Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3D Gaseous-phase Firefighting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UsingAllHands
    replied
    To ScottMA64 and anyone else who is confused about fire attack:

    I highly suggest you get and view a copy of the Video "Methods of Structure Fire Attack." It is from the Bread and Butter series of Fire Engineering Videos. Better yet, get the complete Andrew Fredericks 4 Video set. For anyone who doesn't recognize that name, Andrew Fredericks was a very intelligent and experienced NYC fireman who often wrote on the subject of nozzles and fire attack for Fire Engineering Magazine. He was also a contributor on the Fire Nuggets Website. His passion and goal was to educate today's firefighters in Engine Operations, and particularly, I believe, to convince everyone that smoothbore nozzles truly are the weapon of choice for structural firefighting. Unfortunately, Andy was killed at the World Trade Center Collapse 2 years ago. His work obviously remains unfinished if people are still talking about spraying fog around a room in a "Z" or circlar pattern.

    Scott, I am sorry to hear that was how you were trained. The problem with the fire service today is that too many people are "teaching" without having any real good firefighting experience. Anyone can call themselves and 'instructor' and vomit back nonsense that they have heard from someone else. Andy Fredericks was unique in that he understood the science of fighting fires but also had a ton of real world experience to back his knowledge up. I implore anyone who has any doubts: Listen to those who really, truly know what the heck they are talking about through experience.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScottMA64
    replied
    bpevans - You are 100% correct. I didn't specify anything about possible victims or other firefighters. Using that kind of attack is definetly the wrong way to go. My 1st live fire drill I used indirect instead of direct. luckily the room wasn't that hot yet and nobody got burned.

    Scott

    Leave a comment:


  • bpevans
    replied
    Wow, I missed all the excitement the last few days. Most everyone has said it in some form or another already, and I'm going to pile on - Paul is dedicated to making aggressive firefighting safer by educating us on the most effective techniques to use to tame this beast we call fire - no matter what stage or form it is in when we face it. He has an understanding of fire and fire behavior that we should all strive to attain - and he's there pushing and helping us attain it.

    ScottMA64 - that's a form of indirect attack. There are many factors involved in deciding to use it - like is the room still sealed up, are there any victims in the room, or are there victims in the vicinity. If the fire isn't sealed in the room, you can lose the benefits of the steam conversion. If there are victims, you just cooked them - even if they are nearby, if the steam gets to them they're screwed.

    If you are still in the room, you just created firefighter soup. This is how the indirect attack got its bad rap - from being mis-applied and burning a lot of folks, especially those on the hose. It still goes on to this day, there are people around here who teach some form of fog application, applied in some pattern, and just toughing out the steam.

    I would educate and train more with other techniques so you can have safer and more effective tools at your disposal. Paul's site, www.firetactics.com, is a great resource.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScottMA64
    replied
    Hello everyone. 1st let me quickly introduce myself. I have been a call firefighter in a small town of 4000 people for 4 years and an emt for 2. Being in such a small town we have VERY limited structure fires, in fact I can count on 1 hand how many we had since i've joined. So when it comes to actual structure fires im very very inexperienced, but, we still train and train and train.

    Now, im not here to debate about the original posters theory's or intentions. But I was floored when I read about FF's in the big city's using smooth bores in a structure. I never heard of this debate. I've always been trained on fogs. Have a room on fire thats safe to enter? Open the door, apply the fog pattern in a couple of circles or a "Z" pattern at the ceiling, shut door. We've been taught steam conversion is the key, 1 drop of water expanding 1700 times is the key in fighting a fire in a room. Once all that is done then you can do your straight stream direct attack to put out the rest of the fire. All of our trucks have combination nozzles on them, though we do keep straight stream nozzles in the compartments.

    Again, this is how i've been trained, im NOT intending to slam how other departments put out fires. As far as im concerned the key is getting the "wet stuff on the red stuff" and above all be SAFE!!!

    And please, leave my beloved Red Sox out of this!

    Thanks guys!

    Scott

    Leave a comment:


  • Batt18
    replied
    33Motor Here are two links to the TV documentary - part of which are online

    http://www.rsfd.org/index.html?http&...overy_1995.htm

    LINK TWO HERE

    Click the little page document at the top of the 2ND LINK page to view the video file. The links might be a bit erratic here but do work!

    This documentary on the techniques were made by a good friend of mine - John Taylor. You make it sound like an 'indirect attack' (Iowa method) but what you describe is merely a door entry technique that forms part of the process. 3D attack is aggressive in nature and demands applications in close proximity to the fire (where safe) in an effort to make the environment even safer.

    QUALITY Training is critical to the success of these techniques
    Last edited by Batt18; 09-24-2003, 04:07 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • 33motor
    replied
    Many years ago I saw a show on TV where they were using a method like that. I'm not sure if it was the same or not, but it was very interesting. It probably helped that I was able to watch it from a video perspective. It was somewhere in Europe, and what they did was open the door, and spray a couple of pulses in, then they would close it and when they reopened it a moment later, the fire was out. It seemed really effective. It just sort of struck me as a borring way to fight fire though. LOL The kid in me still like to go in and get dirty.

    Leave a comment:


  • RyanEMVFD
    replied
    it doesn't involve propane so I'm happy.

