Category Archives: Nozzle Smooth Bore

Default Aggressive Saves 29 Year Old, Escambia County Fire Ladder 12, “GRABS Podcast 57” Brothers in Battle

Posted on by

On March 3rd, 2021, LT Daniel Mills, FF Jeff Fangman, and BC Curt Isakson, from Escambia County Fire Rescue, Pensacola Florida, were invited to a virtual sit down with Brothers in Battle, GRABS Podcast host, Grant Schwalbe. Ladder 12’s arrival video is posted for you to see what they saw on arrival at this house fire with a civilian rescue on January 28th, 2021.

CLICK NOW TO LISTEN TO THE PODCAST

The podcast falls right in line with the update we posted yesterday on the academic research by Chief Brian Brush’s Firefighter Rescue Survey. Grant’s interview with the crew of Ladder 12 and Battalion Chief Curt Isakson, provides a deeper look into what it took for LT Daniel Mills, FF Jeff Fangman to get it done.

CF Tactics gives thanks to Brothers in Battle for inviting the members of Ladder 12 to tell their story linked near the bottom of this post. Podcast host Grant Schwalbe has fifty-six (56) other great stories of firefighters putting the citizen first, in their own words. Much can be learned from these first-hand interviews.

The Escambia County Professional Firefighters IAFF Local 4131 provided a glimpse into the mindset of the firefighters they represent with this statement. “Though there was no report of anyone trapped, our “Default Aggressive” mindset from our culture dictates we still search until WE say the building is clear. Their quick actions, aggressive mindset, and years of training paid off with the saving of a 29-year-old male.“

VIEW THE ABC 3 WEAR-TV NEWS REPORT AND FIRE SCENE VIDEO HERE.

Below you will find two links to listen to this podcast right here in this post by clicking play.

Grabs 57: Escambia County, FL (Jan 28, 2021)

 

Listen to Grabs 57 on Apple Podcasts

Aggressive Firefighting Saves Lives!!

Posted on by

I will not make excuses for supporting Aggressive Interior Firefighting. I have supported Direct Water Application since the 90s and have been teaching it for nearly 15 years. I supported going through the front door even with fire venting through that same door way before some test burns proved that we don’t PUSH FIRE with straight and SOLID streams. Urban Firefighters have been teaching Direct Water Application/Entry through the front door most of the time regardless of fire location. They taught this based on hundreds of FIRES they had been apart of extinguishing, at all times of the day and night. Fires that were not in a controlled environment in the middle of the day. These fires were in all types of structures with different fuel packages and different tactics. There was a time that the Urban/Fireground Experienced Firefighter was valued. Their time fighting REAL FIRES under emergency conditions were valued as a positive and not as a negative. It seems that some feel just reading books and spending time on social media certifies them to tell others how its done. I realize not all firefighters have the opportunity to get fight fires frequently and that’s ok. I respect the firefighter that continues to read and train so when the do have a fire, they are that much more prepared for BATTLE. Battle is what fighting fires is and always will be. You can not completely replace or reach the same level without the experiences. Its like our USA Women’s Soccer Team. They won not only from skill but the experience of playing in BIG MATCHES. Experience Matters! Take classes, Train in a drill tower, Get Acquired Structures, do whatever you can to prepare yourself for BATTLE. But at the end of the day you cant fully replace time compressed decision making under emergency conditions. The Fireground is a unique place and so many can do a certain tactic on the drill field, but fail to be able at 2am when fire is blowing out multiple windows. Time teaches us all that experience matters in so many parts of life. Kids thin their smarting than mom and dad until they get older. Life teaches us lessons. I wish more were looking to study the Urban Firefighter and working towards making the most with their staffing instead of making up excuses. Time Delayed Tactics is part of limited staffing. Figure out what needs to be done and then prioritize. You may need to delay some tactics until more staffing arises. Stop Making Excuses and figure out how to do the best you can, with what’s provided to you. I realize some do not have the staffing to vertically ventilate. But just because you do not have the staffing does not mean its not needed, just that you can’t do it based on staffing levels. We haven’t been doing it wrong. We have been very successful in the fire service at saving civilian lives and property. We continue to save lives everyday. We must continue to look for the best way in and sometimes/most of the time that’s the FRONT DOOR.

