Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46
  1. #1
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default Out with the old, in with the new. Nozzles that is.

    So as some of you know my volunteer department is technically a public safety department. Meaning, we have had a police chief who was also over the fire deperatment for the last 10 years or so. Former chief was a firefighter, however like most public safety directors, he was a police officer at heart. This being said, when fire equipment was purchased it was often a "hey I X and whatever the cheapest one is will work" type deal. This led to use ending up with all sorts of different equipment, and the nozzles we were carrying fell victim to this system. Out of our three engines, we have fixed gallonage on one, selectable on another, and automatics on the third. Slightly confusing and not exactly great for a simplified fire ground.

    During our last ISO "what can we do better" meeting, our current fire division administration addressed the need for additional nozzles. I used this as an opportunity to revamp our system; get everything the same and make things as easy as possible for our volunteers with limited training time to learn and be able to use effeciently. Here is what I came up with:

    1 3/4" Hand Lines
    Fog- Elkhart Chief 175 GPM @ 50 PSI "High Rise" break apart
    Smooth Bore- Elkhart integrated smooth bore shut off with 15/16" tip

    Each front line engine will get one of each on the preconnected crosslays. Both lines with have the same nozzle pressure and GPM is close enough to where they can be pumped the same.

    2 1/2" Hand Lines
    Fog- Elkhart Chief 250 GPM @ 50 PSI
    Smooth Bore- Elkhart shutoff with 1 1/8" tip.

    Each engine will keep a smooth bore nozzle on the preconnected 2 1/2" line with the other smooth bore and 2 fogs in the spare compartment. Just as with the other lines, we will now have one nozzle pressure and one GPM to pump for the 2 1/2" lines as well.

    No pistol grips, play pipes, ears, etc. will be on any of the new nozzles. I wanted nozzles that were meant to drag down a hallway and fight fire, not sit outside and spray water with. We did a hose handling class here not long ago that made everyone want to get rid of the pistol grips. This was the best way to do so.

    Anyway, I just wanted to lay that out there and see what you guys thought. I know this isn't something that most people get to do, but I was fortunate. I really think this will be a good move for the department and will make things run much smoother on the fire ground.

    Opinions welcomed!
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.


  2. #2
    Back In Black ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    Opinions welcomed!
    Wow, you've really left yourself open for this one.

    I'll sit back and enjoy the show. We've had TFT's for 20+ years and our fires have gone out when properly used.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber CKirk922's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Watching From The Sideline Now
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Brand abuse aside, we got a grant recently for nozzles.

    We went with
    4 - Akron mid range turbos in the 1 3/4s with break aparts (pistol grips included) with 15/16 slugs.
    and
    2 - Akron high range turbos in the 2 1/2s break aparts (pistol grips included) with 1 1/8? or 1 3/8? slugs (260 gpms I think).

    I could not convince the membership to ditch the grip.

    We set the 1 3/4s on the cross lays of each engine thus equalizing pumping.

    We keep the fogs on first with the slugs to be pocketed.... It is progress...What else can I say?

    We have four different piercing nozzle implements that can quickly connect to the break aparts.

    It works for us. A neighboring department purchased the same setup recently as well.

    Kinda the same thinking as G Rider I guess....
    Last edited by Fireeaterbob; 08-08-2011 at 06:24 PM.
    A coward stands by and watches wrongs committed without saying a word...Any opinions expressed are purely my own and not necessarily reflective of the views of my former departments

  4. #4
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    Wow, you've really left yourself open for this one.

    I'll sit back and enjoy the show. We've had TFT's for 20+ years and our fires have gone out when properly used.
    We teach the rookies all the way open or all the way closed when fighting fire here. TFT's bale gating operation takes that and throws it out the window.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    At my department we use TFT duel force gallonage nozzles on the 1 3/4 and Sb on the 2 1/2. Personally I am not a fan of the automatic nozzles. They still put the fire out but i do not like many of the issues that can come up with them.

    As for your set up:
    I like it

    I like the idea of having the 50 psi fog and SB combination. Being that they are roughly the same GPM the friction loss is the basicly the same. The Nozzle pressure is the same so fire ground calculation will be made easier. The constant gallonage nozzle IMO is the way to go. Less stuff to go wrong.

