KCRA has good video footage of engines using mobile attack tactics, or pump and roll, on a grass fire near the Modesto, California airport. It appears to have been conducted safely and effectively, but this is a good opportunity to initiate a discussion.
In the video below the best footage begins at 3:48.
FIRE AERIALS | LiveCopter 3 has a look of a wind-driven fire near the Modesto Airport that officials say left a person with serious burns. https://t.co/y6VeRDJZs6
— kcranews (@kcranews) May 2, 2022
When I was an engine captain we conducted mobile attacks on grass fires similar to what is seen in the video. If we were the only engine at that location, we operated two nozzles. The one in front was on a short section of 1.5″ hose, and behind the truck a second crewman used a hard line to pick up anything that was still burning. When possible, like seen in the video, the engine was in the black, reducing the chance of a flareup endangering the crew or truck. If there was a second engine we might have just used the front 1.5″ hose and like in the video, count on the second engine to be sure the edge is all cold.
It is important to have a second nozzle, because it is common, unless you progress very slowly, for the fire to creep through the wet line after the first nozzle, and then you can have significant fire behind the engine crew, and you’ve lost what you just gained. It is also important to use a 1.5″ hose in front of the truck. You need the safety factor of that knockdown power and volume of water when you’re suppressing a fire close to the engine. Too often a hard line with 3/4″ inside diameter is woefully insufficient.
What are your thoughts?
Wow!!!!
What a circus on that second clip. No anchor point, no plan of attack, no structure protection, not a whole lot of coordination, and little to no thought about dealing with the fingering and wind shifts. At least they didn’t get in the green and get burned over. I’m sure that if the property owners were watching this that they were on the phone with their insurance agent to make sure they were up on their coverage and having the pucker factor kick in.
Here is a good example of how not to do it… https://www.facebook.com/NEWS9/videos/559360114986167/
Without a good anchor point it is like playing Whack-a-Mole. This looked as though they were caught up in the chaos and “fog of war”. Lots of wasted water, though. The civilian was at less risk due to reduced fuel, but certainly did what most any property owner would do in similar circumstances. Fortunately, no one got burned over and it seems they may have gotten forward spread stopped. It also looks as though there were many other areas that had recently burned. One of those incidents of chasing wind-driven spots all over the country, perhaps.
Perfect example
It brought a smile to my face when bandanas were mentioned. I used one for my entire time in the outfit on wild land fires. Even when nonexistent shrouds came into use I still used a bandanna under them. Another layer of protection is darn nice when one gets hit with a wave of super heated air. BTW – I always used structure gloves rather than wildland gloves. Didn’t slow me down that much when doing hose lays and provided a heck of a lot more protection.
Ooops – darn auto spell check. Should have been nomex
Working in a area where we could do a lot of this, I learned what did and did not work. It was also a difficult thing to learn because of a variation of the grass crop. Grazed off to dirt verses thick matted years build up. Most guys try to go too fast for the conditions. Once they slow down a bit and learn good technique it becomes fun.
Just a question / comment from someone not used to working with dozer (skid steer) lines.
At about 23:54 why not just pop a drip torch and burn out along the cleared line so you could move to mop up?
From other comments, IMHO whether or not you use a 1.5 or 1 inch front line is fuels and terrain dependent. In NE IL when you could approach with an engine a 1 inch front line using a variable gallonage nozzle and a 3/4 GHT follow up line from the rear worked best. On ATV/UTV units 3/4 GHT due to the limited water.
I have always advocated working engines on rolling attack in pairs. As one engines goes dry the second engine takes over while the first goes to refill. Same tactics with ATV/UTV units.
Great job by the crews. Loved seeing the pre-positioned water tenders for engine refills.
There are many reasons why the crew boss may not want to fire out a line. One example not obvious is he or she may have new personnel on board that need to log in some training on a monthly report covering ” mobile attack” for example. Yes the obvious tactic here would have been “squaring it off” from roads or trails in the green stuff. Another example for going direct only is if it involves a grain field where you want to save as much as you can of the farmer’s investment. It may be all that they have to keep from filing for bankruptcy. The crew boss may not have had any training to feel safe about firing out a line and felt the direct tactic was the best for all involved on a beginning season fire.
You never know…
Agree 100%, Roger. Doing a burn-out saves lots of time down the road, especially when nuisance fires are concerned. We used to do this a lot when the locals were entertaining themselves with these kinds of fires. Saved lots of time, fuel, and lost sleep. I might add that many departments do not give their battalion chiefs and captains the authority to make these kinds of decisions. They go with a “extinguish everything” policy which may or may not be all that good. Extending this policy of burn-out/let burn to abandoned structures also saves time, money, and helps protect personnel from the possibility of injury. We had a major problem with meth labs in my unit and after talking with air pollution, environmental health, and sheriffs office folks, they recommended letting abandoned structures burn due to the real possibility of meth labs rather than attacking the fire. I ran this by my BC and DC who after being presented with the recommendations agreed to extending a let-burn policy to abandoned structures with the provision that we cleared the structure, when possible, for individuals inside.
