wearing double hoods

[jerry4184]

I still don't get most of the two hoods argument, but hey, what do i know?

I don't use two, I don't need two, but if you want to, I gues go ahead, it's not going to affect me.

As for the video, I doubt two hoods would have helped no matter how you look at, what do you think johnny46? I say they were wearing two STUPID hoods.

[ndvfdff33]

I really don't see what protection your going too gain by wearing two hoods. If the fire is hot enough too burn through one chances are its going too burn through two. That vid is just pure stupidity

[johnny46]

I think the guys in the video are idiots.

Two hoods would buy time, create more airspace and thus insulate the head better. It obviously would increase protection. Seconds count when you're trying to get out.

I use one hood currently and I'm thinking about using two, but I don't own a second hood since I lost one a few years ago. The guys who use two hoods here have the sock hood as insurance against gaps left by the occasional screw up.

[Frosty42]

Just my .02 worth on this matter.....
With the rapid advancements in PPE, our thermal exposure has been greatly extended to the point where in some cases it has resulted in loss of life because the end user relied on the PPE and not their training. Firefighter survival does not start when we recognize the fact that we are in trouble. It starts the second we respond to the call. We should be using our senses and our training to perform our tasks on the fireground. PPE is only a small part of the equation.

I challenge anyone to prove that structural PPE is tenanable for 17 seconds in a flashover. Current studies with modern PPE can only allow for 3-5 seconds of survival in post-rollover (flashover) environments. Two hoods? No Thanks.

[jerry4184]

Oh, I never said it was good for 17.5 seconds. 17.5 is the industry standard to which all gear is manufactured, but that is only good for a one time flash heating to flashover temperatures. It doesn't take inot pre hearting the gear by crawling through the burning house, you sweating in it, your gear being older than just out of the package new, or any one of the ten million things that effect us on a daily basis. That's why I said, you might get a few seconds, out of it, but 17.5, no way.

[TC33FF]

I would prefer to wear a reed hood but my dept doesn't allow it. Since not everyone would be wearing it. I know a Houston area Dept not in the Reeds. But they do give us a triple layer nomex hood. Which is pretty close to the Reed. I like to have the little extra protection that the hoods give you. Some guys wear 2 of the 3 layer hoods which gets to bulky for me. Reed is still the preferance. But will live with the 3ply hood. Chris

[johnny46]

Just my .02 worth on this matter.....
With the rapid advancements in PPE, our thermal exposure has been greatly extended to the point where in some cases it has resulted in loss of life because the end user relied on the PPE and not their training.

I'm glad you have this special insight. Do you speak directly with the dead, or do you just make the assumptions based upon your magnificent intelligence?

[johnny46]

Just my .02 worth on this matter.....

I challenge anyone to prove that structural PPE is tenanable for 17 seconds in a flashover. Current studies with modern PPE can only allow for 3-5 seconds of survival in post-rollover (flashover) environments. Two hoods? No Thanks.

Is "post-rollover" a euphemism for flashover?