If we do not slow down on this push for exterior fire attack at fires, Civilians Lives will be lost in larger numbers. I have studied a large number of civilian rescues/grabs. The Grabs/Rescues were done on firegrounds were AGGRESSIVE INTERIOR TACTICS were used from the start. Civilians are mostly dying from smoke inhalation and not thermal burns. You can FLOW WATER from the yard all day and COOL the environment. But if FIREFIGHTERS are not getting inside rapidly to locate and remove the trapped civilians, they will die regardless of how COLD your HARD FROM  THE YARD is. This is not a HOT and COLD topic. Its a LIFE and DEATH topic.

Lets get back to putting the CIVILIAN FIRST!!

I am VERY proud to tell my family and neighbors that they come first when I am on-duty ready to SERVE. I am ready to serve them like the Soldier is serving all of us to provide FREEDOM. We are/become so SAFETY CONCIOUS were almost hang cuffing ourselves. Safety is Great until it cost more Lives than its saving.

Let me say that again….. SAFETY is GREAT, Until it Cost More Lives than its SAVING!!

Aggressive Firefighting Saves Lives and Property.

If you want to save firefighter lives than push for better diets, more time getting physically fit, better annual physicals, less stress in the firehouse, and WEARING SEATBELTS..

Wish I had more time to RANT.

I support Transitional Attack when staffing or the Fire Dictates. But I do not respond looking to do that as my first option. I hope that staffing and fire conditions allow an Offensive Interior Attack, utilizing the front door.

Have a Great Day!

Thanks-Curt Isakson

Smoothbore or Fog?

Posted on by

image

SB or FOG? My 2$$
It’s time to but this debate to bed. I say BOTH. There certainly is a place for both and if you find yourself only taking a stand on one of the two nozzles, chances are you are uninformed. SB and Fog a lot of times are dependent on the demographics they serve. Where I work in suburban America, BOTH nozzles are needed and are beneficial. The biggest problem I see when debating these nozzles is that many firefighters are just simply uninformed or under educated on the advantages and disadvantages of BOTH nozzles and even at times, don’t know how to operate the nozzle properly so that it is an effective weapon. The lack of knowledge prevents progress. Staying in your own “bubble” (not getting out of your own department to see how the rest of the world does business) prevents progress. Close minded firemen…”We have always done it this way…and no one got hurt….or just put the damn fire out” mentality, prevents progress. I will take it one step further, it not only prevents progress, but it makes OUR job that more dangerous. That’s right, not just your job, but ALL OF US. This is not an opinion, it is an evidence based FACT. Here are some quick points to ponder that are FACT. Fog nozzles DO NOT provide ANY type of protection with interior firefighting. It is a myth that has absolutely no merit. Watch the video and see what type of “protection” it provides. When operated on a fog pattern, you can move almost as much air as a PPV, essentially creating a wind fueled fire. Again, see the video when the fog pattern is opened twice. Observe how “violent” the conditions get. Drastically changes conditions and heat conditions increase significantly. The ironic thing is, this is what I was taught in 1989 in rookie school. “We don’t know what we don’t know, until we know we don’t know.” I now know it was wrong and dangerous. I’ve learned this through training, education, and experience of being steamed burned (multiple times). Moral of this point, NEVER operate any type of fog pattern, no matter how narrow the fog pattern, when combating interior fires (when fire suppression, not to be confused with mop up). Don’t think so?? Just google the history of the fog nozzle and pattern and how they were originally designed to be used or read up on Lt. Andy Fredrick’s, then come back and finish reading my boring rant. Always use a straight stream. Again, watch video and it clearly demonstrates why we should not be using fog patterns. With that being said, fog nozzles on a straight stream are extremely effective and are excellent weapons. In addition, it does provide the firefighter with a little more versatility to use during overhaul and hydraulic ventilation if needed. Best Fog nozzle weapons are the 50 psi nozzle pressure nozzles. To keep it brief, it equates to high volume of H2o (150+) with low nozzle reaction. The greater the nozzle pressure, the greater the nozzle reaction which equates to gating down the flow. Automatic Nozzles are dangerous, period. Don’t use them with interior firefighting. If you don’t agree or understand, go flow test one and you will see. Don’t use 100 psi fog nozzles. These were big in the 80s and 90s, but fortunately are phasing out of interior firefighting. SB nozzles are extremely effective interior weapons and have been since the inception of the American Fire Service. They have low nozzle pressure (50 psi), typically open orifices the pass debris (essential for stand pipe operations) and solid packed streams that will penetrate objects such as dry wall much better than their fog counterparts. They typically have the same reach as the newer designed fog nozzles, but more volume of the stream goes further distance. SB also are typically small, light, basic, and compact, unlike their fog brothers from another mother. This design makes it ideal for combat firefighting. Light and small equates to aggressive movement of the nozzle….no big fog bails weighing it down. Simple in design….less that will go wrong, and that IS a big deal when the shit hits the fan. And, they are just plain durable and an effective weapon. The biggest mistake I have seen in my career for those who have not been exposed to SB nozzle operations (and that’s a lot of departments in suburban America), is the lack of understanding on how to operate this weapon in an effective mode. It should be moved aggressively all over the room, hitting the floor, sweeping the upper atmosphere, using the ceiling and walls to break up the stream into small droplets. The droplets will not be as fine as a fog stream, thus working to our advantage to not completely jack up the thermal balance like the fog pattern does. Many firefighters loose site of a simplistic concept they teach us in rookie school. GPM extinguishes BTUs. If we allow firefighters to use a SB line when they have never used one before but we don’t train them on how to use it, then we shouldn’t get pissed if they have a negative experience and decide it is not a viable option. So, the point of this rant…..BOTH ARE AWESOME WEAPONS THAT SHOULD BE USED. I believe in having versatility on an engine and by having both options, only make sense. Don’t take mine or anyone else’s word on this, go find out for yourself by training, reading books, studies, and journals about this (that’s right…we do actually learn from reading others materials and can apply what we learn), and challenging the status quo. If you have formulated an opinion on this but it is not based on your own research, training, experience, and education, I would encourage you to re-evaluate your position on this subject. Be the courageous follower in your department and challenges all perspectives to find out what works best for your demographics. “Challenge the Status Quo!”
Be Aggressive-
8 5 0 F I R E M E N

