Don't think it was meant to put the fire out , but it was a good way to try and cool the temperature and stop any fire spread . It was better than doing nothing .
@@scooby1992 No. He wasn't hitting anything because the fire was small and behind an intact window. He probably did more water damage than what the fire caused. They basically put it out by dumping a pan of water on it finally. Had the entire room been on fire, it would've been a good transitional attack, but this was not the case.
That cyclist arguing with the fireman, some people are so damned self-important. If a fireman trying to put out a fire shouts at you to "Go away", make sure you do. Every second he's paying more attention to someone arguing, that's a second less listening to his radio, listening for his colleague's shouts and taking his attention from his job.
Seat of the fire luckily seemed to be localised! Interesting how there was only 1 pump in attendance, I'm sure the PDA for residential is 2 minimum? Great capture anyway, and great work by the operator
Very interesting and useful analysis, thanks Steve! I also did not know about PDA. This was the back of the building and I am not sure if there was anything at the front of it.
Under Home Office doctrine, all UK residential shouts are two-pumper PDAs minimum. So there must've been another pump in attendance, somewhere. And because of our country's ridiculous health and safety laws, a BA crew is no longer allowed to enter a burning building unless there's a back-up BA crew assisting or on stand-by -- and there's only one BA crew per pump. So it stands to reason, as the firefighters inside weren't wearing sets, there was probably half of the London Fire Brigade standing-by in case a colleague twisted an ankle or broke a fingernail!
Not entirely fair . Health and Safety can be OTT but gets an unfair hearing in the press .If we scrapped health and safety we would see an increase in deaths at work in industries like construction in particular .Having a second pump present is not an unnecessary cost or a ' nice to have ' . If the BA team get into difficulties it is good to know that another team has your back . Also a BA Team can enter a building without a back up team if Rapid Deployment is chosen as long as there is either saveable life , minimum crew or to get in to stop the incident escalating . Assuming there was not another pump in attendance it could have been justified here to sort the job out before the fire spread . Don't believe everything that some lazy journalist with an anti public sector agenda has . If you are ex or serving Fire Service I apologise if you already know this .
Grant Melville that is a good point Grant! Also I was looking at the back of the property, the firefighters could also go into the front of the property. From the front they could gain access into the flat and fight the fire from inside it. I think though, they did not go from the corridor of the property, into the flat itself. Until the guy in the video had gotten the environment a bit cooler with his water hose. I am not totally sure about that though.
Maybe he could see what the rest of the crew could not and acted instinctively.. .. And as is the case with a lot of incidents, the will be the one person who thinks they know better than the professionals trained to deal with them..
If other crew have to make forceable entry its gonna lave the pump operator to get water on the fire as quickly as possible. Its not uncommon for this to happen.
It literally says "Stay with it or turn it off" on majority of LFB's trucks. How hard is it to check if your food is still cooking before leaving the house? ...
The appliance op / driver did a good job keeping that fire down until the crew could get access, if the widow had gone he would probably have put it out himself , good job well done .
Does anyone know, what was actually on fire? It seemed like so little smoke for the amount of flames. Was someone grilling inside the house? Inquiring minds from across the pond want to know.
The window was open a little so the smoke was being vented away , if it hadn't of been open the flat would have filled with smoke very quickly , even from what looked like a small fire .
@@scooby1992 That wasn't the question. If you watched the video one of the firefighters brings out what looked like a small grill or Rubbish bin. Just trying to identify that object. However if the window was open the flat would have filled with fire. The appartment would have been fully involved.
I was a bit puzzled myself. At first I thought that it was a grill of fat fryer, but the fire seemed to constant for a pan with the cooker still heating it. When I later saw them breaking away below the worktop, I started wondering if it was a washing machine fire.
The red hose or lay flat hose comes in sections or lengths that couple together and are approximately 25 Metres long and are 45 mm or 70 mm thick , the hose reels are 60 M or 90M long depending on the type of fire appliance and are 19mm approx. thick .