    The only issue that i can see would be kinking of the lines due to the lower pressure. However with proper line management and basic engine company firemanship this should not be an issue. Just something to be aware of.

    On the 2 1/2 i like the set up. the only thing that i would change is instead of the 1 1/8 tip. I personally would go with a 1 1/8, 1 1/4 stacked tip. This would enable you to have the ablity to increase your flow to 325 GPM for more of a hit when meeting well advance fire conditions on arrival. utlizing the 1 1/4 tip for the defensive, blitz attacks, etc. and the 1 1/8 tip for more offensive style operations such as standpipes, commercial, attic fires etc.

    If money permitts I would also look at your master stream nozzles as well. Might as well do all of it at the sametime

    Lastly I would take the time to develope a fire streams policy. State the accepted fire ground flow mins or ranges for a:

    1 3/4 is X GPM
    2 1/2 is X GPM
    Master streams min of X GPM

    Also state the nozzle type that is to used on each type of line.

    In my mind this would give the pump operator. especially the newer ones "goals" to be achieved when pumping. This would also provide a standard across the board in policy form. This would prevent the well here at station XYZ we like the old nozzles, etc.

    This could also be used as the foundation for you pump training.

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    224

    Default

    I like the system you came up with, too. As well as the suggestions the others made. I have long been advocating pretty much the same thing.

    Just to be clear, are your Elkhart shut-offs going to have a built in smoothbore, or will you be using screw-on tips (or both, lol)?

    I, personally like the idea of a bigger slug (integral) tip with add on combo, and strait tips.

    An added bonus- the strait stream from a low pressure (50 psi) combo, is darn near identical to that of a smoothbore. The test I saw used the Akron low pressure fog, not the Chief. I'm reasonably sure The Elkhart would perform similarly.

    Bonus#2: Extending hoselines is now much easier. Just remember to secure the bale wide open with a hose strap or something, so it doesn't get accidentally shut. I'd prefer to add a shut off to the new end, too- not just the fog tip. ( a good reason to add an extra one to the high rise kit!)

    I like the piercing nozzles too. Or, as I've seen them called in articles, improvised sprinkler heads! A great way to quickly attack an attic, or any other confined space, without feeding it lots of fresh air. Great for engine compartment fires- esp in today's plastic and tin foil cars, hood latch controls are often early victims of the fire...

    Say, the Akron Turbo, that's the selectable gallonage one, right? We had some old ones on our hose packs, and I think that's what they were... They WERE Akrons, and had the "roulette" wheels on em. I'm thinking this would require a good deal of coordination between nozzle team and pump operator, if you plan on switching flows often. I used to find them in different random flow settings every time I used them, or did a truck check.

    The fire stream policy idea is spot on. Include a flow test of all preconnects, and discharges with the new nozzles. That way you know the friction loss of YOUR engines, hose, and appliances. You'll be able to make an easy to follow pump chart to place on each rig, further simplifying the operator's job- esp at 3 in the am! I tried to introduce such a policy to our chiefs in line officer meetings, but didn't get much traction. We used TFT handlines, and basically had no idea what we were flowing, nor did we have any real standard discharge pressure for them.

  7. #7
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFD21C View Post
    At my department we use TFT duel force gallonage nozzles on the 1 3/4 and Sb on the 2 1/2. Personally I am not a fan of the automatic nozzles. They still put the fire out but i do not like many of the issues that can come up with them.

    As for your set up:
    I like it

    I like the idea of having the 50 psi fog and SB combination. Being that they are roughly the same GPM the friction loss is the basicly the same. The Nozzle pressure is the same so fire ground calculation will be made easier. The constant gallonage nozzle IMO is the way to go. Less stuff to go wrong.

    The only issue that i can see would be kinking of the lines due to the lower pressure. However with proper line management and basic engine company firemanship this should not be an issue. Just something to be aware of.

    On the 2 1/2 i like the set up. the only thing that i would change is instead of the 1 1/8 tip. I personally would go with a 1 1/8, 1 1/4 stacked tip. This would enable you to have the ablity to increase your flow to 325 GPM for more of a hit when meeting well advance fire conditions on arrival. utlizing the 1 1/4 tip for the defensive, blitz attacks, etc. and the 1 1/8 tip for more offensive style operations such as standpipes, commercial, attic fires etc.

