For all you Monday morning quarterbacking. This is a known abandoned building. There is no reason to risk any firefighters lives to make an aggressive interior attack. It’s called a cost benefit analysis of the situation. Protect the sorounding structures and everyone goes home safe!
. . . how about protecting some of the trees? And how about avoiding some tons of additional CO2 in the atmosphere? So it was a pretty complete waste of time and money !
*With the million dollar homes being built and all the money pouring into the island, seems like that piece of property could be quite lucrative to a developer. Timing and circumstances seem suspect*
I'm British and we have fires here I call "developers' fires" where a disused building, sometimes historic, that stands on a site that's ripe for development, is burnt out. If they're pouring money into this island, they should put in fire hydrants. Fires, but particularly house fires, can kill.
@@crazyleyland5106 Soy bomberao de Argentina. Aquí también suceden cosas similares con fines desarrollista. Lo peor es que se involucra a personas y bienes de terceros que nada tienen que ver con sus negocios .
When the 'authorised' personnel asks you nicely to move back, you move back. The first responders already have their hands full and they don't need another incident on scene to handle. And yes, I work in the Fire Rescue Service.
He's pretty clear from the get-go that this is a DEFENSIVE response, meaning that they are protecting adjacent structures because the single story building is obviously a total loss. No hydrants, and tanker only water supply. I tend to agree with Mr. Powell that it's something a developer might want to have burn down so they could put a McMansion on the property.
27:32 Way to go there Sparky. Will somebody give this guy a jr merit badge or at least honorable mention? He's done more for water deployment than most of the FFs in attendance.
So an abandoned building is allowed to burn and the fire department is there mainly to protect other structures from fire damage. That's easy to see. But for some to say that this fire was intenionally set because it was an eye sore to the wealthy is foolish. So easy to blame the homeless or the wealthy. But how many of those saying that are actually fire investigators. No one really knows the cause or circumstances surrounding this fire. Just a bunch of guess work really. A grass fire that consumed a building. Not the way an arsonist would do it.
This would be called a 'controlled burn'. Nice touch, to have a 'Baghdad Bob' on the scene. Oh, and it's an island. Isn't that 'surrounded by water' ? Very WET water?
If it's inland on the island it can still be several minutes away from their water supply fill point for their tankers. Plus, it takes a while for outside tankers to come in and arrive on scene
The chief said they were going to let it burn but there is a FF at the front of the building hosing into the window. Even after half the roof collapsed.
As a kid ive seen many restaurants built in inferior wood like this, a lot of them went up do to Greek lightning ,mob, robbery/arson or grease fire .The better restaurants have brick & block plus a junior joist with metal roof decking ,steel studs ,a fire/ burglar alarm,steel wall studs. Its harder to torch these kind of places. I dont see restaurants go up in smoke like i used to when i was a kid.
I know it's got a levee, but why doesn't Contra Costa have any fire hydrants? This is the 2nd video I've seen of a severe fire here, the other where 3 houses burnt down. They need hydrants within reach of the houses, as house fires can kill. From UK.
How much is fire insurance there? Well, and as for those 3 houses burning down in that other video, this island's in California. That right there should tell you (it's exorbitantly high, no doubt). And just who's really buying the land and new developments? Chinese investors?
The title of this video is, "East Contra Costa Fire Battles Structure Fire" Now either I am blind, which I damn sure am not, or the person who wrote the title has a gross misunderstanding as to what "Battling a Fire" actually means and entails. Inasmuch as the only thing that I saw was a fully involved building with not a single attack line anywhere to be seen and that is not in any sense of the word "Battling" a fire. Hell, there is not even a single Pumper, Ladder, Rescue, Tanker, nor any other piece of firefighting apparatus on the scene until after the building had begun to collapse. Now that is what is called watching a fire burn itself out, not Battling a fire, period !!! If a fire department deserves credit for their effort, then so be it, but if you are going to falsify the records to make it appear as though the Fire Department was acting responsibly when they were not, then you are going to get called on that false reporting !@!! This Fire Department was extremely lucky that there was a brisk wind blowing away from the other close-by buildings or there would have surly been a conflagration without a doubt.
@@ffjsb Did y'all not listen to him explain why they weren't fighting the vacant restaurant? They only had enough water in the trucks to either fight the restaurant or protect the exposure, but not both.
