BIG thanks for the explanation as to what was on fire BCR. 👍👍 I'm in Canada and was watching the Allure leaving the port. I tried to watch a few tv channels with the news later on in the day. But, didn't see any reason as to what happened there at the port of Miami. Hope no one was injured because of the fire. 🤞
I love the fact that the miami Dade fire BOAT attended MORE OR LESS right away before fire trucks ..as they should as its in the port BUt NOT MUCH THEY COULD DO AS IT WAS ON LAND !..they were pretty much helpless to act on the fire (NOT THIER FAULT OBV as the fire was too far away for them to be of any effect on it) AS for folks commenting it took this long and that long for land based fire crews to get there ..the time it took EVEN with having to get through port security stuff (which i very much doubt as it was an emergecy) is pretty good going in my book ..IN the UK you can (depending on were you live and were the fire is ) wait more than 11 mins for a fire truck to turn up it seems like an eternity admitedly BUT fire spread so quickly i have seen on YT buildings burn down in 5 min in the past before the fire trucks got there ...at least it was only a cargo lifter that was on fire and not a bulding or house! i hope no one was injured and hurt in this incident!
The fireboat is equipped with a pump that can deliver several master streams.of 12,000 gpm ... which is capable of reaching that fire. The primary reason they didn't use water is because that was a liquid fuel fire that would spread burning fuel and they would have no way to contain the runoff of fuel that could make its way into the bay and killed the wildlife. Security is not a impending problem for fire personnel and they don't need special clearance. A hazmat team would be needed to clean up and contain the runoff.and you can't do it from a boat. You're speaking from no experience in firefighting ..I have 38 years worth. Your speculation on time could vert will be that there wasn't a engine company close by..they could have been on a call elsewhere
Stay in your lane. If you're not in the fire service you don't have a clue of what you're saying. As a standard 6 min on the scence can be longer if a company has to come to that territory further from another station. There are other calls and they are dispatched as they cine in. And they come from other locations in the city... that's standard protocol.
I must be missing something here. Did it really take 11 minutes for the first fire unit to arrive, and then 5 more minutes to put some water on the blaze? Not a bad response time for a volunteer fire department, but for a busy port, like Miami? No bueno!
You can't just run in and put water on it. You have to know what is on fire and what is surrounding the fire. Does it require foam or can they use water? Those are vital questions to ask when coming into a fire situation, especially a port with millions of unknown products, like sodium metal and lithium, which explode when they come into contact with water.
We have raw captures 24/7 of all cameras with time-stamped recordings. Fire started at 5:34pm. Fireboat arrived on scene at 5:44pm. Firetruck arrived at 5:46pm.
Bet that was so scary when fire erupted. Also hope no one was injured too. God bless the Firemen and everyone who was involved in getting the fire contained too.👏🏻👏🏻❤️🙏🛳️❌⭕️
That fireboat showing up was a waste! They did not even try to get a stream of water up on that fire. I am sure they could have reached it, those are supposed to be pretty powerful.
Also, consider if the boat just lobbed water in there blindly, what other damage could that water stream cause. Could it injure bystanders, operator, or other arriving firefighters? It is likely that whatever was burning was toxic by the color of the smoke. Where would the run off water go and carrying the toxic product where? It would likely go into the storm drains and then the waterways. Now you have an uncontrolled hazardous materials incident with potential environmental damage to the waterways. Likely, containment was established before extinguishment. That would have been done by boots on the ground. There was minimum exposure risk as the machine was out in the open. The biggest hazard appeared to be the material burning and the environment. I watched from the same vantage you did. I saw a fairly common incident handled in an efficient manner with ample resources. I'm sure that the boat is assigned to all fires in the port, mainly as a water supply. To pump additional water to the apparatus on land. A jet boat, like the one seen, can likely supply in the area 5000 gallons per minute to the on shore apparatus. Depending on the agency's protocols, the boat maybe the primary water supply, and the hydrants be a secondary. The boat may be able to supply more gpm than the hydrant system (if there is one).
Gotta love all these armchair quarterbacks in the comments acting like they know the first thing about firefighting. Thanks to the folks commenting here who actually DO have firefighting experience trying to explain why just because a fireboat CAN spray water at a land-based fuel fire, doesn't mean they SHOULD. You think professional firefighters WANT to just stand there not doing the one thing they dedicated their entire lives to doing? Seek help.
BIG thanks for the explanation as to what was on fire BCR. 👍👍
I'm in Canada and was watching the Allure leaving the port. I tried to watch a few tv channels with the news later on in the day. But, didn't see any reason as to what happened there at the port of Miami.
Hope no one was injured because of the fire. 🤞
What are all those side-cab looking boats buzzing around used for?
Those are the island ferries.
@@blake_edwards Thank you!
Anybody know the schedule for the new MSC terminal and pier?
Late 2024 finish, assuming no further delays.
April 2025.
