RIT Deployment “Firefighter Triage”

Article Updated 05/07/2023

The Ultimate Test!

RIT DEPLOYMENT

Firefighters rescue civilians daily from the interior of a working structure fire and SAVE many lives by going interior to suppress and search for trapped occupants. Civilians have incredible respect for firefighters because saving lives is our top priority. Respect is enormous and not to be taken lightly. However, we can quickly lose it. Generally, most civilians respect the average firefighter and place them on a pedestal compared to other occupations. Firefighters should respect this and work to continue this admiration that is placed on our calling. I appreciate the admiration and respect that most civilians give us. Still, it is not what I’m looking for concerning earning respect/admiration. The civilian is very high on my priority list.

Still, the firefighters I’m responsible for are VERY high on this same list, and they frequently RISK their lives to save others. I want to feel confident I can command a Firefighter Rescue Operation “Mayday.” A Mayday and RIT operations is the ultimate test I may face one day as a Fire Ground Commander. I think about it every single day. I study previous Maydays and RIT OPERATIONS. I also do a lot of WHAT IFs. What if this happens, What if that happens, and how would I/we deal with that? We cannot do too much “What If Thinking.”

Recently I notified my battalion that we would be performing a RIT DRILL and gave them some details. I explained it would involve a down firefighter trapped in a collapse that required them to use airbags in a low visibility environment under challenging conditions. They had a few weeks to prepare/ train however they deemed necessary.

The drill involved two firefighters trapped in a basement under a simulated collapse. We used couches with bags of concrete as the weight to simulate a floor on top of rescue dummies. One of the dummies/downed firefighters only wore an SCBA mask and no airpack. Another dummy/downed firefighter with an airpack and SCBA mask in place was ten feet away. The low-air alarm bell had just run out once the RIT entered the basement. We also had smoke detectors and pass devices sounding. Distracting noises are critical for firefighters to learn the difference between a pass and a smoke detector. Smoke detectors can cause a false attraction and delay air/rescue to a trapped firefighter. Once the RIT locates the down firefighter, they must ID, check the air supply, and silence the pass. The three initial actions must occur in unison, and the RIT must report the findings to the incident commander. History tells us that we could find additional firefighters other than the one or ones that called a mayday. Historically, many firefighters located by a RIT never transmitted a call for HELP” MayDay.”

During the drill, each RIT found the firefighter with strictly a mask on first. They did the above priorities the best they could. They could not ID the firefighter because the firefighter was not adequately marked, YES, adequately marked. All firefighters operating on the fire ground should have their name on the bottom of the mask, front piece, and lower part of the bunker coat. In addition, the air pack’s bottle band and front shoulder strap must have the company designation. With these markings, IDing a down firefighter and confirming their assigned company is easy. Many fire departments still need to properly ID their firefighters, which amazes me. I have operated on the fire ground with well-identified and poorly-identified firefighters, which is a huge difference when firefighters are visibly marked.

Now back to the RIT drill.

Once the RIT gets the first firefighter on air and silences the pass, they hear a second pass alarm ten feet away. This downed firefighter has a fully operational airpack that is very low on air or has just run out. Now the RIT has a serious decision to make. Do they try and get RIT PACK between the two and provide a regulator to the mask of the first firefighter and trans-fill the second firefighter? Doing so would be a great option, but in this scenario, I purposely spread the two just enough that the RIT hoses would not reach. I wanted them to decide, YES, downed firefighter TRIAGE. Nobody wants to talk about it.

Yes, everyone goes home, but they might not go home alive. With this reality’s obvious nature, we must train to save those that can be saved. We do it with civilians, and it is a probability to be faced with the same situation during a RIT operation. I placed Worcester District Chief Mike McNamee’s picture on my screen saver in December 1999 and left it up for almost a year. I looked at his picture daily and thought about the decisions he faced and the ones he made that night. I have never met him, but he has impacted my career and voyage to prepare for the ULTIMATE test. So do we disconnect the first firefighter, trans-fill the second, then return to the first and re-hook up the regulator? I don’t know; each situation is different. Consider the downed Firefighters’ location, previous radio communications, signs of injuries, firefighter age, and other considerations we would prefer not to discuss openly.