@@BreakerOneNine07 The BEST way to protect an exposure is to put out the fire. It takes VERY little water to protect a structure, it NOT an either or situation.
@@ffjsb If that building was fully involved, it would take a good amount of water to hold off the radiant heat and prevent the surrounding exposures from catching on.
Fughters can put off fire but no save your house You are the main to responsible putting fire off Should all the good gears to put off fire in the house Waiting for fighters is hopeless By the time they start putting water on burning house it would be almost completely gone
¿Qué esperan para empezar a tirar agua? Se pasean con barretas de acá para allá sin hacer nada... con las mangueras cerradas paseándolas de acá para allá ¿Por qué no apagan el árbol, y el poste por ejemplo antes de hacer nada?
In what way were they slow? The location was more than 10 minutes away from the closest responding engine, the building was vacant and run-down already, there's no water supply on the island, so they made the decision to allow the building to burn, and use their limited water to keep the fire from spreading beyond that one building. How was that slow? It was a tactical decision to let the building burn down, and as a firefighter myself with more than 20 years of experience, I think it was the right one too. Firefighting is much more than just "show up, spray water." If the building was actively in use and saveable, or if there were people inside, or any number of other factors were in play, they would have been much more aggressive and attacked the fire directly rather than conserving water to protect other buildings. A fire that large is intense, and takes LOTS of water to put out. Depending on turnaround time, he may have needed 10 or more water tenders, and you need a really good reason to pull that many tenders from a region, making them unavailable for other fire emergencies. With the situation they had though, the most effective tactic was to allow the abandoned building to burn, and protect things around it.
Open your eyes and ears . With no local water supply and only what they had in their units and a tanker, what do you expect them to do. Without a strong continuous supply from a hydrant. you may as well pee on it.
@@te9017 Why did they not set in to open water like we would here in the UK, or was there no where suitable for an engine to get close enough to the open water to deploy suction hose and supply the fire ground with ample water.
Would have been nice if some brainiac added the county ,State, and country to the info on this video. Where the hell is this place with no fire hydrants to fight fires. I would not move there for sure.
And the camera man watches the fire instead of saying, yo-ya got a flare up back here. Smh The abandoned place was intentionally set on fire because it was an eye sore. Dump some dirt on it and call it good.
always seek the source of the fire by seeking the hot spot tihs is the source that can not be controlled. other areas will be egffected by what ebvert you do to distemper the fire. you can have many different types of firesa fire that is self contained, meaning can not be made different. locate this one area and you can control the fire.light water will not allow a fire to be reenighted. amnd un controlled. kill the source the fire will take care of itself. this is always called the hot spot. you may wonder how i know such things I'M GOD.
The minute they put their deck guns on the fire they lose the whole block they didn't have enough water to fight the fire there are no hydrants on the island the water had to be trucked in fight the fire or protect the exposures
For all you Monday morning quarterbacking. This is a known abandoned building. There is no reason to risk any firefighters lives to make an aggressive interior attack. It’s called a cost benefit analysis of the situation. Protect the sorounding structures and everyone goes home safe!
. . . how about protecting some of the trees? And how about avoiding some tons of additional CO2 in the atmosphere? So it was a pretty complete waste of time and money !
You don´t need to risk anybody attacking with deck gun...are you kidding???
*With the million dollar homes being built and all the money pouring into the island, seems like that piece of property could be quite lucrative to a developer. Timing and circumstances seem suspect*
Jewish lightening?
I'm British and we have fires here I call "developers' fires" where a disused building, sometimes historic, that stands on a site that's ripe for development, is burnt out. If they're pouring money into this island, they should put in fire hydrants. Fires, but particularly house fires, can kill.
@@crazyleyland5106 Soy bomberao de Argentina. Aquí también suceden cosas similares con fines desarrollista. Lo peor es que se involucra a personas y bienes de terceros que nada tienen que ver con sus negocios .
Lots of good memories of Franks bar,sad to see it gone
When the 'authorised' personnel asks you nicely to move back, you move back. The first responders already have their hands full and they don't need another incident on scene to handle. And yes, I work in the Fire Rescue Service.
Thanks to all who helped put the fire out, and saved other homes near by
So if they are on a ISLAND, With water supply issues, Why are they not drawing water from river less than 100 yards away?