    If money permitts I would also look at your master stream nozzles as well. Might as well do all of it at the sametime

    Lastly I would take the time to develope a fire streams policy. State the accepted fire ground flow mins or ranges for a:

    1 3/4 is X GPM
    2 1/2 is X GPM
    Master streams min of X GPM

    Also state the nozzle type that is to used on each type of line.

    In my mind this would give the pump operator. especially the newer ones "goals" to be achieved when pumping. This would also provide a standard across the board in policy form. This would prevent the well here at station XYZ we like the old nozzles, etc.

    This could also be used as the foundation for you pump training.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nozzle nut 22 View Post
    I like the system you came up with, too. As well as the suggestions the others made. I have long been advocating pretty much the same thing.

    Just to be clear, are your Elkhart shut-offs going to have a built in smoothbore, or will you be using screw-on tips (or both, lol)?

    I, personally like the idea of a bigger slug (integral) tip with add on combo, and strait tips.

    An added bonus- the strait stream from a low pressure (50 psi) combo, is darn near identical to that of a smoothbore. The test I saw used the Akron low pressure fog, not the Chief. I'm reasonably sure The Elkhart would perform similarly.

    Bonus#2: Extending hoselines is now much easier. Just remember to secure the bale wide open with a hose strap or something, so it doesn't get accidentally shut. I'd prefer to add a shut off to the new end, too- not just the fog tip. ( a good reason to add an extra one to the high rise kit!)

    I like the piercing nozzles too. Or, as I've seen them called in articles, improvised sprinkler heads! A great way to quickly attack an attic, or any other confined space, without feeding it lots of fresh air. Great for engine compartment fires- esp in today's plastic and tin foil cars, hood latch controls are often early victims of the fire...

    Say, the Akron Turbo, that's the selectable gallonage one, right? We had some old ones on our hose packs, and I think that's what they were... They WERE Akrons, and had the "roulette" wheels on em. I'm thinking this would require a good deal of coordination between nozzle team and pump operator, if you plan on switching flows often. I used to find them in different random flow settings every time I used them, or did a truck check.

    The fire stream policy idea is spot on. Include a flow test of all preconnects, and discharges with the new nozzles. That way you know the friction loss of YOUR engines, hose, and appliances. You'll be able to make an easy to follow pump chart to place on each rig, further simplifying the operator's job- esp at 3 in the am! I tried to introduce such a policy to our chiefs in line officer meetings, but didn't get much traction. We used TFT handlines, and basically had no idea what we were flowing, nor did we have any real standard discharge pressure for them.
    Thanks for the suggestions!

    Quick note: I am only outfitting the two front line engines for my small town volunteer department. The reserve is getting outfitting with the equipment left over when everything is replaced.

    I do plan on writing into policy what our minimum flow and first off lines will be for structure fires. I plan on using the NFPA standard (someone remind me of the number) which says 150 GPM minimum on the first line and 150 GPM minimum for the second line, totaling 300 GPM.

    I called an Elkhart field rep I have trained with in the past before I made the purchase and talked with him for almost an hour about what we wanted to do and how we wanted to do it. He offered to come down and do an engine company ops class with us, which includes putting gauges and flow meters on each engine and discharge to see what we need to be pumping the trucks at to get the desired flow.

    Right now we are running low bid junk attack hose; one of my main budget requests for 2012 is 1000 ft. of Ponn Conquest 1 3/4" to match the higher flow nozzles and help fight the kinking issues. Until then we will train and adapt to make sure our hose handling skills are up to par.

    Yes, the shut offs for the 1 1/2" nozzles will have integrated 15/16" smooth bores. They will also have stream shapers in between the shutoff and fog/SB tips. Next year's budget also calls for a few SB nozzles that won't have stream shapers (for the stand pipe kits).

    We run stack tips on our master streams, so no real need to replace anything in that department. We do keep jumbo fogs around just for ISO and to wet the kids in the summer time. Hopefully 2 portable monitors will be coming next year as well.