DOWNED FIREFIGHTER TRIAGE.

Once you have established air to the down firefighter, the extrication process begins. What tools will you need, and have you trained to use them in this environment? Are the tools set up for RIT operations? Airbags used in a RIT operation must be set up correctly by the RIT Team with ropes or webbing to assist in dragging and operating in a hostile environment. They also need to be marked appropriately with isolation valves already pre-connected. The hoses need to be marked so you can identify them in low visibility. The setup of the control box and hose needs to be streamlined. When operating two bags, you should have three different colors, something to help manage the hoses during deployment and while setting up on arrival at the downed firefighter. It can be frustrating if you have not trained and thought out your airbag operation.

Back to the top.

The civilian respects you, but do your fellow firefighters RESPECT YOU?
Have you genuinely worked at preparing yourself for the Ultimate Rescue, a Firefighter Rescue?

I want the civilians I swore to protect to respect what I do and how seriously I take my calling. But more importantly, I want my fellow firefighters to feel confident that I have done and will do whatever is necessary to save them if they get caught or trapped in a fire. I hope to fulfill my calling.

Every day must be a Training Day!

Curt Isakson

Additional Note!
Do not run out of air as a RIT TEAM member with a FULL RIT AIR PACK in your hands or available. The RIT TEAM may need to share the RIT PACK. Practice trans-filling yourself. It takes practice..

The Ultimate Test!

RIT DEPLOYMENT

Firefighters rescue civilians everyday from the interior of a working structure fire and SAVE a lot of lives by going interior to suppress and search for trapped occupants. Saving Lives is our top priority and this is the reason civilians respect firefighters so much. Respect is huge and should not be taken likely. It’s not easy to earn, but can easily be lost. I think generally most civilians respect the average firefighter and place them on a pedestal in comparison to other occupations. Firefighters should respect this and work to continue this admiration that has been placed on our calling. I appreciate the admiration/respect that most civilians give us, but it is not what I’m looking for in relation to earning respect/admiration. The civilian is very high on my priority list, but the firefighters I’m responsible for are VERY high on this same list and they frequently RISK their lives to save others; and I want to feel confident, that I have the abilities to command a Firefighter Rescue Operation “Mayday”. I view this, as the ultimate test that I may face one day as a Fire Ground Commander. I literally think about it every single day. I study previous Maydays and RIT OPERATIONS. I also do a lot of WHAT IFs???? What if this happens, What if that happens and how would I/we deal with that. I don’t think we can do, to much What if thinking.

 

Recently I gave notice to my battalion that we would be performing a RIT DRILL and gave them some of the details. I explained it would involve a down firefighter, trapped in a collapse. That they would be required to use airbags in a low visibility environment, under challenging conditions. They were given a few weeks to prepare/ train however they deemed necessary.

The drill consisted of two firefighters trapped in a basement under a simulated collapse. We used couches with bags of concrete as weight to simulate a floor on top of rescue dummies. One of the dummies/down firefighters strictly had a mask on and no airpack. Ten feet away was another dummy/down firefighter with airpack and mask on. The bell was ringing or had just ran out once the RIT makes it down into the basement. We also had smoke detectors and pass devices sounding. This is critical for firefighters to learn the difference between a pass and a smoke detector. Smoke detectors can cause a false attraction and delay air/ rescue to a trapped firefighter. Once the RIT locates the down firefighter they must ID, check air, and silence the pass. These three priorities should almost be done together and reported to command. History tells us that we could find additional firefighters other than the one or ones that called a mayday. Historically a large number of firefighters have been located that never transmitted a call for HELP ” MayDay”.

During the drill, each RIT found the firefighter with strictly a mask on first. They did the above priorities the best they could. They were unable to ID the firefighter, because the firefighter was not properly marked. YES, properly marked. All firefighters operating on the fire ground should have their name on the bottom part of mask, front piece, and lower part of bunker coat. In addition to this, each air pack should be marked with company designation on the bottle band and front shoulder strap. With these markings, it should be fairly easy to ID a down firefighter and confirm the company they are assigned to. It still amazes me how many fire departments do not properly ID their firefighters. I have operated on the fire ground with both and it is a huge difference when firefighters are visibly marked.