Thank you! Fire trucks can pump water out and into their storage tanks,hold 1000s of gallons of water pumped from local water sources.
California used to be nice. Lived there in the 70’s. Now it’s a cesspool.
Big fire big water , and that makes it hard to fight with little water
He's pretty clear from the get-go that this is a DEFENSIVE response, meaning that they are protecting adjacent structures because the single story building is obviously a total loss. No hydrants, and tanker only water supply. I tend to agree with Mr. Powell that it's something a developer might want to have burn down so they could put a McMansion on the property.
In Britain, when a disused building that's on a site that's ripe for development is burnt out, I call it a developers' fire.
Are they letting it burn?
27:32 Way to go there Sparky. Will somebody give this guy a jr merit badge or at least honorable mention? He's done more for water deployment than most of the FFs in attendance.
So an abandoned building is allowed to burn and the fire department is there mainly to protect other structures from fire damage. That's easy to see. But for some to say that this fire was intenionally set because it was an eye sore to the wealthy is foolish. So easy to blame the homeless or the wealthy. But how many of those saying that are actually fire investigators. No one really knows the cause or circumstances surrounding this fire. Just a bunch of guess work really. A grass fire that consumed a building. Not the way an arsonist would do it.
The tree itself, what was the cause of the fire?
euh, where's the fire attack?
I was wondering about that, too. 'Defensive fire attack' ; uhh, HOW?
This would be called a 'controlled burn'. Nice touch, to have a 'Baghdad Bob' on the scene. Oh, and it's an island. Isn't that 'surrounded by water' ? Very WET water?
If it's inland on the island it can still be several minutes away from their water supply fill point for their tankers. Plus, it takes a while for outside tankers to come in and arrive on scene
They`re not in any hurry to put it out.
We spend millions of dollars on a fire department ,,,, but have no water!!!!
What state is this
California. Across the bay from San Francisco.
The chief said they were going to let it burn but there is a FF at the front of the building hosing into the window. Even after half the roof collapsed.
I know chief said tanker operations but 1 line ?
How much you want to bet that once more of those million dollar homes are up, a hydrant system magically appears?
Doesn’t work that way, Chuck. You really think they enjoy having to haul water in?
Like it. Video. south west. Devon. Katy leeson 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍😁😁
As a kid ive seen many restaurants built in inferior wood like this, a lot of them went up do to Greek lightning ,mob, robbery/arson or grease fire .The better restaurants have brick & block plus a junior joist with metal roof decking ,steel studs ,a fire/ burglar alarm,steel wall studs. Its harder to torch these kind of places. I dont see restaurants go up in smoke like i used to when i was a kid.
Need to drill wells for water supply in the future.
They let it burn out.
The East Contra Costa fire Dept. motto is: 'Why even bother!'
"saved another slab"
I know it's got a levee, but why doesn't Contra Costa have any fire hydrants? This is the 2nd video I've seen of a severe fire here, the other where 3 houses burnt down. They need hydrants within reach of the houses, as house fires can kill. From UK.
Nice video
That's what should to all abandon buildings protect exposures and let it burn.
I wonder how much is fire insurance on this godforsaken island? And they're paid if I remember correctly after they burned down a row of houses.
How much is fire insurance there? Well, and as for those 3 houses burning down in that other video, this island's in California. That right there should tell you (it's exorbitantly high, no doubt). And just who's really buying the land and new developments? Chinese investors?
There should of been some fire hydrants out there, with it being a business.
The title of this video is, "East Contra Costa Fire Battles Structure Fire" Now either I am blind, which I damn sure am not, or the person who wrote the title has a gross misunderstanding as to what "Battling a Fire" actually means and entails. Inasmuch as the only thing that I saw was a fully involved building with not a single attack line anywhere to be seen and that is not in any sense of the word "Battling" a fire. Hell, there is not even a single Pumper, Ladder, Rescue, Tanker, nor any other piece of firefighting apparatus on the scene until after the building had begun to collapse. Now that is what is called watching a fire burn itself out, not Battling a fire, period !!!
If a fire department deserves credit for their effort, then so be it, but if you are going to falsify the records to make it appear as though the Fire Department was acting responsibly when they were not, then you are going to get called on that false reporting !@!!
This Fire Department was extremely lucky that there was a brisk wind blowing away from the other close-by buildings or there would have surly been a conflagration without a doubt.