    I want to throw in a shameless plug for Elkhart. Not only do they make great nozzles, but the company itself does a lot to help out the service. The field rep I am speaking of has hosted many classes in Georgia and provides great info. Elkhart also does a trade in program where they give you money for the nozzles you are replacing. I these things say a lot for the company.

    Great discussion, keep it coming!
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  8. #8
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    I'll sit back and enjoy the show. We've had TFT's for 20+ years and our fires have gone out when properly used.
    Combination nozzles are too complicated for today's generation of bleeding edge firefighters. They shy away from nozzles that require them to make tactical choices but rather prefer nozzles where the only thing they have to figure out is the on/off switch...
    Last edited by DeputyMarshal; 08-09-2011 at 11:07 PM.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    I personally love the elkhart nozzles. We have a few floating around on the department (with 43 front line rigs, old things always pop up.) Every once and awhilie you we see a rig running around with the old 200 GPM 75Psi elkharts. Those things are like tanks you cannot break them. even though they are 20 plus years old. i dont know about the new ones though.

    A neighboring department near me does the same set up if my memory serves me correctly. The only complaint i hear is that the nozzles are alittle on the long side.

    I agree with the pump chart idea. At my old company (recently transffered) we had them made up for pretty much any hose configuration you could resonable think of. Test each preconnect on the discharge. It is a signfigant difference between the front bumper line and the number 1 crosslay for instance. All PDPs tested to the desired GPM. As a shift we had determined that our two flows out of an 1 3/4 (TFT duel force) were either 150 GPM or 200 GPM. Most of the time we would only flow 150 GPM. yes this is a little low for most departments however with 6 quint companies responding on a working fire calling for another line is not a problem add this to our bread and butter buildings it worked for us. Also by creating the pump charts to any configuration that we could reasonable build on the fire ground it served as basicly a list of all the engine company tools in the tool box. Which helped with rookies getting up to speed when they came out. serving as a idea box for engine company drills.

    We recently switched to the Ponn Conquest hose it was amazing to see how much it dropped our pdp which in turn dropped the reaction force on the nozzle as well. One word of caution though. As i said above we are a fairly good sized department. We did not replace every length of 1 3/4 in the department. now with hose being damaged and replaced by what the hose shop has. we have a mixed bag of hose on the preconnects this negates the gains of lower friction loss hose

    for high rise pack do your self a favor and go with 2 1/2 inch hose. keep another pack of 100' of 1 3/4 for your project lays and extending the attack line.

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    13

    Default

    With so few actual fires, and so many actual medical calls, we tried to totally simplify our operations. Simple for the engineer, simple for the hose/nozzle team, and simple to teach and train to. Here is what we did:

    First we picked a target fire flow for each line. 185 gpm on our pre-connects for all the engines. Next with the line(s) flowing we identified the engine pressure. We shut the lines and identified the pressure the engine climbed to. That has now become the pressure when smoke or fire is showing that the engineer goes to upon arrival. That give the crews the maximum target fire flow when the lines are fully opened. If it is more than they want they will gate down, yet they still have the target fire flow if needed and a good penetrating straight stream as well as a protective fog pattern as needed.

    This only works though if you use an automatic with a slide valve. Also, we chose 75 psi operating nozzles to eliminate some of the nozzle reaction. But, it sure simplified our operations.

  11. #11
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Combination nozzles are too complicated for today's generation of bleeding edge firefighters. They shy away from nozzles that require them to make tactical choices but rather prefer nozzles where the only thing they have to figure out is the on/off switch...
    What does his post have to do with combination nozzles? If you read mine, you would see where we are still carrying fogs. Not sure I understand the jist of your post.