Back to the drill.

Once the RIT gets the first firefighter on air and silences the pass, they hear a second pass ten feet away and this down firefighter has a fully operational airpack, that is very low on air or has just ran out. This is where the RIT has a serious decision to make. Do they try and get RIT PACK between the two and provide regulator to mask of first firefighter and trans-fill the second firefighter. This would be a Great option, but in this scenario, I purposely spread the two just enough that the RIT hoses would not reach. I wanted them to decide, yes down firefighter TRIAGE. Nobody wants to talk about it. Yes, everyone goes home. They just might not go home alive. This is a reality and we must train to save those that can be saved. We do it with civilians and we may be faced with this same situation during a RIT operation. I placed Chief Mcnames picture on my screen saver in December of 1999 and left it up for almost a year. I looked at his picture everyday and thought about the decisions he faced and the ones he made that night. I have never met him, but he has impacted my career and voyage to prepare for the ULTIMATE test. So do we disconnect the first firefighter, go trans fill the second, to then return to the first and re hook up the regulator?? I’m not sure, each situation could be different. Location, previous radio communications, signs of injuries, age of firefighter and other considerations that we don’t like to openly discuss. Down FIREFIGHTER TRIAGE.

Once you have established air to the down firefighter, now begins the extrication process. What tools will you need and have you trained using them in this kind of environment? Are the tools set up for RIT operations. Airbags used in a RIT operation need to be set up properly with ropes or webbing to assist in dragging and using in a hostile environment. They also need to be properly marked with isolation valves already pre connected. The hoses need to be mark where you can identify in low visibility. The control box and hose need to be stream lined. When operating two bags, you should have three different colors and something to help manage the hoses during deployment and while setting up once at the down firefighter. It can be very frustrating if you have not trained and thought out your air bag operation.

Back to the top.

The civilian respects you, but does your fellow firefighters RESPECT YOU?

Have you truly worked at preparing yourself for the Ultimate Rescue, a Firefighter Rescue?

I would like the civilians, I swore to protect, to respect what I do and how serious I take my calling. But more importantly, I really want my fellow firefighters to feel confident that I have done and will do whatever necessary to save them if they were to get caught or trapped in a fire. I hope that I am able to full fill my calling.

Everyday must be a Training Day!

Curt Isakson

Additional Note!

Do not run out of air as a RIT TEAM member with a FULL RIT AIR PACK in your hands or available. The RIT TEAM may need to share the RIT PACK. Practice trans-filling yourself. It takes practice..

Exponential Engine “Fire Streams”

Fire Streams P1

Fire Streams and the Exponential Engine

By: Brian Brush

http://www.FireByTrade.com

As of late I have been fielding a lot of questions regarding apparatus set up and nozzle selection. It is encouraging to see such an interest in one of our professional foundations. I believe it means that firefighters are taking greater ownership in decisions which may have been more recently dictated to their departments by savvy vendors. I enjoy assisting firefighters work through nozzle studies and flow testing because I know the value of these processes to a department and its members.

In 2005 my department conducted a year-long fire stream and nozzle study; the information collected and changes made as a result of it have made our operations more efficient and our operators more knowledgeable. Since that study I have been fortunate enough to train and network with firefighters from around the country and at the highest levels of education and experience in engine company operations. I am still very much a student of the game and continue to learn on a daily basis. With that said there seems to be recurring questions in many of contacts I have had lately. I believe that I may be better able to answer them to the masses rather than one at a time. So settle in for a little bit of rambling or pick off sections that you are seeking.

Fire Streams P2

Fire Streams

IFSTA will tell you that a fire stream is the “Stream of water or other extinguishing agent after it leaves the fire hose until it reaches the desired target.” To me this is too narrow of a view on the fire stream. The stream of water leaving the fire hose on its way to the target is the end result of a system from the source to the nozzle. If a group or department wants to evaluate their fire streams they must be willing to analyze all parts of that system for influence and change. If you are given the chance to lead or be a part of a fire stream evaluation process or nozzle study you will fail the opportunity if you get trapped in a smooth bore versus fog focus.

