit.
Thanks again for putting together an outstanding publication.
William Goldfeder
Director
Loudoun County, Virginia
Department of Fire and
Rescue Services
Steam bums can be trouble
I enjoyed your debunking of myths (“Random Thoughts,” June and July 1989 issues of Fire Engineering). Here’s an apparent falsehood that has wide currency in the fire service community: “Wet firefighters get steam burns in situations where dry firefighters get no burns.”
I’m neither a professional firefighter nor a physicist, but it seems apparent that steam burns are a rarity in firefighting and radiant heat or hot combustion gases cause most of the burns called “steam burns.” I’d need a bit of solid evidence before I’d believe in the mythical “steam burn.”
David E. Gwyn
Shell Development Company
Houston, Texas
Editor’s reply: Thanks for the encouraging words on myths, fust some feedback: There are steam bums.
1. Rubber-covered gloves should be banned from heated atmospheres. Palms cannot breathe and do sweat.
2. Human beings (and firefighters) can operate in atmospheres of up to 300°F dry temperature. If the atmosphere or clothing becomes moist, bums occur at a much lower temperature.
3. During overhauling or fog operations, hot droplets boil and expand 1,700 times to steam at 212°F.
Conduct this test: Set an oven to 200 and then stand near it or put your hand inside. Then boil a pot of water to 212° and put a hand in that. Moisture is trouble.
Learning from fatal fire
It is distressing to all of us in the fire service to learn of the loss of any one of our members. We always try to determine the circumstances surrounding these tragedies in an effort to learn if our operation can be improved on in order to reduce the probability of a future loss.
We must begin to address the possibility that this contributed to the officer’s decisions not to seek his own water supply and to utilize a 1 3/4″ line on a 7,000 sq. ft. commercial occupancy instead of a 2 1/2″ line, which would have required more manpower. Although not addressed in the article, was the water supply exhausted and not supplemented because the pump operator was utilized to stretch a hoseline or place a ladder due to lack of manpower? One of the fireground pictures shows no one manning the pumper.
The comments regarding the performance of turnout gear and other protective equipment were interesting, but are firefighters being placed in jeopardy through the use of too much protection? Are nomex hoods, shirts, and undergarments encapsulating the firefighter so well that he goes beyond the point of no return? Progress and the protection of firefighters are extremely important. However, we must not allow our safety to be sacrificed for budgetary or profit concerns. Also, we must not lose sight of some of our basic firefighting tenets: adequate manpower to do the job and getting out when your ears start to burn.
George B. Tierney
First Assistant Chief
Lynhrook (NY) Fire Department
Thank you for sharing with us the investigation report of the tragedy that occurred on February 24, 1989 (“Orange County Fatal Fire,” July 1989 Fire Engineering).
After reading the story twice (once was not sufficient), I just wanted to compliment you on the methods you used to present it. We are going to use the article as a basis for a training session. All our members will be given a copy and be required to read and absorb the article. Then we will “desorb” the article with a thorough general discussion, paragraph by paragraph.
Our district has many buildings of the same construction as the Sunrise Gifts store. We have a high exposure to this type of collapse, and we may be able to prevent injuries. Again, thank you for the report.
F.C. Windisch
Fire Chief
Ponderosa Volunteer Fire Department
Houston, Texas
Photos of improper procedures
I have been in the fire service for 20 years and was a department training officer for seven years. I would like to comment on your editorial “What’s with Your Photos?” (August 1989 Fire Engineering).
I certainly agree with you, and sadly, that training has taken a back seat to many other fire-related activities. I also agree with you that a safe and properly operated fireground is a pipe dream.
What I don’t agree with is publishing photos of firefighters committing unsafe acts or not being properly protected on front covers of magazines. Too many times I have heard, “The fire service is over 200 years old and hits yet to be hampered by progress.” If we are going to use photographs to identify unsafe acts or unprotected firefighters, let’s do it where it will do the most good: in the classroom as a training subject or in a complete article in a magazine to help increase safety and safety awareness on and off the fireground.
Each year, our association conducts an annual photo contest for its members. One of the specific contest rules is that any photograph that illustrates a firefighter negligently committing an unsafe act or improperly protected is disqualified. We want the public and the media to see and understand the many dangers of our profession, but we need not purposely publish our mistakes for their criticism. Any criticism should be done using the photographs constructively during in-station training.
I realize your photos come from authors, photographers, and a photo bank. Could it be more advantageous for the fire service image if you were a bit more selective about your covers? By the way, the cover photo for the August issue was photographed by one of our members. Thank you for your consideration.
Paul W. Chybicki
Kentucky Coordinator
President
International Fire
Photographers Association
Rolling Meadows, Illinois
In “What’s with Your Photos?” (August 1989), you spoke of complaints you have received about photos of unsafe acts and improperly equipped firefighters being published in Fire Engineering. No one wants to be shown making a mistake. But can we afford to let vanity eliminate a valuable training tool? I think not. A mistake covered up is bound to be repeated.
Photos of improper procedures can, and often do, have a positive side. So that way of doing something isn’t in the book—maybe because no one else thought of it! What is w rong today can be an improved method of operations tomorrow. But without the picture, who’s to know? Your worthwhile idea is “waiting for water.”
John W. Oldham
International Fire
Photographers Association
Lexington, Kentucky
