New firefighting paradigm

Not long ago, JIM made a remark about offensive vs. defensive philosophies when comparing Dutch and American firefighting methods. That rang a bell in my brain about an article I had read a while ago, but it took this long to remember where I had read it.

Here's a Wired magazine article on the concept of "3-D" firefighting. I don't know if this concept has anything to do with what JIM was referring to in that old message, but I thought it was an interesting read. For forum readers in the fire service in the U.S., I'm curious if you have ever been exposed to these techniques yet? From the article, it sounds like most haven't, at least not more than simply hearing/reading about the techniques. The article says that this is the now the standard method used by the fire services in the UK and Sweden for structural fires. I have no idea if it's also true of Holland.

I'm almost half afraid to post this since I figure that some readers will feel very passionate about the topic and the article (like referencing an article that denigrates your favorite caliber of ammunition as being "inadequate"), but I think it's an important concept to expose people to if they haven't already and it's an interesting article even for non-firefighter people. I know we have readers from the fire services of different countries here, so let's try to keep things civil and not take comments made about "your" firefighting method too personally.

The 3-D method described in that article is known to all Dutch fire-fighters as the Box-technique. It's almost the first thing you learn(basic training).

3-D firefighting isn't really new. It has been around for quite awhile. It's orgin can be traced back to the Navy, who have been fighting fires in well insulated confined spaces longer than anyone.
It works, most of the time... but again it is only one tool in the tool box. While, the article makes it seem like this is a NEW technique in America... It isn't, I was taught it in both academies I went through... it just didn't have a name 12 years ago.

That article makes it look like most firefighters are ignorant about fire... while I cannot speak for all, I know that most firefighters I know have a great level of knowledge about fire and suppression.

106 firefighters were killed in the US in 2005, 27 at structure fires... most of those were due to medical issues... not trauma.

I too, along with Romania was taught this technique. In my case that was around 15+ years ago, so it is not new in the US. It is one more tool in the arsenal, and if you think about the discussion regarding defensive vs. offensive tactics, this is more offensive in nature.

As to gas removal, it has been a tactic for quite some time to ventilate roofs to allow the hot gases and uncombusted particulates to be removed from a structure. The use of positive pressure fans/ventilation or spraying a wide pattern across an open window to create a Venturie (spelling may be off) effect have also been useful tools in the arsenal to remove smoke and hot gases.

With that said, keep in mind that a significant portion of the personal in the US Fire Service are volunteers, some with equal training and experience to their career counterparts, many with less. There has been great strides in Firefighting education and training, but in many areas, much still needs to be accomplished.

Pete