“The Franktown, Colorado, Experience”

The Franktown, Colorado, Experience

The Franktown (CO) Fire Protection District (FFPD) is a department in transition as the complexities associated with growth become a reality. Call volumes increase while volunteer firefighters and available funding for departmental operations decrease. When confronted with this situation—simply, the “do more with less” theory—managers must be open to all potential solutions, even those that may contradict traditional thinking.

FFPD is located approximately 25 miles south of Denver in unincorporated Douglas County, a county that ranks second in the nation for new residential growth. The district encompasses 155 square miles and is considered a bedroom community for the Denver Metro area. It is primarily rural residential in profile, with large lot subdivisions occupying most of the developed areas. Wildland interface is of primary concern to us. FFPD is staffed by 40 volunteer and two career firefighters operating out of three stations. We provide both EMS and fire protection services. Water supply for firefighting is accomplished entirely by tanker shuttles from developed water supply systems scattered throughout the district.

I had the opportunity to speak with representatives of ACFT about the Raven technology. My first reaction was that this tool—this tri-agent unit utilized by two firefighters in a manner consistent with the utmost safety and protection yet which would seem to give new meaning to the words “rapid intervention”—was too good to be true. If it could be done, I thought, someone already would have done it!

INITIAL TESTING

Nevertheless, 1 agreed to participate in the initial controlled structure firefighting testing of the unit, which began in September 1993 and continued through January 1994. The first live tests using the prototype unit were conducted on single-family woodframe residential structure fires. We began with single-room involvement, with rooms containing fuel loads equal to or greater than what normally are found in fires of this type. We chose direct interior attack as the method for extinguishment and used a dry chemical agent entrained with clean agent (halon replacement gas) to establish initial control of the fire, firing threeto five-second bursts of agent into the room of origin. Fire control was extremely rapid, with little or no burn-back noted. Heat reduction in the adjacent area, as well as the room of origin, was significant and unusually rapid. Firefighters did not experience the thermal impact from steam. The overhaul process began comfortably within one minute of fire control; overhaul consisted of applying small amounts of Class A foam to the remaining smoldering hot spots. Results of the initial tests indicated that, with modifications to techniques and application, superior performance could be achieved.

Additional testing of the unit consisted of multiple-room to full-structure involvement on nine structures ranging from 1,200square-foot single-story residences to 1,800-square-foot barns to 2,700-squarefoot two-story wood-frame barracks. All test fires had fuel loads consisting of actual furnishings, wood cribs, and oak pallets. Prebum times ranged from 10 to 25 minutes and were gauged to be representative of actual alarm and response times. Extinguishment of all these structures was performed from the exterior, with initial knockdown accomplished by introducing the agents through one natural opening. No manual ventilation was performed during these tests. Extinguishment times for the tests ranged from under 10 seconds for the smaller structures to 30 seconds or less for the larger ones. In all cases, a remarkably rapid decrease of interior structure temperature was noted, with temperatures associated with the fully involved multiple-room fires reduced to near ambient temperatures in from one to three minutes after extinguishment. Overhaul of the test structures began after the one-to-three-minute time frame for visibility and temperature reduction; overhaul was completed in times ranging from five to 10 minutes using small amounts of Class A foam.

Continued testing of the system currently is underway, which will provide verifiable information on the system’s effectiveness. Residential structures will be used; and temperature, gas, and oxygen levels will be closely monitored with scientific equipment.

IN SERVICE

In February 1994, I placed the Raven prototype unit in service in FFPD. The unit has been assigned to respond on all calls requiring firefighting apparatus, including structure fires, wildland fires, and EMS calls involving transportation accidents. To date, the unit has been used on several brush fires, a mobile home fire, and numerous transportation accidents, including a twin-engine plane crash.

We were surprised at the effectiveness of the unit on four brush fires, each greater than two acres, particularly since we did not test the unit in such applications. The brush fires began at ground level grass and proceeded into the Gamble Oak—our most common brush type, a dense plant that grows from near ground level to a height of 12 to 14 feet and is difficult to extinguish when on fire. We attacked these fires with dry chem and Class A foam in combination. The agent was very effective in penetrating the dense Gamble Oak; stream reach was 90 feet, and we used the wind to assist in dispersing the agent, thereby controlling large areas of fire.

Large and/or fully involved structure fires are not a frequent occurrence in our district. However, on the afternoon of March 18, 1994, we received an alarm of smoke coming from a mobile home. The location of the structure was at a concrete plant. Weather that day was clear with constant winds out of the southwest at 25-30 mph. The alarm response normally would have been two engines, three tenders, and a rescue company; but based on volunteer availability, only one engine, one tender, and the Raven unit could be manned.

Dispatch confirmed the structure fire and notified us that our neighboring department was sending units to the scene. On arrival, we found a 12by 60-foot mobile home with smoke and flame showing. Approximately one-third of the interior was involved. Fire had breached the outer wall on one corner of the structure on the downwind side. Smoke and flame were also showing from the underside of the trailer. The trailer’s wheels had been removed, and the frame was in direct contact with the ground on one side. Poured concrete supported the trailer on two other sides, and the space on the fourth side was covered with wood skirting. The wind was pushing the fire under the floor and down the length of the trailer. The fire had penetrated the floor at the end of the structure where the fire reached the concrete barrier.

Before handlines could be placed in service, the Raven unit was deployed. Initial attack with the Raven was made from one end of the trailer through a small window on the burning side. A five-second burst of dry chem was fired and killed the flames in the end room. The nozzle then was advanced to the center door, and one additional burst of agent was fired toward the end of the trailer, knocking down the fire. Within seconds, the visibility in the trailer cleared sufficiently to observe portions of the floor that had been penetrated by fire from the underside. Fire had burned through the floor and still was burning on the underside. The line was advanced to the floor openings, and single bursts of dry chem were fired under the floor toward both ends of the trailer.

Overhaul was accomplished with Class A foam. Total time spent for this operation was approximately 15 minutes and was completed by a three-member crew using the Raven handline. Overhaul was completed before the engines and tenders could break down hoselines and portable tank operations. Damage to the trailer was extensive; however, outer walls and the roof remained structurally sound and many of the resident’s personal items were salvaged.

My time spent testing and using the Raven unit has been a learning experience. Our department has benefited in many ways from this technology. While we will always require conventional fire apparatus, we now can deploy rapid intervention units to alarms while control and extinguishment still are possible. In combination with properly manned engines and other apparatus, I believe this tool has a place in today’s fire service.

LAFD SUV in the ocean

Los Angeles Firefighter Swept Into Ocean as Mudslides Hit CA

A Los Angeles Fire Department vehicle was pushed into the ocean as heavy rains sent debris across several roadways.

Grandville (MI) Fire Truck Hit While Responding to I-196 Rollover

Michigan State Police are reminding drivers to pull over for emergency vehicles after a fire truck was struck Wednesday night.