    Not to mention that the fact that with modern building construction and materials, the best "tactical decision" when fighting a fire is to go in with water, lots of it, and put it where it needs to be. You don't need the fanciest nozzle out there to do that.
    Last edited by GTRider245; 08-10-2011 at 02:33 PM.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    What does his post have to do with combination nozzles? If you read mine, you would see where we are still carrying fogs. Not sure I understand the jist of your post.
    I was trying to figure out the samething. I thought the nozzles of the "older generation" were the ones with only on and off bales. The new cutting edge for the "next generation' of firefighters were the automatic with the slide valve. I know that is the case that is what the newest TFT catolog said. It has to be true. HAHAHA

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BenFireFan View Post
    With so few actual fires, and so many actual medical calls, we tried to totally simplify our operations. Simple for the engineer, simple for the hose/nozzle team, and simple to teach and train to. Here is what we did:

    First we picked a target fire flow for each line. 185 gpm on our pre-connects for all the engines. Next with the line(s) flowing we identified the engine pressure. We shut the lines and identified the pressure the engine climbed to. That has now become the pressure when smoke or fire is showing that the engineer goes to upon arrival. That give the crews the maximum target fire flow when the lines are fully opened. If it is more than they want they will gate down, yet they still have the target fire flow if needed and a good penetrating straight stream as well as a protective fog pattern as needed.

    This only works though if you use an automatic with a slide valve. Also, we chose 75 psi operating nozzles to eliminate some of the nozzle reaction. But, it sure simplified our operations.
    It sounds like a you all have the "older" style pressure relief valves. with the newer Electronic pressure governors you would just set your intended PDP and the truck will throttle up to maintain that pressure when going from the static pressure to the flow pressure.

    IMO I do not like the ablity to "throttle" the bale on the nozzle as the TFT litature states. I have seen far to many times where improper hose handling has lead to the nozzleman throttling back to decrease the reaction force. I feel that this causes problems.

    1) As a pump operator I like to know what each hose line is flowing X and the total net GPM of the pump is Y. This enables me to always know how much more I can pump out and if pulling another line off is possible.

    2) when riding in charge for the Day. I know through past history that given this amount of fire I can handle it with this hose line or that hose line. If my nozzleman gates the bale on the nozzle back because he is improperly managing the nozzle the GPM is reduced. This will change the effect of the fire stream on the fire.

    GPM versus BTU rate is a balance. We have to overcome the amount of BTUs with the GPM we are PROPERLY applying to the fire. when the scale is off balance to either side the amount of property damage is increased. To much GPM and we are going to cause more water damage then needed. To little GPM and the either the fire continues to grow thus causing more damage or it takes longer to extinguish the fire which causes more damage due to the fire and it byproducts as well as an increase in the water damage due to longer flowing times.

    by "throttling" the nozzle bale back nobody knows what the GPM flow of the line is. If i cut the bale back to say 3/4s open. Whats my GPM flow is? That line that is suppose to be flowing 175 GPM fully open. what is it flowing when it is only open 3/4s is it flowing 150, 125, 95? Is that 3/4's open always the same?

    Add in to the mix the maintance issues with the slide valve. Is that slide valve sticking partially closed reducing the GPM? Has some trash clogged up the tigher tolerences of the slide valve? Lets look at the stream to determine if it is proper flow using or street knowledge of fire streams. That will not work the nozzle is designed to provide a good quality stream through a range of flows (ours our 95-200GPM).

    that is why I like to apply the KISS principle to fire streams. Hose line X will give me XYZ GPM everytime we pull it. When flowing the nozzle is always fully open or fully closed. With this XYZ GPM we have ABC friction loss on this size of hose.

    In the end nozzles are like IV caths to our paramedic counter parts. Each brand and type is slightly different and each person has their own opinons on which one is best and why. In the end they acomplish the same desired outcome when properly used.

  14. #14
    Back In Black ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Are guys really sitting in a burning house at any particular moment and calculating BTU's and then setting their GPM?

    As a long time user of the TFT nozzle, if the fire was ripping, fully open. Something less, then open slightly less.

    It's not rocket science.

    The maintenance issue was also never an issue. Never and we are frequently flowing water that was fresh from a lake or pond...
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  15. #15
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    Are guys really sitting in a burning house at any particular moment and calculating BTU's and then setting their GPM?

    As a long time user of the TFT nozzle, if the fire was ripping, fully open. Something less, then open slightly less.

    It's not rocket science.

    The maintenance issue was also never an issue. Never and we are frequently flowing water that was fresh from a lake or pond...
    ditto.

    rfd21c, you talk about how your guys are trained to be all the way open or all the way shut....so how could gating back be an issue? Do guys suddenly operate differently from their training due to having an adjustable nozzle? Really?