1 ¾ for Commercial Attack……Why Not?

Posted on by

By: Battalion Chief Shannon Stone

City of Fort Walton Beach Fire Dept. Fla.

Now that I have your attention, take a moment to read this and provide feedback.

Couple of disclaimers; I’m not a writer so please be kind and I’m not advocating the use of 1 ¾ for commercial fires, but rather reaching out to those who are knowledgeable in this area and asking for feedback.

Recently during flow testing apparatus in my department, an engine company approached me and asked me a question. “What do you think about flowing and operating a 1 ¾ line flowing 260 GPM in place of  2 ½ line flowing 260 GPM?” You can imagine my response….”No way, we don’t use 1 ¾ for high flow GPM and we certainly wouldn’t use it to replace a 2 ½ line on a commercial job.” As you can imagine this started a debate which led to much testing and this article for County Fire Tactics. I will make this as brief as possible.

 

All flows were flow tested with a flow meter at the intake, nozzle reactions calculated multiple times, and tested advancing lines in full PPE simulating fatigue factors (not live fire). An “apples for apples” comparison was done with two identical tests. Both evolutions were performed with a four man company, the same firefighters in the same positions every evolution. They advanced the hose lines into a drill tower room 1, flowing to the left, shut down moved to the right and flowed, advance to the next room and flowed, advanced to the 2nd floor and flowed, advanced to the 3rd floor and flowed. Each time the nozzle was opened it was operated at full capacity for 30-60 seconds. Here are the details:

 

Evolution #1 – 2 ½ inch Ponn Conquest hose, 200 ft, solid bore nozzle with 1 1/8 tip

  • Engine pressure of 80 PSI equaling 265 GPM
  • As everyone knows, 2 ½ hose advancement is labor intensive and even with four well trained firefighters, the fatigue factor was still a concern
  • Firefighters had to work extra hard to manage the kinks in the line. They were never successful in removing all the kinks and this was performed in a drill tower where the obstacles are far less than an actual building.
  • Proper techniques were used by all especially by the nozzle man and back up firefighter
  • General assessment of the evolution is that it was very tiring and all firefighters were winded, but of course they said what all firefighters say “But we got it!”

IMAG2617 IMAG2614

Kink management was difficult at best with the 2 ½ advancement. The hose team was never successful in managing all the kinks in the line. Keep in mind there were numerous pivot points for this advancement.