Link Below is to full article.

 Fire Streams and the Exponential First Due Engine Company

Anyone looking to evaluate their current nozzle selection and Engine Setup should read this article. County Fire Tactics fully agrees and supports the above article by Brian Brush.

Brian Brush’s article on the Exponential Engine is right on the mark.

We have added an Engine Company Operations page on this site and has Dennis Legear’s articles on Hose & Nozzle Dreams. They too are a must read.

Videos below from Gallons Per Second Program

1 ¾ for Commercial Attack……Why Not?

By: Battalion Chief Shannon Stone

City of Fort Walton Beach Fire Dept. Fla.

Now that I have your attention, take a moment to read this and provide feedback.

Couple of disclaimers; I’m not a writer so please be kind and I’m not advocating the use of 1 ¾ for commercial fires, but rather reaching out to those who are knowledgeable in this area and asking for feedback.

Recently during flow testing apparatus in my department, an engine company approached me and asked me a question. “What do you think about flowing and operating a 1 ¾ line flowing 260 GPM in place of  2 ½ line flowing 260 GPM?” You can imagine my response….”No way, we don’t use 1 ¾ for high flow GPM and we certainly wouldn’t use it to replace a 2 ½ line on a commercial job.” As you can imagine this started a debate which led to much testing and this article for County Fire Tactics. I will make this as brief as possible.

 

All flows were flow tested with a flow meter at the intake, nozzle reactions calculated multiple times, and tested advancing lines in full PPE simulating fatigue factors (not live fire). An “apples for apples” comparison was done with two identical tests. Both evolutions were performed with a four man company, the same firefighters in the same positions every evolution. They advanced the hose lines into a drill tower room 1, flowing to the left, shut down moved to the right and flowed, advance to the next room and flowed, advanced to the 2nd floor and flowed, advanced to the 3rd floor and flowed. Each time the nozzle was opened it was operated at full capacity for 30-60 seconds. Here are the details:

 

Evolution #1 – 2 ½ inch Ponn Conquest hose, 200 ft, solid bore nozzle with 1 1/8 tip

  • Engine pressure of 80 PSI equaling 265 GPM
  • As everyone knows, 2 ½ hose advancement is labor intensive and even with four well trained firefighters, the fatigue factor was still a concern
  • Firefighters had to work extra hard to manage the kinks in the line. They were never successful in removing all the kinks and this was performed in a drill tower where the obstacles are far less than an actual building.
  • Proper techniques were used by all especially by the nozzle man and back up firefighter
  • General assessment of the evolution is that it was very tiring and all firefighters were winded, but of course they said what all firefighters say “But we got it!”

IMAG2617 IMAG2614

Kink management was difficult at best with the 2 ½ advancement. The hose team was never successful in managing all the kinks in the line. Keep in mind there were numerous pivot points for this advancement.

Evolutions #2 – 1 ¾ inch Ponn Conquest hose, 200 ft, solid bore nozzle with 1 1/8 tip

 

  • Engine pressure of 140 PSI equaling 260 GPM
  • Half the weight allowed the firefighters to move the line very easily, much quicker, and more efficient than the 2 ½.
  • There was only 1 kink during the entire evolution which was easily corrected by a firefighter.
  • Proper techniques were used by all especially the nozzle man and back up firefighter. This is a 1 ¾ line but absolutely has to be operated and staffed like a 2 ½ line when flowing 260 GPM.
  • General assessment of the evolution is it was much easier to advance and the firefighters said they felt way less fatigued. They described it as no different than advancing any other 1 ¾ attack line. The nozzle man also stated that due to the smaller diameter of the 1 ¾ hose, he felt it was easier to hold and control the nozzle position.
Bleeding the line checking the stream preparing to advance the 1 ¾.

Bleeding the line checking the stream preparing to advance the 1 ¾.