Bill, I was brought up from some R5 Captains that required 1.5″ front nozzle and operated that way for years. Later on, after some serious struggles managing that large of a hose in sagebrush and being laughed at for wasting water to boot, by a bunch of salty BLM folk, we switched to using a 1″ line. We had it set up with a barrel nozzle and knockdown was sufficient for the light cheat and 2-3 ft sage typical of our rolling attacks. We still trained with the 1.5″ as well and used it in certain situations with taller brush, PJ, or working with stronger winds. We would also throw on a forester nozzle in light cheat when flame lengths weren’t a concern, but covering as much ground as possible before you ran through your tank was the path to success. I always trained my crew to be heads up for sudden changes and we practiced drills to react quickly. Not sure it would always work, but paid off a few years ago when a fire whirl came over us while in a mobile attack. Several other resources watching from the road were pretty worried, but quick reactions by my crew to secure hose and get in the engine paid off…
Phillip, I have one of those moments too. I was working with a bucket ship on a small .10 acre lightning fire. It was just creeping, but was working up under some brush underneath a large spruce tree. The helicopter was coming just in time. I asked him to drop on the west side of the little gully, which he did perfectly. Only problem was, I meant the east side. His flare and rotor wash was just enough to push it all the way through the brush and into the crown of the tree which torched fully. I started grabbing a little plate sized spot at a time. It was my first year and the IC came over and said, it was time to go. I couldn’t believe him and said, “I can get the spots.” He had me look up and around from the 20ft circle I had been working in. I saw probably 50 spots all around and suddenly understood. The fire took off when we were halfway to our safety zone. Wound up holding it to 17 acres or so with a bunch of tankers and engines. I won’t ever forget that thin margin of error caused by a few mispoken letters…
With a pto driven booster pump supplying 3/4″ hard line and a three person crew, I had plenty of opportunities to use this tactic. The video shows a great operation in ideal conditions.
Two incidents in my experience stand out in my memories. One was a flare up that had my partner bail on me. No injury, but communication could have been better.
The other was on a hillside attack with trees and rocks to contend with. I had to do one backtrack as I saw the engine was on the left and I was on the right of a large oak tree. Short interruption in the operation, but perhaps consequential. Another engine was working toward us as we tried to keep the fire from getting to the bottom of a steep slope. We did not succeed. What had been about 10 acres burning upon arrival ended up at 1200 acres a few hours later. That one small step still haunts me 48 years later.
Years ago (52 years now) when I was an engine operator in Tuolumne County, CA we used this a lot in the low country. In windy conditions, however, I had a nozzleman take a face full of heat when the wind pushed the flaming from 15 or 20 feet of flames. With his nomex faceshield and goggles he only ended up with blisters on his nose. It could have been worse.
Good attack!!!
Engines and crews in the black with good nozzle action knocking down the fire and then bringing it down for extinguishment. The grass looked like a typical early season fire, matted down and needing penetration from more than just a fog pattern. They anchored their line and took their time making sure they weren’t getting re-kindles behind them. They also had a backing fire which made things a whole lot easier than having to deal with a running flame front. The second engine is back far enough that it isn’t pushing the first engine too. the captain is out front making sure that no one drives into an old cistern, septic tank, or runs into and old well casing, or steel fence post.
Good job all around and everyone goes home safe!!!!
Hi there
Thanks for all of your work, guys we really appreciate it.
Most of what is captured in the video seems to be a backing fire – creeping back against the wind – which makes it easier to attack on foot. Not so easy if it is running with the wind – may need to attack using a nozzle from the truck.
Given the wind is pushing smoke into the black I’m interested to understand why the crew on the ground and the trucks were in the black rather than out of the black and out of the smoke? This isn’t a criticism, just trying to see what I’m missing.
thanks
The training emphasizes staying in the black because if a drastic wind shipt occurs and you’re in the green, your day gets ruined real quick because th3-4 foot flame lengths lying close to the ground turn into 6-8 foot flame lengths that stand up to chest and head height. I spent many hours doing field fires in central Montana, where this tactic is perfect. Somewhere I’ve got a video I made teaching the differences of backing fire and running fire on the same piece of ground.
Fighting fire from the black has been pretty standard on any fire I have been on. Personally, I think eating what little smoke there is off a backing fire is better than risking a wind switch pushing fire under and around you and your equipment. It’s not guaranteed that a switch will happen all the time, but it will save your butt when it does.