Evolutions #2 – 1 ¾ inch Ponn Conquest hose, 200 ft, solid bore nozzle with 1 1/8 tip

 

  • Engine pressure of 140 PSI equaling 260 GPM
  • Half the weight allowed the firefighters to move the line very easily, much quicker, and more efficient than the 2 ½.
  • There was only 1 kink during the entire evolution which was easily corrected by a firefighter.
  • Proper techniques were used by all especially the nozzle man and back up firefighter. This is a 1 ¾ line but absolutely has to be operated and staffed like a 2 ½ line when flowing 260 GPM.
  • General assessment of the evolution is it was much easier to advance and the firefighters said they felt way less fatigued. They described it as no different than advancing any other 1 ¾ attack line. The nozzle man also stated that due to the smaller diameter of the 1 ¾ hose, he felt it was easier to hold and control the nozzle position.
Bleeding the line checking the stream preparing to advance the 1 ¾.

Bleeding the line checking the stream preparing to advance the 1 ¾.

Although hard to tell by looking at pictures but the kink factor was decreased significantly. Notice the nice stiff bends in the hose in comparison to the pictures of the 2 ½ hose.

Although hard to tell by looking at pictures but the kink factor was decreased significantly. Notice the nice stiff bends in the hose in comparison to the pictures of the 2 ½ hose.

IMAG2637

Wrapping the wall, stairwell, and rooms are essential with minimal staffed fire departments. The 1 ¾ worked very well due to the high pump pressure. It never kinked when utilizing these advancement methods. However, 2 ½ would kink immediately rendering this technique less effective resulting in numerous kinks.

Wrapping the wall, stairwell, and rooms are essential with minimal staffed fire departments. The 1 ¾ worked very well due to the high pump pressure. It never kinked when utilizing these advancement methods. However, 2 ½ would kink immediately rendering this technique less effective resulting in numerous kinks.

IMAG2636

Here are additional facts:

 

  • Nozzle reaction for both the 1 ¾ and 2 ½ are virtually identical since the GPM and diameter of the nozzle are the same.
  • Kink flow testing revealed that on average a kink in the 2 ½ hose would result in the flow decreasing from 265 GPM to 240 GPM.
  • Kink flow testing revealed that on average a kink in the 1 ¾ hose would result in the flow decreasing from 260 GPM to 210 GPM. The significant decrease is obviously due to the amount of water flowing through a smaller diameter hose.
  • 2 ½ hose was guaranteed to kink, 4 firefighters could not manage all the kinks resulting in a decrease average flow of GPM.
  • 1 ¾ hose was extremely difficult to kink due to the high pump pressure. Only one kink that was corrected easily and quickly. The average GPM was around 250-260.
  • Low friction loss hose was used (Ponn Conquest). Anyone who is a student of the fire service understands the actual diameter of this hose is slightly larger that standard hose (or slightly larger than what the manufactures actually advertises it as); however, manageability of the low friction loss hose vs the standard hose is identical.
  • High pump pressure had no negative bearing on advancement or operation of hose
  • The nozzle man has the same range of motion with the 1 ¾ line as the 2 ½ line
  • Reach, penetration of the fire stream of each was identical

 

Advantages of the 1 ¾ option

 

  • Literally ½ weight in comparison to 2 ½
  • Nozzle controllability was the same if not better with the 1 ¾
  • Line advances easier, faster, and more efficient
  • Fatigue factor was much less that 2 ½
  • Average GPM was greater than the 2 ½ (kink factor)

 

Disadvantages and limitations to the 1 ¾ high flow set up

  • It is likely that anything over 200 ft of 1 ¾ set up will not work due to high friction loss factors.
  • This should not be considered in high rise fires due to high friction loss factors. This would include most if not all standpipe operations.
  • If the 1 ¾ nozzle is operated too far out in front of the nozzle man, a serious “whipping or snapping” action of nozzle can occur. This is easily controlled by proper nozzle control and operation.

Summary

 

A quick special thanks to my guys that insisted I take a look at this. Fort Walton Beach Fire Department Engine Company 7– Acting Captain Justin Westmoreland, Engineer Mark Birchett, and Firefighter Brandon Waterhouse.