Although hard to tell by looking at pictures but the kink factor was decreased significantly. Notice the nice stiff bends in the hose in comparison to the pictures of the 2 ½ hose.

Although hard to tell by looking at pictures but the kink factor was decreased significantly. Notice the nice stiff bends in the hose in comparison to the pictures of the 2 ½ hose.

IMAG2637

Wrapping the wall, stairwell, and rooms are essential with minimal staffed fire departments. The 1 ¾ worked very well due to the high pump pressure. It never kinked when utilizing these advancement methods. However, 2 ½ would kink immediately rendering this technique less effective resulting in numerous kinks.

Wrapping the wall, stairwell, and rooms are essential with minimal staffed fire departments. The 1 ¾ worked very well due to the high pump pressure. It never kinked when utilizing these advancement methods. However, 2 ½ would kink immediately rendering this technique less effective resulting in numerous kinks.

IMAG2636

Here are additional facts:

 

  • Nozzle reaction for both the 1 ¾ and 2 ½ are virtually identical since the GPM and diameter of the nozzle are the same.
  • Kink flow testing revealed that on average a kink in the 2 ½ hose would result in the flow decreasing from 265 GPM to 240 GPM.
  • Kink flow testing revealed that on average a kink in the 1 ¾ hose would result in the flow decreasing from 260 GPM to 210 GPM. The significant decrease is obviously due to the amount of water flowing through a smaller diameter hose.
  • 2 ½ hose was guaranteed to kink, 4 firefighters could not manage all the kinks resulting in a decrease average flow of GPM.
  • 1 ¾ hose was extremely difficult to kink due to the high pump pressure. Only one kink that was corrected easily and quickly. The average GPM was around 250-260.
  • Low friction loss hose was used (Ponn Conquest). Anyone who is a student of the fire service understands the actual diameter of this hose is slightly larger that standard hose (or slightly larger than what the manufactures actually advertises it as); however, manageability of the low friction loss hose vs the standard hose is identical.
  • High pump pressure had no negative bearing on advancement or operation of hose
  • The nozzle man has the same range of motion with the 1 ¾ line as the 2 ½ line
  • Reach, penetration of the fire stream of each was identical

 

Advantages of the 1 ¾ option

 

  • Literally ½ weight in comparison to 2 ½
  • Nozzle controllability was the same if not better with the 1 ¾
  • Line advances easier, faster, and more efficient
  • Fatigue factor was much less that 2 ½
  • Average GPM was greater than the 2 ½ (kink factor)

 

Disadvantages and limitations to the 1 ¾ high flow set up

  • It is likely that anything over 200 ft of 1 ¾ set up will not work due to high friction loss factors.
  • This should not be considered in high rise fires due to high friction loss factors. This would include most if not all standpipe operations.
  • If the 1 ¾ nozzle is operated too far out in front of the nozzle man, a serious “whipping or snapping” action of nozzle can occur. This is easily controlled by proper nozzle control and operation.

Summary

 

A quick special thanks to my guys that insisted I take a look at this. Fort Walton Beach Fire Department Engine Company 7– Acting Captain Justin Westmoreland, Engineer Mark Birchett, and Firefighter Brandon Waterhouse.

 

The testing we performed was much more comprehensive than what this article shows, but in an effort to make it brief and a quick read I stuck the meat and potatoes of the issue. In no way am I implying that we in the fire service move away from use of 2 ½ hose for large fire or commercial fire attack. However, the numbers and facts speak volumes that I believe are worthy of evaluating. If you think about it, this is no different from the evolution of 1 inch hose, to 1 ½ hose, to 1 ¾ hose, to low friction loss hose which now allows us to flow larger volumes of water under manageable conditions. I do buy into the concept of limiting your nozzle reaction and insuring you have a manageable line so the nozzle is ALWAYS operated properly during significant fire conditions-nozzle all the way open. This is why this 1 ¾ set up absolutely has to be operated as if it is a 2 ½ line insuring adequate staffing to insure correct deployment and operation.

 

So I beg the question….what are we missing here? What’s your thoughts and/or experiences with high flow, smaller diameter hose? Should this be a viable option for large fire attack?