    It's a tactic to be used as a tool. the more tools the better, just remember to train with the tools before hand.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lewiston2Capt
    replied
    Having been around for the previous discussions on Pauls 3D gaseous technique, and having personally discussed them with the Lt, I do see the benefit of bringing this topic up once again. I would hope that all of the jakes here would be able to have an educated debate without reverting to the age old, on-going arguement that we cant seem to get past.
    I have mostly read the previous threads on the 3D technique with interest. My limited posting on the subject was due to wanting to shut up and learn. I have been taught pulsing as a means of fire control, but that was more of a direct attack. I find these debate educational and would hope that we can have another informative discussion (along with some good natured ball busting).

    Leave a comment:


  • Batt18
    replied
    I just want to thank those of you who supported an old 'jake' who was gettin a 'roastin' in here E229Lt, hfd66truck, WDFT10, CollegeBuff, StillPSFB and CaptainGonzo - these are all people who I have debated with on the forums for many years. Not everyone is open to embracing any firefighting tactic that involves water-fog! However, I always urge people to be open-minded enough to explore a bit further. I do not encourage people to attempt these techniques in the 'real'-world without adequate training. However, as you see (and I have a hundred e-mails saying the same) occasionally someone gets a very good result with the 3D approach.

    3D Firefighting? It is NOT just about applying water-fog as a means of countering extreme forms of fire development, flashover etc. It is a unified approach that encourages straight stream attack 95% of the time. It involves concepts that encourage firefighters entering burning structures to exert control over their environment utilizing the right choice of stream, at the right time, whilst ensuring any venting actions complement the approach. It is about understanding fire behavior and about recognizing when to take a fire in its gaseous state and when to take it in its fuel state. Like I said - you can get it the wrong way round and then its YOU that gets roasted.

    To hear that some FDNY personnel are willing to try out these techniques for themselves carries a strong message. The effect of pulsing water droplets from a 'can' into the overhead, as opposed to directing a constant stream onto an inaccesible fire can only have positive effects. This particular strategy has always been one fraught with hazards but has resulted in some of the most spectacular 'snatch' rescues.

    This 3D approach may cool and 'shrink' the gas layers in the overhead, causing the smoke layer to rise a few vital inches! I am here if you want to ask questions or debate it, or even if you want to place an opposite point of view.

    Stay safe.........

    Leave a comment:


  • CaptainGonzo
    replied
    I, too will echo Dave aka hfd66 truck's statements. I took a flashover recognition course with Dave at his FD. I have seen "up close and persnal" how a short burst of fog can delay the flashover to get time to escape. 3d fog attacks might not be the correct answer for every fire... but if they can get a crew out of a flashover situation, go home to their families and live to fight another day, then it is a good thing...Paul Grimwood's tactics are just another tool in our firefighting arsenal!

    Leave a comment:


  • stillPSFB
    replied
    Just saw this thread, and I'll jump in here -

    Having been taught the techniques that Paul promotes I'll simply say this -
    Without them I wouldn't be here today (nor would the guys with me) - at a fire a few months ago things took a sudden turn for the worse and if I hadn't of known how to use gas cooling techniques we would have been caught in the flashover that was about to occur - we wouldn't have made it back to the door before the room would have flashed. It was just lucky that I was on the knob that day.

    Works for me!

    Leave a comment:


  • CollegeBuff
    replied
    Don't forget- Paul isn't just some annoying pusher of "European firefighting." I've seen posts of his where he speaks of trying to take American ventilation tactics back home to England. And guess what- I bet they aren't thrilled about it either! "New" is not "bad"!

    Paul strikes me as a natural teacher with a sincere desire to help other firefighters. He did not deserve what he got in this thread. Opinions are like.... well, a few different things- but everybody's got one!

    Leave a comment:


  • WTFD10
    replied
    To echo Dave, Paul has been posting here for a long time and I get the impression that his only intentions are to help his brother and sister firefighters.

    I encourage everyone to spend some time reading the articles on his website. His ideas are well researched and thought provoking.

    My final thought is, it's refreshing to see debates on firefighting tactics on here rather than the same old BS lights, helmets, etc. For that I say "Thanks Paul!"

    Leave a comment:


  • hfd66truck
    replied
    You know, I am kinda suprised at the tone this thread took.

    I have been part of these forums for several years, and have emailed Paul back on forth on different topics. He has a wealth of imformation, and his interest is in promoting what he believes are tactics that will help us. Don't want to believe him, then don't. Don't want to try them, no problem. But to slam the crap out him for promoting thinking, even if the thinking is contrary to what you believe...come on folks.

    Last time I checked, these forums were here to network, share ideas, and maybe even learn a thing or two. Tired of reading about the 3-D tactics, then stop reading them. Don't kill the messenger.

    Everyone has something to offer, from the big cities right on down to little ole town USA....maybe Paul is pushing his stuff a lot, but it is a technique he believes will help save lives...maybe he is wrong, at least he ain't trying to sell you insurance.

    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • stm4710
    replied
    Does this thread sound like a Infomercial?

    Not really familair with your ideas but you can make statistics up to prove anything.
    Like did you know 3 out of 4 people make up only 75% of the population!

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X