 

The testing we performed was much more comprehensive than what this article shows, but in an effort to make it brief and a quick read I stuck the meat and potatoes of the issue. In no way am I implying that we in the fire service move away from use of 2 ½ hose for large fire or commercial fire attack. However, the numbers and facts speak volumes that I believe are worthy of evaluating. If you think about it, this is no different from the evolution of 1 inch hose, to 1 ½ hose, to 1 ¾ hose, to low friction loss hose which now allows us to flow larger volumes of water under manageable conditions. I do buy into the concept of limiting your nozzle reaction and insuring you have a manageable line so the nozzle is ALWAYS operated properly during significant fire conditions-nozzle all the way open. This is why this 1 ¾ set up absolutely has to be operated as if it is a 2 ½ line insuring adequate staffing to insure correct deployment and operation.

 

So I beg the question….what are we missing here? What’s your thoughts and/or experiences with high flow, smaller diameter hose? Should this be a viable option for large fire attack?

Little Drops Of Water & Application of Water

Posted on by

FOG ATTACK

So when is it a good idea to use a Fog Attack or a Combination Attack? When should we set our Fog Nozzle on a fog pattern? When Should we set our Fog/combination nozzle on straight stream? Do we push fire and if so; when? Does the setting of the nozzle effect te ability to push fire? Is there ever a time we would want to push fire? When is it ok to apply water from the outside? BE BRAVE and post your thoughts. Share your opinion for all to see. Check Out  www.firefighterrescues.com sign up for email notification of New Post at bottom of Home Page.

The Two and Half Inch Attack Line “The Deuce & Half”

Posted on by

 

What’s the difference between the two set-ups? Is your department open to stretching & Flowing the 2.5″ attack line first due, with only a three person crew? Will your FD allow stretching & Flowing a 2.5″ off tank water?

 

Standpipe Operations

Posted on by

What do you carry in addition to above photo? How do you justify using 1.75″ in standpipe operations? When can you hook up on the FIRE FLOOR? What door should you force other than the Fire Apartment? If you are over taken by a WIND DRIVEN FIRE; what direction should you evacuate? When should you take the Elevator? Why is an inline gauge so critical? Why do FDs that have 1.75″ as their Standpipe Attack System get away with it?

Standpipe Operations require proper training and equipment that will allow the standpipe system to offer the best results. Standpipe systems placed into service before 1993 only required 65 psi at the highest outlet. This requirement was built around a 50psi nozzle and 2.5″ hose that would have a 15psi friction loss from standpipe connection to nozzle “150 feet”. Standpipe systems placed in service after 1993 require 100 psi at the highest outlet. This gives the FD an additional 35 psi to work with. It is still highly recommended in all systems to use 2.5″ attack line with a 2.5″ smoothbore nozzle with no stream shaper. The stream shaper takes away one of the reasons for using a smoothbore and the ability to pass sediment/debris. In addition, understand what tips are on the end of this Attack Weapon. 1″ = 210 GPM, 1 1/8 = 265 GPM, 1.25″ = 325 GPM. The BIGGER tip is not always the answer. The GPM must also reach the desired point; the burning solid fuels. So pick the tip for reach that will also deliver the GPM required.

The ball valve is placed on SP connection before turning on; to allow control with a valve the FD brought with them. Some valves in very salty areas are very hard to operate and may cause additional problems without a ball valve. It is critical to place inline gauge on discaharge side of ball valve to control proper operating pressure.

Have you trained your crew, company, station, department on providing water to standpipe via first floor connection? What are some of the concerns?

Rapid Attack Monitors

Posted on by

What are the pros and cons of portable monitors? Do you preconnect or leave in compartment? Do you have mounted on the exterior and where? What have you found works best? What type of tip do you leave on it? What is the longest you can stretch and still flow? Do you use 2.5" or 3" hose?

Smooth-Bore vs Fog What do you prefer for the interior attack?

Posted on by

Does a Smooth-bore cause water damage? Does a FOG on a WIDE FOG push Fire?

WHY are so many FIREFIGHTERS totally against/closed minded towards the       SOLID STREAM?  I love BOTH!!  I like options!! I like to have the chose based on fire conditions and extinguishment needs.  SOLID STREAMS/SMOOTH-BORE nozzles have been proven to be very reliable and effective on the fire ground for longer than anyone still involved in fighting fires. So study history and have options!!!!!!!  SORRY there is no DEBATE.