Also, I usually have a bandanna around my neck (not as good as a ventilator mask, but will keep out most particulate matter, chemicals not so much), to pull up if I am in smoke for extended time. I use a Carbon Shield Bandanna, but there are many made specifically for firefighters, even some you can slip filters in to. I’ll let you research that.
Just to elaborate about the use of a bandana, the description at The Fire Store claims the Carbon Shield Bandana “aids in eliminating the inhalation of dirt, ash and dust.” It does not say to what extent, or how effective it is. The particulates in smoke that are most harmful to humans, PM10, are unlikely to be eliminated by a device like this. The description claims that it will not burn, which of course would be desirable feature for firefighters.
Not to fast not to slow, mobile attack is a team effort, every one needs to have their heads on a swivel, not good when you dump the front end of your engine in a hole that you can not back out of….We practiced this on the Cleveland NF all the time, I recall this being a big deal at fire school. A water additive is essential, wet water, I recall using this tactic only a handful of times on actual fires in SO Cal, most of our fire transitioned from the flat to the slope rather quickly.
In 98 a bunch of us took our engines to TX on a 21 day roll, we were hitting 2 and 3 fires a day, mobile attack was the way to go, what a blast we had, one of my best assignments as an Engine Captain, we had a great crew, a lot of fun….folks really appreciated our presence there……It’s easy to get ready for the next one when all you have to do is pack your pre connect and roll a little hard line up…sometimes finding water was a pain…
Thanks Bill these topics are great fun………
We use similar tactics on the edge of the Everglades in S Florida. Our Type 6’s won’t stand up off-road so our main equipment are swamp buggies with ~200 gal and comped out like a Type 6. When going direct in heavy grass we put one tire track in the black and one on the green edge to mash moisture into the fuel. We have a 3/4 hard line wetlining and fire flaps knocking down the the flank as well as flappers behind the buggy if not running two buggies together. Conserving water is key as turn around to refil can be 2+ hours. Fundamentals are the same though.
Also a common tactic on grass fires in Minnesota. Engines on the upland but more commonly tracked vehicles on lowlands and soft ground. Working in pairs is ideal if the resources are available. Like Everglades guy said, we also at times would “wet track” in wet marshes using the tracks to mash the grass down into the standing water in lower intensity situations. Some of our lowland grass fuels can generate 20-30 foot flame lengths and require working in tandem with a helicopter or FireBoss/SEAT.
Rolling attack is a very important tool in the box. Front and rear hose options are essential. I am used to this tactic in TX and plains states. I left federal service before I could get an idea into a working model to deal with lots of 5 strand barb wire fences along the fires edge. If you ever run up on a pile of burning cows that can’t get through a fence or you half to stop at a fence and cut your way through it makes you think about better ways of doing business!
Think about the wire cutters on federal helicopters. A hydraulic folding set of cutters out front of the hose connection allows the engine driver to extend the cutters snap the strands as the engine passes through and do no damage to the fence posts all the while keep on rolling.
The only thing I might suggest is more hose action. Move the hose rapidly in Cs or figure 8s or whatever turns you on. The rapid movement of the hose/spray makes for a more efficient use of the water. Straight spraying is an attempt to drown/remove oxygen from the triangle. Rapid movement also denies oxygen but also cools, working two legs of the triangle.
I had a class a few years ago and saw the extreme motion some structure guys use. They moved the nozzle so rapidly it almost looked as though the hose was loose under extreme pressure.
And hose/nozzle movement.
Layperson here. It looks like the wind is blowing back into the black – doesn’t that make a world of difference in how this fire was handled?
Some. Fighting fire from the black has been pretty standard on any fire I have been on. As they were fighting a “backing fire”, it does make it easier and faster to catch as you aren’t in a race with the wind.
That looked like a fun one. They seemed to be progressing at a good pace slow enough that most of the heat was knocked out before the Type 6 had to drive through it. They also had what looked like the Captain out in front scouting and presumably acting as lookout, then the Type 3 batting cleanup behind and cooling off hotspots next to the Type 6’s tires in front. It definitely seems like they have trained for that.
If ya don’t have turrets and bumper mounted spray nozzles…..
This is the way I was taught in 1989…Type 3-6 hardline n all
That is an excellent video. Good job all around: Lead hose is using spread and knock down power, follow-up is close, but not too close and keeping heat off lead engine (around 4:48 in video), they have a spotter traveling with the lead engine.
Currently, I focus mostly on prescribed fire, but we still use these same tactics. Landowners are also employing these after seeing the effectiveness and safety of it. We especially use it if we have an area that is only UTV/ATV accessible.
Thanks for sharing it.