    Simple observation....at a fire, pull your first line ( 1 3/4 or 2 1/2) and attack the fire. If it's not darkening down, pull a second line. Stop worrying about calculating whether the GPMs are outweighing the BTU's and put the damn thing out.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  16. #16
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    ditto.

    rfd21c, you talk about how your guys are trained to be all the way open or all the way shut....so how could gating back be an issue? Do guys suddenly operate differently from their training due to having an adjustable nozzle? Really?

    Simple observation....at a fire, pull your first line ( 1 3/4 or 2 1/2) and attack the fire. If it's not darkening down, pull a second line. Stop worrying about calculating whether the GPMs are outweighing the BTU's and put the damn thing out.
    Obviously if it is a matress or a small pile of crap burning an untrained chimp is not going to open the bail of the nozzle all the way open blasting it all over the place. I figured that is would be common sense. For that it doesnt matter if you have an adjustable nozzle or not.

    i am trying to figure out why complicate things by having the option of adjusting the flow at all. Do you sit in the hallway and say to yourself well this is only a room fire. I am going to only open the nozzle 5/8's of the way open? No you open the nozzle fully and put the thing out. If it is a pile of crap smoldering in the corner you crack the nozzle and put it out. You can do that with a any nozzle. that is just plain common sense.

    I am refering to the over marketed selling point that almost all auto nozzle advociates preach. I can adjust the flow at the nozzle by simpily closing the bail particially. "look it still produces a good looking stream."

    GPMs and BTUs are part of prefire planning. On the fire ground you jump of the rig look at the fire and say yup this is an 1 3/4 fire based on prior knowledge and experience. With the wide range of flows that automatic nozzles and modern 1 3/4 hose are able to flow you have to set a standard that fits your operations. So that everyone is on the same page. i dont want to say well we have Joe driving today he only gives you a little pressure on the line or Tommy is driving today he help you open up with all the pressure he gives on the line. Without a standard that is what you get.

    What is wrong with saying BEFORE the fire everytime an 1 3/4 line is charged it flows 150 gpm?

    If the nozzleman doesnt open the nozzle fully how are you consitantly flowing that amount? No different then if your pump operators pump at different PDPs. Either way it reduces the amount of water that comes out of the end.

    As a pump operator I am always going to know what my GPM out put is. That my job I am a pump operator not a lever puller.

    As the OIC if i order an 1 3/4 line to be placed in operation I expect it to have the desired outcome. This is based off of prior knowledge and experience. Not a fancy formula. If no standard is in place to determine a standard gpm flow of that 1 3/4, One day you will flow 125GPM the next you flow 200 GPM. Is this difference not going to affect the amount of fire the you will draken down?

    Dont even get me started with the maintance issues that we have had with the slide valves on our TFTs. Which is the main reason I prefer constant gallonage nozzles no moving parts, springs, things that need lubercation. Pull the 30 year old nozzle off the self and it pumps just as good as it did when you put it on the self.

  17. #17
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFD21C View Post
    Obviously if it is a matress or a small pile of crap burning an untrained chimp is not going to open the bail of the nozzle all the way open blasting it all over the place. I figured that is would be common sense. For that it doesnt matter if you have an adjustable nozzle or not.

    i am trying to figure out why complicate things by having the option of adjusting the flow at all. Do you sit in the hallway and say to yourself well this is only a room fire. I am going to only open the nozzle 5/8's of the way open? No you open the nozzle fully and put the thing out. If it is a pile of crap smoldering in the corner you crack the nozzle and put it out. You can do that with a any nozzle. that is just plain common sense.

    I am refering to the over marketed selling point that almost all auto nozzle advociates preach. I can adjust the flow at the nozzle by simpily closing the bail particially. "look it still produces a good looking stream."

    GPMs and BTUs are part of prefire planning. On the fire ground you jump of the rig look at the fire and say yup this is an 1 3/4 fire based on prior knowledge and experience. With the wide range of flows that automatic nozzles and modern 1 3/4 hose are able to flow you have to set a standard that fits your operations. So that everyone is on the same page. i dont want to say well we have Joe driving today he only gives you a little pressure on the line or Tommy is driving today he help you open up with all the pressure he gives on the line. Without a standard that is what you get.

