First Arriving Network
Powered by the First Arriving Network,Reaching 1M+ First Responders Worldwide

Raw video: Auto business & other firms destroyed in Napoleon Township, Michigan fire.

Click here to follow on Facebook (hit “like”)

This is video from a fire Thursday at an auto shop in Napoleon Township, Michigan. It happened while a vehicle’s gaoline tank was being worked on.

A large fire reported about 5 p.m. destroyed the building at 3405 Brooklyn Road in Napoleon Township, which housed the shop and three other businesses, and hurt Williams.

Williams was burned and had to go to a hospital, but he is OK, said Derek Rutan, 31, who owns D and D Auto with Williams. His shirt caught fire and he had burns on the back of his arms, Brandt said.

The structure also contained Trophy Mounts Taxidermy; Dixon Market, which sells plants; and Concrete Solutions, a commercial and residential concrete and excavating company.

Do you want to sell a rig? Click HERE to find out how with


Comments - Add Yours

  • FireGears

    ANOTHER video which highlights that the Fire Service is stuck on “stupid”.

    STILL attempting to fight fires with plain water in
    an VERY non-ordinary combustibles world.

    We should be ADDING fire extinguishing agents
    to make plain water very much more effective in fighting
    the non-ordinary combustable fires we face everyday.

    Hey, the Crash-Rescue folks figured it out when their “world”
    began to fill up with non-ordinary combustibles…

    As did the Wildland Fire folks when they figured it out how to make
    their limited water supplies more effective …

    Someday, even the leather-heads may figure it out.
    (although, MANY FDs have.!!!! )


    Stay Safe.!!!

  • Joe

    Big Fire, Big Water………..1 3/4″ lines come on, might as well use a garden hose.

    • Vol. Firefighter

      I agree, the master stream needs to be used. Big GPM for big fire.

      I do not know if there are hydrants located there, but if so, the big nozzle needs to come out.

      Since it is an auto repair business, there was most likely acetylene tank(s) and other haz mat hazards there.


    Don’t feel bad. If was a bit further east, they would’ve pulled an 1.5″.

    Seriously, if you roll in on that and don’t lead off with a 2.5″ and/or deck gun, just what are you saving those big streams for??

  • ltfd seattle

    Fire Gears, how about if you use some basic fire science and advocate for effective fire flow & stream application first?

    I’m not sure what the available water supply was in this incident (or what resources & response timelines they were dealing with), but I hope that my crew would default to a portable monitor (500 gpm+) to start. The 1-3/4″ would be much more effective on the car fires.

  • chief 200

    Again. It is an epidemic. NO justification. I agree about the ‘additives” but far worse, FAR worse is the failure of the officers who make policy to tolerate such poor firefighting operations. I highly doubt it will end. This is a master stream fire. The two firefighters shown could easily deploy a portable monitor, put into operation and stretch a 2.5″ as well.

  • Rudedawg

    I’m glad to see that other people on this forum are recognizing the failure of tactics in the fire service. The 1.75″ lines shouldn’t even have made it off the truck. Can somebody out there do an experiment for me? Take the 1.75″ lines off the pre-connect crosslays under the cover of darkness, and replace them with 2.5″ lines(I know they won’t fit in most crosslay compartments, but just hear me out). Maybe then the 2.5″ lines will get used. The fire service has been “programmed” to grab whatever is in the crosslay and use it. So why don’t we put the 2.5″ lines there, and take the 1.75″ lines to the back of the engine? Seems that everbody is too lazy to go to the back of the engine and pull the 2.5″ line. Maybe just get rid of the 1.75″ lines all the way around. This isn’t just about this fire. It’s more and more of the fire videos on here. We need to wake up.

  • Bob Sacamento

    I like it Rudewag, 21/2″ pre connect.
    The reason people don’t like 21/2″:
    1. its too hard – put in on the ground and use the reach of the stream 1 or 2 people easy can control.
    2. I will waste all of my water- not if you put it on the fire, using 13/4″ while the fire is spreading ensures you will veto spray water longer all the while not putting out fire
    3. too much nozzle reaction- bigger hose doesn’t mean more pressure 15-20 PSI per 100′ 11/4″ nozzle 200′ 90 PSI Engine pressure
    4. don’t start with 13/4″ then move to 21/2″ when more people show up use 21/2″ from the start and the big fire will be more manageable when the calvary shows up
    5. for those that say they can hold a fire with 13/4″ I say I can put it out with 21/2″ and mop it up with 13/4″
    6. we all say big fire big water then lets do it.