Choosing Between Smoothbore and Fog Nozzles: Key Considerations

When selecting a nozzle for interior firefighting, the choice between a smoothbore and a fog nozzle can significantly impact performance and safety. Here are the core arguments for each option:

Advantages of Smoothbore Nozzles

  1. Penetration and Reach: Smoothbore nozzles are renowned for their ability to deliver a concentrated stream of water with impressive penetration and distance. This feature is critical for reaching the seat of the fire quickly, especially in environments where high pressure is required.
  2. Consistent Flow Rate: They provide a stable Gallons Per Minute (GPM) output, which can be crucial in ensuring an effective and steady firefighting effort.
  3. Lower Operating Pressure: These nozzles generally require less pressure to operate efficiently, reducing nozzle reaction and making it easier for firefighters to handle the hose.

Advantages of Fog Nozzles

  1. Versatility: Fog nozzles offer a range of spray patterns, from a narrow straight stream to a wide fog. This adaptability allows firefighters to adjust the output based on the immediate needs of the situation, such as indirect attack or rapid heat absorption.
  2. Cooling and Protection: The wide spray pattern of a fog nozzle can absorb heat rapidly and provide a cooling shield for firefighters, especially when operated in confined spaces.
  3. Gas Entrainment: By generating a fog pattern, these nozzles can entrain significant volumes of gases, potentially pushing smoke and combustion products away from advancing hose lines.

Considerations and Challenges

  • Steam Production: While the fog pattern can be beneficial, it can also generate large amounts of steam, which might pose hazards in poorly ventilated areas or if crew members become surrounded by steam.
  • Situational Dependency: The best choice often depends on specific fire conditions. For example, a confined space might benefit from the cooling effect of a fog pattern, provided that ventilation is adequate to manage steam.
  • Combination Options: Some modern nozzles offer combination features, allowing firefighters to switch between fog and smoothbore settings. This flexibility can be invaluable in dynamic fire situations.

Ultimately, the decision between a smoothbore and a fog nozzle should be guided by the tactical requirements of the situation, the experience of the crew, and the specifics of the structure and fire behavior.

The Crucial Role of Knowledge in Firefighting: A Guide for Young Firefighters

Understanding the variety of nozzles available is fundamental for young or inexperienced firefighters. Here’s why diving deeper into this knowledge is crucial:

  1. Adaptability in Diverse Situations
    Fire scenarios vary significantly, and the nozzle you choose can dramatically affect the outcome. Knowing about different types empowers a firefighter to adapt quickly to unexpected challenges, deploying the most effective tools when seconds matter.
  2. Broadening Tactical Skills
    Different nozzles offer varied flow rates and spray patterns. By familiarizing yourself with these options, you enhance your tactical skill set. This means being able to control fires more effectively and efficiently, potentially saving more lives and property.
  3. Enhanced Safety Measures
    An understanding of nozzle mechanics and capabilities can lead to safer firefighting practices. Knowing how each type functions allows you to anticipate problems before they arise, ensuring that both you and your team operate in the safest possible manner.
  4. Professional Growth and Leadership
    Comprehensive knowledge beyond agency standards sets a solid foundation for leadership opportunities. When you can make informed decisions about equipment and tactics, you stand out as a knowledgeable professional, ready to guide and educate others.
  5. Personal Confidence and Initiative
    Having the technical know-how about a wide range of firefighting tools instills confidence in your abilities. This proactive learning approach demonstrates initiative, showing that you are not just reliant on habitual agency practices but are committed to personal development and improvement.

By seeking out knowledge beyond what is immediately required or available through your current agency, you prepare yourself for a more successful and adaptable firefighting career. This continuous learning approach aligns with the ultimate goal of every firefighter: saving lives and serving your community with excellence.

Understanding the Impact of Nozzle Choice on Standpipe Operations

When it comes to standpipe operations, the selection of the right nozzle is crucial for both safety and efficiency. Each fire department, whether large or small, faces unique challenges and conditions that influence their equipment choices. What works effectively in one region might not be suitable in another. Here’s how nozzle selection can significantly impact these operations:

1. Safety Considerations

  • Pressure and Control: Nozzles that require higher operating pressure can be difficult to manage, leading to potential safety risks. For instance, maintaining control over a 1.75” hose with a 100 psi fog nozzle can be challenging, especially under duress in high-pressure situations.
  • Compatibility with Hose: The right nozzle ensures a stable connection and smooth operation. Mismatched equipment can lead to hose whipping or a lack of directional control, putting firefighters at risk.