I'd be embarrassed to be on this FD.
@@ffjsb Did y'all not listen to him explain why they weren't fighting the vacant restaurant? They only had enough water in the trucks to either fight the restaurant or protect the exposure, but not both.
@@BreakerOneNine07 The BEST way to protect an exposure is to put out the fire. It takes VERY little water to protect a structure, it NOT an either or situation.
@@ffjsb If that building was fully involved, it would take a good amount of water to hold off the radiant heat and prevent the surrounding exposures from catching on.
There were at least two there at the very beginning of the video.
Fughters can put off fire but no save your house You are the main to responsible putting fire off Should all the good gears to put off fire in the house Waiting for fighters is hopeless By the time they start putting water on burning house it would be almost completely gone
Another fire department saving the foundation,
¿Qué esperan para empezar a tirar agua? Se pasean con barretas de acá para allá sin hacer nada... con las mangueras cerradas paseándolas de acá para allá ¿Por qué no apagan el árbol, y el poste por ejemplo antes de hacer nada?
Why bother showing up ?
God bless our Heros.
Huh, they watched a building burn down. Go team ...
What hero's? Where was the water?
Wow the water and beach is filthy with oil gross view from above!!! No wonder .
yep a burnout building cause that was the slowest fire dept. i have seen in my life wow.
In what way were they slow? The location was more than 10 minutes away from the closest responding engine, the building was vacant and run-down already, there's no water supply on the island, so they made the decision to allow the building to burn, and use their limited water to keep the fire from spreading beyond that one building. How was that slow? It was a tactical decision to let the building burn down, and as a firefighter myself with more than 20 years of experience, I think it was the right one too. Firefighting is much more than just "show up, spray water."
If the building was actively in use and saveable, or if there were people inside, or any number of other factors were in play, they would have been much more aggressive and attacked the fire directly rather than conserving water to protect other buildings. A fire that large is intense, and takes LOTS of water to put out. Depending on turnaround time, he may have needed 10 or more water tenders, and you need a really good reason to pull that many tenders from a region, making them unavailable for other fire emergencies. With the situation they had though, the most effective tactic was to allow the abandoned building to burn, and protect things around it.
Open your eyes and ears .
With no local water supply and only what they had in their units and a tanker, what do you expect them to do.
Without a strong continuous supply from a hydrant. you may as well pee on it.
@@te9017 Why did they not set in to open water like we would here in the UK, or was there no where suitable for an engine to get close enough to the open water to deploy suction hose and supply the fire ground with ample water.
Wow very saaad!!!
у них видно не принято тушить начало пожара, лучше когда до тла все сгорит постоять водой по поливать
Need to invest in a HVP
Total loss already
Cellar hole makers!
Took way to long to get water on 😤
nice fires keep doing fires money lost in billions dollars around the world thanks god you are great
Dude you need to work on your English cause what you tried to say made no damn sense
Would have been nice if some brainiac added the county ,State, and country to the info on this video. Where the hell is this place with no fire hydrants to fight fires. I would not move there for sure.
Northern California. Tons of fire videos on UA-cam with no mention of any of the things you mentioned.
AY DIO.
A so called "quick reaction force" ....not 😂
Maybe you should read the note at the bottom of the description...you're definitely not funny.
These guys are on the same level as Grants Pass Rural Fire Dept.
And the camera man watches the fire instead of saying, yo-ya got a flare up back here. Smh The abandoned place was intentionally set on fire because it was an eye sore. Dump some dirt on it and call it good.
After the house burns down they start using water, isn't that funny??????
What about all that global warming???
.#zZz#.⚡⬆️⬇️💀☢
they could have put the fire out lazy fire figters
always seek the source of the fire by seeking the hot spot tihs is the source that can not be controlled. other areas will be egffected by what ebvert you do to distemper the fire. you can have many different types of firesa fire that is self contained, meaning can not be made different. locate this one area and you can control the fire.light water will not allow a fire to be reenighted. amnd un controlled. kill the source the fire will take care of itself. this is always called the hot spot. you may wonder how i know such things I'M GOD.
I guess their deck guns were broken.
The minute they put their deck guns on the fire they lose the whole block they didn't have enough water to fight the fire there are no hydrants on the island the water had to be trucked in fight the fire or protect the exposures
They could pumped water in the fire trucks from that local water source,i saw a jet ski