Amazes me how people still walk run or cycle by or even drive by a fire engine when they are actually on scene and dealing with the fire and people actually stand fairly close to where the fire fighters are working. Are there not laws in place that prohibit this? If not then there should be. Who would be liable if someone jogging tripped over the hose or an idiot cyclist clipped the hose and fell off injury if themselves? For me there should be an automatic minimum of 25 yards from any fire situation they can quickly escalate to be far worse than they are. I’ve seen many videos where people just are to close and motorists still think it’s safe to creep by a fire engine dealing with a fire and they even slow right down and stop to have a look. There is a video of a pub on fire in London on the corner a road and another road 2 of the roads are one way and motorists can clearly see a fire engine is stopped and they can see fireman on the pavement and in the road yet they still think it’s safe to try and get by.
@@allythevan WRONG. That driving with the line on the outside was doing ZERO to put out the fire, and causing more water damage. The firefighters on the inside had no SCBA on, and used a pot of water to put out the fire. Since when is a pot of water standard firefighting equipment?? I wouldn't call 4+ minutes "fast"... especially since it likely much more since we see the hose is already out at the beginning of the video.
ffjsb wow.. easy tiger.dont know why you’ve got such a bee in your bonnet over this... Am no pro fire fighter although I spent ten years Royal Navy. I certainly wouldn’t be getting upset over this. Every situation is different. I can’t comment but only guess that they decided just to,get in as it look as it was initially a small fire. I suspect they were on scene toot sweet so instead of gearing up just get in deal with it. If they broke the rules the yes by all means they deserve a ticking off..
That pump operator did a brilliant job from the outside - a medal for you man for stopping it spreading and bringing down the room temperature
That was absolutely a worthless piece of firefighting.
Don't think it was meant to put the fire out , but it was a good way to try and cool the temperature and stop any fire spread . It was better than doing nothing .
@@scooby1992 No. He wasn't hitting anything because the fire was small and behind an intact window. He probably did more water damage than what the fire caused. They basically put it out by dumping a pan of water on it finally. Had the entire room been on fire, it would've been a good transitional attack, but this was not the case.
That cyclist arguing with the fireman, some people are so damned self-important. If a fireman trying to put out a fire shouts at you to "Go away", make sure you do. Every second he's paying more attention to someone arguing, that's a second less listening to his radio, listening for his colleague's shouts and taking his attention from his job.
Ultra Vires , if you ignore them usually they go way by them selfs. 😜
I would have turned the hose on him
Paul Marshall I’d put him on the fire.
Seat of the fire luckily seemed to be localised! Interesting how there was only 1 pump in attendance, I'm sure the PDA for residential is 2 minimum? Great capture anyway, and great work by the operator
Very interesting and useful analysis, thanks Steve!
I also did not know about PDA.
This was the back of the building and I am not sure if there was anything at the front of it.
@@globalreach10 Ah I see, may well have been another machine covering (X) angle, many thanks
Under Home Office doctrine, all UK residential shouts are two-pumper PDAs minimum. So there must've been another pump in attendance, somewhere. And because of our country's ridiculous health and safety laws, a BA crew is no longer allowed to enter a burning building unless there's a back-up BA crew assisting or on stand-by -- and there's only one BA crew per pump. So it stands to reason, as the firefighters inside weren't wearing sets, there was probably half of the London Fire Brigade standing-by in case a colleague twisted an ankle or broke a fingernail!
@@YelpBullhorn I did not know it works like that, thank you!
Not entirely fair . Health and Safety can be OTT but gets an unfair hearing in the press .If we scrapped health and safety we would see an increase in deaths at work in industries like construction in particular .Having a second pump present is not an unnecessary cost or a ' nice to have ' . If the BA team get into difficulties it is good to know that another team has your back . Also a BA Team can enter a building without a back up team if Rapid Deployment is chosen as long as there is either saveable life , minimum crew or to get in to stop the incident escalating . Assuming there was not another pump in attendance it could have been justified here to sort the job out before the fire spread . Don't believe everything that some lazy journalist with an anti public sector agenda has . If you are ex or serving Fire Service I apologise if you already know this .
That's the driver/pump operator of the appliance with the hose without his PPE on. The rest of the crew must be inside.
