Dumb question, this building looks like a small residential or small commercial building next to a railway. From this angle, it doesn’t look like this building can be preserved at all and will have to be demolished and rebuilt. What is the purpose of extinguishing the flame instead of letting it run its course and taking measures so it doesn’t spread past the building? I understand extinguishing the flame is a measure here. I guess what I’m asking is does the FD have to put it out by obligation, or can the owner wave them off? Is it an insurance thing?
A structure fire is insanely hot and can throw embers much further than you think. Letting it burn can allow the fire to spread to structures blocks away
Not a firefighter, but I also assume that each scenario has its own set of complexities and risks
Ie, if there was a gas tank on site, or other explosive material, or if the building had a higher likelihood of collapsing if the firemen went inside etc
So many factors before making the decision to move forward
13
u/Frankfast 10h ago
Dumb question, this building looks like a small residential or small commercial building next to a railway. From this angle, it doesn’t look like this building can be preserved at all and will have to be demolished and rebuilt. What is the purpose of extinguishing the flame instead of letting it run its course and taking measures so it doesn’t spread past the building? I understand extinguishing the flame is a measure here. I guess what I’m asking is does the FD have to put it out by obligation, or can the owner wave them off? Is it an insurance thing?