    Get out and practice

    Cut off the fire and protect the portion on the right( “D” side) screw the fully involved part.


    The same folks who won’t lead off with a 2.5″ when needed are the same ones who “always” drop a 3″ and then say we’ll go to 5″ if it gets too much for the 3″.
    If I hear one more “it’s too heavy” tearjerker about 2.5″ and 5″ …

    Like Bob said, the goal isn’t to hold the fire, it’s to put it out.

  • Anonymous

    Gears if you look closely to the second picture show [ didn’t catch any mile markers on the tape ] but, help me out please. I thought it looked like they may have been using some additive. It appeared there was some foamy water sticking to what was left of the door frame to the left and the run-off flowing out of the doorway. Probably didn’t have the correct mixture for the 1.75 line being used. What do ya think? How about if they used larger hose and appliances for the situation at hand and wouldn’t have to worry about any percentage mixtures.

  • FireGears

    Hey Anon,

    I did see that in the 2nd video.
    It looks like an additive is finally being applied.

    They were sure not using it on the first video or those 1.75″ lines would have been
    very much more effective.

    By adding Fire Extinguishing Agents,
    limited manpower and limited water issues are far more manageable.

    I was encouraged to see an Fire Extinguishing Agent FINALLY being added.

    In another 10-years or so, our new leather-heads will be shocked to hear there was a
    time at their FD when Fire Extinguishing Agents were NOT being added to plain water.

    Stay Safe and Work Smart.!!!

  • Up there doin

    Additive or no additive, if you dont pull the right line off the truck it isnt going to make much difference.

  • FireGears

    Sorry “Up There”,

    Your statement is just not true.

    Adding the correct Fire Extinguishing Agent to a smaller water stream
    can make it as effective (and sometimes MORE effective)
    as a larger stream of just plain water.

    That is the science behind the modern Fire Extinguishing Agents now available.

    We do NOT fight “ordinary combustable” fires any longer.
    Our world is FULL of NON-“ordinary combustibles” which
    plain water is less effective in extinguishing.

    Hey “Up There”…
    Ever wonder WHY we see 1000’s upon 1000’s of gallons of plain water
    just running down the street at a major fire.????

    WHY is the Fire Service still attempting to fight these fires which
    we encounter EVERY DAY with just plain water.????
    If the Fire Service began to DEMAND better and less expensive
    Fire Extinguishing Agents, IT WOULD HAPPEN.!!!!

    I have a dream,
    That the FS finally gets un-stuck off “stupid”.!!!

    Stay Safe and Work Smart.!!!

  • mark

    Strangely enough, I have to agree with FireGears on this one.

    Auto repair occupancy=lots of flammable materials. Not to mention, the fire started while a gas tank was being worked on.

    An even better concept is using the proper hose with an additive.

    PS Coldfire would have put this fire out before it started. ;)

  • Steve in NJ

    I agree with FireGears. I think with the right additive, the first due company could have knocked that entire fire down with a water can extinguisher. This, of course, makes the entire argument about 1 3/4″ hose vs. 2 1/2″ hose purely academic. And all these years we’ve been fighting fires with plain water. How 20th Century of us. FireGears! Where have you been? Our Lord and Savior!


    Let’s be perfectly honest up front … just how much do we think of the gasoline from that initial gas tank was left upon FD arrival?? Yeah, me too. The shop had plenty of other fireload, but the initial gas tank didn’t last long.
    Maybe, along with the standard array of advertising logos found in your average auto repair shop, just a simple ColdFire sign could haev prevented all this damage.
    Going all “non-stupid” doesn’t make much sense if you’re (leatherhead or plastic) not going to choose the appropriate hoseline. Even a booster line of ColdFire is going to have an uphill battle against all those BTUs.

  • AbsoluteReality

    NJ Steve,

    10,000+ years from now your opinion concerning the fire service will mean nothing.

    Your relationship (or lack of) with THE LORD and Savior, JESUS CHRIST, will mean EVERYTHING!

    Check out online the:
    . FireFighters for CHRIST
    . Fellowship of Christian Firefighters

    Wise Men (and Women) Still Seek HIM