Fire Attack: Offensive vs Defensive - Research Paper Example

 Fire Attack: Offensive vs. Defensive The development of an effective and viable strategy must be acknowledged as an indispensible reaction to a fire; however, it is important to understand that the execution of any particular strategy in the present situation cannot be deemed as feasible because there are several variables that need to be taken into account before taking appropriate action. According to the guidelines that have been established by the International Association of Fire Chiefs and the National Fire Protection Association (2006: 310) a fire officer must be in a position to conduct a size-up of the event, approximate the requirements of the fire flow, assess the priorities of the event and create a tactical outline of the fire should be managed. In addition to the aforementioned considerations, the immediate response to a fire attack encompasses the creation of a chain of command that can allow the fire officer to transfer duties and successfully communicate with members of the task force regarding specific requirements and strategies. While, it is certain that in times of crisis a strategized development of plan is necessary, the matter also demands attention to the aspects that are involved in the process of fire suppression. Schottke (2014: 680) states that the term of fire suppression encompasses a range of actions, strategies and tactics that can be executed by a firefighting squad to eliminate the imminent threat that is posed by the fire so as to attain the ultimate goal of extinguishing the fire. The classification of fire suppression strategies that can be adopted to achieve the goal of eliminating the threats and potential hazards of an event is conducted under the categories of either offensive or defensive operations (Schottke 2014: 680). An offensive operation can be defined as one in which fire fighters approach the hose lines into the affected area in order to target the fire, in comparison with this tactic a defensive operation is executed from a specific distance that is deemed as safe for the firemen because the fire does not pose an immediate threat to them as water streams are routed towards the building or infrastructure that has been impacted (Schottke 2014: 680). The preceding definition only outlines the manner in which the respective operations are initiated however; a more complex discussion with regards to the selection of a specific strategy and not opting for the other one is associated with the elements of the incident or the scenario that emerges while on location. The decision making process that precedes the launch of an offensive or defensive attack can be analyzed comprehensively by outlining the development of a plan which includes both strategies and tactics. Kidd, Czajkowski and Briese (2008: 590) understand that strategy entails that things that need to be done and an effective solution in this must constitute of take into account the following components 1) rescue 2) incarceration 3) aeration 4) extinguishment and 5) property preservation. Consequently, tactics encompass the actions that should be initiated for the purposes of ensuring that the strategy proves to be successful and is able to achieve the designated objectives. Therefore, the measures that constitute of tactics include launching a primary search of the affected building, overhaul, initiation of salvage maneuvers, designing a system to deliver water to the location and gaining access to the area (Kidd, Czajkowski and Briese 2008: 590). Following the agreement on the aforementioned actions and decisions the team is expected to abide by either a defensive mode or strategic mode. At this point the important question that arises intends to discover the factors that prompt a fire officer to follow either of the strategic modes that have been outlined previously. A defensive attack is initiated when the expected risks and threats of an action are greater than the benefits or advantages that are linked with the decision to act defensively. Other elements that need to be taken into account during the process of launching a defensive attack is that if the team is faced with the risk of experiencing a structural collapse or does not possess the adequate resources to address the emerging scenario then an offensive attack should not be opted for (International Association of Fire Chiefs and National Fire Protection Association 2006: 315). Moreover, fire teams must also understand that whether to decide to opt for an offensive or defensive strategy is also a matter of assessing monetary losses that could be experienced in case the former is chosen. For example, if it is determined that launching an offensive attack would curb the fire but cause a severe damage to the structure that could eventually make conservation, prevention and preservation impossible then it is more feasible to opt for a defensive mode to ensure that minimum risks are involved in the operation (International Association of Fire Chiefs and National Fire Protection Association 2006: 315). According to Sendelbach (2009: 4) maintaining proper positioning on the ground to enhance the chances of achieving success is also reliant upon the selection of a defensive or offensive mode. In this scenario the effectiveness and viability of a strategy is tested to its core. Explaining this case, Sendelbach (2009: 4) presents a situation in which the possibility of the initial apparatus’ impingement occurs due to multiple contact with the fire while, at the same time the attack crew experiences a scarcity in the availability of resources because of an unexpected event. Sendelbach (2009: 4) asserts that in this case, the significance of developing a ‘worst case’ scenario and creating a strategic plan for tackling with the scenario becomes evident. Therefore, even if the scenario transforms into the worst possible case even then the team would be able to cope with the situation by permitting the apparatus operator to take a defensive position on the location (Sendelbach 2009: 4). This scenario demonstrates the viewpoint that even when a team is prepared to tackle the situation with an offensive operation, there exists likelihood that the risks which are involved in the operation would increase thereby, prompting the team to abandon the offensive approach in favor of the defensive approach. Moreover, any fire suppression response tactic that is initiated should be based upon the basic fundamentals that could teach a fireman the necessary skills which promote an understanding of how a fire starts, soars and adopts a specific pattern under given conditions that could either promote or lessen the severity of the situation (Shackelford 2008). In terms of structural firefighting the presence of tactical knowledge and skills can prove to be highly beneficial when deciding between the employment of an offensive or defensive operation. However, Klaene and Sanders (2007: 234) assess the situation from a new perspective by stating that when choosing between an offensive versus defensive attack, the decision should not solely be based on the structural scenario and also encompass considerations regarding staffing matters, the availability of apparatus and resources in addition with ventilation. Indeed, the ultimate tool that has the ability to judge the merits of a strategic mode is the risk-benefit analysis that can assist decision making procedures, potentially predict outcomes and also aid the preparation of a worst case scenario to ensure that the safety of those who have been affected and those who are putting their lives at stake to rescue them is not comprised. References INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS, & NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION. (2006). Fire officer: principles and practice. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett Publishers. KIDD, J. S., CZAJKOWSKI, J. D., & BRIESE, G. L. (2008). Safe firefighting: levels I & II. New York, NY, McGraw Hill. KLAENE, B. J., & SANDERS, R. E. (2008). Structural firefighting: strategy and tactics. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett. SCHOTTKE, D. (2014). Fundamentals of fire fighter skills.2 SENDELBACH, T. (2009). 10 Step Action Plan for a Safer, More Effective Fire Attack. Near-Miss 24/7/365 Safety Calender. SHACKELFORD, R. (2009). Fire behavior and combustion processes. Clifton Park, NY, Delmar Cengage Learning. Read More