Water has been the primary choice for extinguishing fires since fire departments began. The properties of water and its availability make it a good choice for most types of fires. The principle is relatively simple: apply enough water to overcome the British thermal units (Btus) being generated. The trick is to get the required volume of water to what is generating the heat. Moving the water from the source to the fire has always been the challenge. No one should be surprised to learn that staffing levels affect the ability to deliver and move water—from the supply to the attack line and everything in between.
In the beginning, departments used bucket brigades. A group of people lined up, and a person at one end dipped a bucket into the water. Then the bucket was passed to the front person, who got as close to the fire as possible to throw the water on the fire. The effectiveness of this could certainly be questioned. Most likely the water could not overcome the Btus until enough of the fuel burned away. Of course, this was very labor-intensive, in addition to being mostly ineffective.
Manual fire pumps were also used to move water. Firefighters would physically operate the pump to deliver the water. Firefighters or horses delivered the pump to the fire location, and if they didn’t use horses, I would guess the firefighters were quite tired before they even got to the fire! Although it was an improvement over the bucket brigade, it too was labor-intensive. Staffing on a manual pump greatly exceeded the current requirements of NFPA 1710 for a fire engine!
Motorized Engines Arrive
Improvements continued, with the next step being the use of steamers to operate the pumps, which eliminated the need for manual labor to make the pump work and deliver water. Horses usually transported the steamer, but it could be pulled by personnel. Although this was still labor-intensive, the numbers required to operate the pump decreased.
Motorized vehicles replaced the horses, and manufacturers continued to improve the pumps. The basic premise remained—to deliver the largest possible amount of water to extinguish the fire in the most efficient manner. The objective was, and still is, to move the water from the source to the fire. Improvements in technology have resulted in less required staffing, yet firefighting remains relatively labor-intensive, even though machines are used extensively to pump the water.
So, what does all this mean today? One of the prime considerations has to do with staffing levels. Even though technology has helped move water, it has not eliminated the need for personnel. With the financial challenges many communities face and some of the political issues facing some departments, limited staffing has affected the ability of departments to deliver the necessary water to the fire.
Equipment and technology today allow large volumes of water to be moved from the source to wherever it is needed. Fire pumps have large capacities, municipal water supplies have an endless volume, and hose sizes can deliver a lot of water. The primary limiting factor is the number of people available to use the tools. Other factors include the intensity of the fire, which restricts access; distance from the water source to the fire; and the overall collection of equipment to be used.
One firefighter on a fire truck could be considered a fire department. I wouldn’t say it would be a very good fire department. Yet, some communities continue to reduce staffing for financial reasons and still think they have a department. A deck gun on the top of an engine can be operated by one person. The apparatus can pull in front of the building and deliver water according to the capacities of the source, pump, and appliance. Water can be dumped in any opening reachable from the parked apparatus, and the volume of water probably is sufficient to overcome the Btus at many fires. Unfortunately, the water may not be delivered to the seat of the fire. Even though the hardware exists to deliver water, it takes proper personnel levels to affect the outcome.
Staffing issues affect other aspects of water delivery. An inadequate number of personnel will limit the size chosen and mobility of handlines. One person on the end of a 1½- or 1¾-inch handline will not move the hose if it is charged. This is even more challenging with 2½-inch hose. Unless Superman arrives, that hose is not moving once it is charged, and getting to the seat of the fire most likely will not happen. Limited staffing greatly impacts the effectiveness of hose deployment and the ability to move water.
Getting water from the source to the fire pump is also affected by staffing. Large-diameter hose (LDH) is very effective at delivering water, provided it can be put in place within a reasonable amount of time. Also consider the energy required to deploy LDH. Firefighters might be able to get it into place, but the firefighters will be ready for rehab before they get a chance to put water on the fire!
These challenges are new to many organizations as they see their numbers greatly reduced. It is not reasonable to expect the same level of service or performance on the fireground. Departments need to know their new limitations. They should adjust deployment, strategies, tactics, and expectations.
Train Like You Work
Fire departments need to explain to their policy makers, in terms that they will understand, that reduced staffing will not allow them to move water as they have in the past. With fewer capabilities, it will be more difficult to overcome the Btus. The fire may not be contained until it consumes the fuel load. This simple premise must be understood so that firefighters are not placed in harm’s way unnecessarily because they lack the water resources for basic fire attack.
Departments that have experienced a reduction should reevaluate their capabilities to see what they can accomplish within a reasonable timeframe after arrival on the scene. Return to the drill ground to practice with new staffing levels to see if anything has changed. See if those on the first-due assignment can deliver water as they have in the past. Let the limited staffing connect to a fire hydrant to see how much longer it will take and to see if it affects their stamina. Fill a 2½-inch line with water and see if the staff can move it into the proper position. In addition to moving forward, see if they can make any turns. Departments may find that using this size line is not practical or maybe not even possible until additional resources arrive. If these resources come via mutual aid, personnel need to know how long the response is likely to take.
Finding out on the first fire is too late. This should be known by all members of the department, especially those who arrive first to start the operation. It also needs to be explained in layman’s terms to those who authorize the resources for the department so they know there will be a significant change in capabilities, if that is what training results show.
People, mostly those outside the fire service, often will say that response times are not affected by staffing reductions because the trucks will get there in the same amount of time. They interpret this to mean that there will be no affect on service—but, that is not the case. Somehow this should be communicated, because staffing reductions can greatly impact water delivery.
RICHARD MARINUCCI is chief of the Northville Township (MI) Fire Department. He retired as chief of the Farmington Hills (MI) Fire Department in 2008, a position he had held since 1984. He is a past president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) and past chairman of the Commission on Chief Fire Officer Designation. In 1999, he served as acting chief operating officer of the U.S. Fire Administration for seven months. He has three bachelor’s degrees in fire science and administration and has taught extensively.
More Fire Apparatus Current Issue Articles
More Fire Apparatus Archives Issue Articles