Grant Melville that is a good point Grant!
Also I was looking at the back of the property, the firefighters could also go into the front of the property.
From the front they could gain access into the flat and fight the fire from inside it.
I think though, they did not go from the corridor of the property, into the flat itself. Until the guy in the video had gotten the environment a bit cooler with his water hose. I am not totally sure about that though.
Maybe he could see what the rest of the crew could not and acted instinctively.. .. And as is the case with a lot of incidents, the will be the one person who thinks they know better than the professionals trained to deal with them..
@@dickiemcvitie1752 that is very clever and interesting. I did not think of that, thank you.
If other crew have to make forceable entry its gonna lave the pump operator to get water on the fire as quickly as possible. Its not uncommon for this to happen.
Ha Ha another armchair firefighter
It literally says "Stay with it or turn it off" on majority of LFB's trucks. How hard is it to check if your food is still cooking before leaving the house? ...
The appliance op / driver did a good job keeping that fire down until the crew could get access, if the widow had gone he would probably have put it out himself , good job well done .
Does anyone know, what was actually on fire? It seemed like so little smoke for the amount of flames. Was someone grilling inside the house? Inquiring minds from across the pond want to know.
The window was open a little so the smoke was being vented away , if it hadn't of been open the flat would have filled with smoke very quickly , even from what looked like a small fire .
@@scooby1992 That wasn't the question. If you watched the video one of the firefighters brings out what looked like a small grill or Rubbish bin. Just trying to identify that object. However if the window was open the flat would have filled with fire. The appartment would have been fully involved.
I was a bit puzzled myself. At first I thought that it was a grill of fat fryer, but the fire seemed to constant for a pan with the cooker still heating it.
When I later saw them breaking away below the worktop, I started wondering if it was a washing machine fire.
How long is the hose pipe
The red hose or lay flat hose comes in sections or lengths that couple together and are approximately 25 Metres long and are 45 mm or 70 mm thick , the hose reels are 60 M or 90M long depending on the type of fire appliance and are 19mm approx. thick .
Amazes me how people still walk run or cycle by or even drive by a fire engine when they are actually on scene and dealing with the fire and people actually stand fairly close to where the fire fighters are working. Are there not laws in place that prohibit this? If not then there should be. Who would be liable if someone jogging tripped over the hose or an idiot cyclist clipped the hose and fell off injury if themselves? For me there should be an automatic minimum of 25 yards from any fire situation they can quickly escalate to be far worse than they are. I’ve seen many videos where people just are to close and motorists still think it’s safe to creep by a fire engine dealing with a fire and they even slow right down and stop to have a look. There is a video of a pub on fire in London on the corner a road and another road 2 of the roads are one way and motorists can clearly see a fire engine is stopped and they can see fireman on the pavement and in the road yet they still think it’s safe to try and get by.
Where was the annoying member of the public?
Also that hose operator did a great job, so many stupid armchair experts in the comments!
To be honest I dont see the fire engine doing much fire fighting at all :P
What kind of amateur hour firefighting is this????
ffjsb The kind of firefighting that puts fire out very quickly and saved whole building from going up.
@@allythevan WRONG. That driving with the line on the outside was doing ZERO to put out the fire, and causing more water damage. The firefighters on the inside had no SCBA on, and used a pot of water to put out the fire. Since when is a pot of water standard firefighting equipment?? I wouldn't call 4+ minutes "fast"... especially since it likely much more since we see the hose is already out at the beginning of the video.
ffjsb fires out regardless of how it got put out .. nobody hurt building saved. Good job
@@allythevan That's a pathetic excuse for not doing what you were trained to do.
ffjsb wow.. easy tiger.dont know why you’ve got such a bee in your bonnet over this... Am no pro fire fighter although I spent ten years Royal Navy. I certainly wouldn’t be getting upset over this. Every situation is different. I can’t comment but only guess that they decided just to,get in as it look as it was initially a small fire. I suspect they were on scene toot sweet so instead of gearing up just get in deal with it. If they broke the rules the yes by all means they deserve a ticking off..
Fire Dept. Movement is Slowly, very very Slowly.