I love the fact that the miami Dade fire BOAT attended MORE OR LESS right away before fire trucks ..as they should as its in the port BUt NOT MUCH THEY COULD DO AS IT WAS ON LAND !..they were pretty much helpless to act on the fire (NOT THIER FAULT OBV as the fire was too far away for them to be of any effect on it) AS for folks commenting it took this long and that long for land based fire crews to get there ..the time it took EVEN with having to get through port security stuff (which i very much doubt as it was an emergecy) is pretty good going in my book ..IN the UK you can (depending on were you live and were the fire is ) wait more than 11 mins for a fire truck to turn up it seems like an eternity admitedly BUT fire spread so quickly i have seen on YT buildings burn down in 5 min in the past before the fire trucks got there ...at least it was only a cargo lifter that was on fire and not a bulding or house! i hope no one was injured and hurt in this incident!
The fireboat is equipped with a pump that can deliver several master streams.of 12,000 gpm ... which is capable of reaching that fire. The primary reason they didn't use water is because that was a liquid fuel fire that would spread burning fuel and they would have no way to contain the runoff of fuel that could make its way into the bay and killed the wildlife. Security is not a impending problem for fire personnel and they don't need special clearance. A hazmat team would be needed to clean up and contain the runoff.and you can't do it from a boat. You're speaking from no experience in firefighting ..I have 38 years worth. Your speculation on time could vert will be that there wasn't a engine company close by..they could have been on a call elsewhere
Stay in your lane. If you're not in the fire service you don't have a clue of what you're saying. As a standard 6 min on the scence can be longer if a company has to come to that territory further from another station. There are other calls and they are dispatched as they cine in. And they come from other locations in the city... that's standard protocol.
What was he carrying to cause so many explosions and such black smoke. Just wondering.
Large tires and plenty of fuel and hydraulic oil.
I must be missing something here. Did it really take 11 minutes for the first fire unit to arrive, and then 5 more minutes to put some water on the blaze?
Not a bad response time for a volunteer fire department, but for a busy port, like Miami? No bueno!
You can't just run in and put water on it. You have to know what is on fire and what is surrounding the fire. Does it require foam or can they use water? Those are vital questions to ask when coming into a fire situation, especially a port with millions of unknown products, like sodium metal and lithium, which explode when they come into contact with water.
@@Beth11271 correct I'm assuming it busted an oil or hydraulic line
@@tsaffran Same
We have raw captures 24/7 of all cameras with time-stamped recordings. Fire started at 5:34pm. Fireboat arrived on scene at 5:44pm. Firetruck arrived at 5:46pm.
Seems it's something like that. The lift truck just starts burning when it makes the turn.
Bet that was so scary when fire erupted. Also hope no one was injured too. God bless the Firemen and everyone who was involved in getting the fire contained too.👏🏻👏🏻❤️🙏🛳️❌⭕️
I first saw this yesterday and thought oh no a construction fire from welding in the MSC terminal
🙏🙏🙏🙏
That fireboat showing up was a waste! They did not even try to get a stream of water up on that fire. I am sure they could have reached it, those are supposed to be pretty powerful.
They couldn't see over the wall. Quite obvious in the video.
Also, consider if the boat just lobbed water in there blindly, what other damage could that water stream cause. Could it injure bystanders, operator, or other arriving firefighters? It is likely that whatever was burning was toxic by the color of the smoke. Where would the run off water go and carrying the toxic product where? It would likely go into the storm drains and then the waterways. Now you have an uncontrolled hazardous materials incident with potential environmental damage to the waterways. Likely, containment was established before extinguishment. That would have been done by boots on the ground. There was minimum exposure risk as the machine was out in the open. The biggest hazard appeared to be the material burning and the environment. I watched from the same vantage you did. I saw a fairly common incident handled in an efficient manner with ample resources. I'm sure that the boat is assigned to all fires in the port, mainly as a water supply. To pump additional water to the apparatus on land. A jet boat, like the one seen, can likely supply in the area 5000 gallons per minute to the on shore apparatus. Depending on the agency's protocols, the boat maybe the primary water supply, and the hydrants be a secondary. The boat may be able to supply more gpm than the hydrant system (if there is one).
How are they supposed to know the situation until they get there? They know what they are doing.
They can make big waves in the harbor while we are fueling ships.
Gotta love all these armchair quarterbacks in the comments acting like they know the first thing about firefighting. Thanks to the folks commenting here who actually DO have firefighting experience trying to explain why just because a fireboat CAN spray water at a land-based fuel fire, doesn't mean they SHOULD. You think professional firefighters WANT to just stand there not doing the one thing they dedicated their entire lives to doing? Seek help.
Another failed fire boat.
15 minutes and fire extinguished equipment yet, and fire boat stirring the bottom
Miami Dade failed county
Please read comments from those with firefighting experience. There was nothing they could have done that wouldn't have made this situation worse.
10 minutes to arrive, that is not okay
You're aware firefighters don't know there's a fire the instant one starts, yeah? And that they can be busy doing other stuff too?