2. Efficiency in Water Delivery

  • Flow Rate: Different nozzles provide varying flow rates. Choosing a nozzle that optimizes flow for the specific building or fire size ensures that water is delivered effectively and promptly, minimizing damage and controlling the fire more efficiently.
  • Stream Patterns: Adjustability in the nozzle’s stream pattern—from fog to straight stream—can enhance the effectiveness of water delivery, enabling firefighters to adapt to changing fire dynamics quickly.

3. Operational Flexibility

  • Ease of Use: Some departments rely on older, familiar nozzles that align with their standard operating procedures, even if they aren’t the most efficient. By experimenting with modern nozzles designed for today’s challenges, fire departments can improve adaptability on the scene.
  • Cultural Adaptation: Many departments develop a preference based on historical use and training. However, examining current evidence and being open to modern nozzle options can lead to adopting practices that improve overall safety and effectiveness.

Fire Engineering has some excellent articles on drops of water. The authors actually did scientific experiments. The results showed that during an interior attack, the drops from a smoothbore (SB) actually made it through the fire gases as they fell and cooled the solid burning fuels. The water drops from a fog on a straight stream were smaller than those of a SB and were consumed in the upper gas area, not making it down to the burning solid fuels to stop the production of more heat/fire gases that kill and will cause the interior to continue to burn.

Myths and Misconceptions

There are several myths about smoothbore versus fog nozzles that need addressing. One such misconception is that penetration and distance are different factors; however, they are essentially the same. The straight stream from a properly adjusted fog nozzle is only marginally less effective than a comparable solid stream from a smoothbore.

When it comes to GPM and pressure, it’s crucial to compare apples to apples. Make sure to choose the right nozzle for the job by understanding these metrics in context.

Personal Preferences and Practical Use

I LIKE BOTH. But, if I am stretching for an interior attack, I would prefer a SB backed up by a fog. If stretching for exterior work, I would prefer fog. I can tell a difference between the two when operating inside with high heat conditions. The SB causes less upper steam and gives a fast knockdown. Fog requires the windshield wipers on the mask and heat conditions do rise more so than that of a SB.

In the end, they both are excellent nozzles if they are flowing more than the BTUs being produced.

However the deal with using said nozzle is DISCIPLINE! The nozzleman has to keep it on straight stream during operations 98% of the time. That is the rub and I see it all the time is the 3/4 fog attack nonsense. Bad nozzle discipline has given us fog dogs a bad name!!! BTW the FOG nozzles place is on the 1 3/4 ONLY…STOP USING IT ON BIGGER LINES AND MASTER STREAMS!

Now, let’s dive deeper into why this discipline is so critical. Fog nozzles offer versatility, allowing you to switch between direct and indirect attack strategies. This flexibility can be crucial in pushing fire and combustion products away from your advance. Yet, this adaptability comes with its own set of challenges.

Advantages of Fog Nozzles

  • Steam Generation: In confined spaces, fog nozzles create steam, which can suppress fire effectively. However, this is only beneficial if the area is clear of unprepared firefighters or victims.
  • Gas Entrainment: These nozzles can entrain around 5,000 cubic feet of gases per minute into the stream, aiding in controlling the fire under the right circumstances.

Disadvantages to Consider

  • Positioning Hazards: Using a fog pattern when above or between the fire and the ventilation point is risky. This can lead to steam being forced back over the crew, increasing the danger.
  • Heat and Condensation: The steam generated condenses upon anything cooler than 212°F, including you and your gear, bringing 970 BTUs per pound back onto the crew. This can lead to burns and other heat-related injuries if not managed properly.

In essence, while fog nozzles are powerful tools, their proper use hinges on strict discipline and understanding of their inherent risks and benefits.

 

 

Conclusion

Ultimately, the effectiveness of standpipe operations hinges on selecting the right combination of hose and nozzle. Fire departments are encouraged to assess their specific needs and consider new technologies and methodologies. By doing so, they can ensure that their choices promote not just tradition but enhanced safety and operational efficiency.