    What is wrong with saying BEFORE the fire everytime an 1 3/4 line is charged it flows 150 gpm?

    If the nozzleman doesnt open the nozzle fully how are you consitantly flowing that amount? No different then if your pump operators pump at different PDPs. Either way it reduces the amount of water that comes out of the end.

    As a pump operator I am always going to know what my GPM out put is. That my job I am a pump operator not a lever puller.

    As the OIC if i order an 1 3/4 line to be placed in operation I expect it to have the desired outcome. This is based off of prior knowledge and experience. Not a fancy formula. If no standard is in place to determine a standard gpm flow of that 1 3/4, One day you will flow 125GPM the next you flow 200 GPM. Is this difference not going to affect the amount of fire the you will draken down?

    Dont even get me started with the maintance issues that we have had with the slide valves on our TFTs. Which is the main reason I prefer constant gallonage nozzles no moving parts, springs, things that need lubercation. Pull the 30 year old nozzle off the self and it pumps just as good as it did when you put it on the self.

    Excellent post with many valid points.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  18. #18
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFD21C View Post
    Obviously if it is a matress or a small pile of crap burning an untrained chimp is not going to open the bail of the nozzle all the way open blasting it all over the place. I figured that is would be common sense. For that it doesnt matter if you have an adjustable nozzle or not.

    i am trying to figure out why complicate things by having the option of adjusting the flow at all. Do you sit in the hallway and say to yourself well this is only a room fire. I am going to only open the nozzle 5/8's of the way open? No you open the nozzle fully and put the thing out. If it is a pile of crap smoldering in the corner you crack the nozzle and put it out. You can do that with a any nozzle. that is just plain common sense.

    I am refering to the over marketed selling point that almost all auto nozzle advociates preach. I can adjust the flow at the nozzle by simpily closing the bail particially. "look it still produces a good looking stream."

    GPMs and BTUs are part of prefire planning. On the fire ground you jump of the rig look at the fire and say yup this is an 1 3/4 fire based on prior knowledge and experience. With the wide range of flows that automatic nozzles and modern 1 3/4 hose are able to flow you have to set a standard that fits your operations. So that everyone is on the same page. i dont want to say well we have Joe driving today he only gives you a little pressure on the line or Tommy is driving today he help you open up with all the pressure he gives on the line. Without a standard that is what you get.

    What is wrong with saying BEFORE the fire everytime an 1 3/4 line is charged it flows 150 gpm?

    If the nozzleman doesnt open the nozzle fully how are you consitantly flowing that amount? No different then if your pump operators pump at different PDPs. Either way it reduces the amount of water that comes out of the end.

    As a pump operator I am always going to know what my GPM out put is. That my job I am a pump operator not a lever puller.

    As the OIC if i order an 1 3/4 line to be placed in operation I expect it to have the desired outcome. This is based off of prior knowledge and experience. Not a fancy formula. If no standard is in place to determine a standard gpm flow of that 1 3/4, One day you will flow 125GPM the next you flow 200 GPM. Is this difference not going to affect the amount of fire the you will draken down?

    Dont even get me started with the maintance issues that we have had with the slide valves on our TFTs. Which is the main reason I prefer constant gallonage nozzles no moving parts, springs, things that need lubercation. Pull the 30 year old nozzle off the self and it pumps just as good as it did when you put it on the self.
    Like Fyred pointed out, well stated post with a good many great points.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  19. #19
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,655

    Default

    Yes, good post.

    We don't use the automatics anymore, we switched to a setup similar to GTRider a few years ago.

    As a past/long time user of the automatics though, the issues people point out against them are the same "selling points" that salesmen use. Maintenance. Wasn't an issue for us...we didn't maintain them, they never failed and they continuously flowed as they were supposed to (ya, we flow tested annually). Nozzleman adjusting the bale....that is not a fault of the nozzle, plain and simple. Yes, they did require higher pump pressures.

    Another arguement that goes the same way is Pistol grips. People often blame pistol grips for poor nozzle handling techniques. That is not the fault of the pistol grip, but the fault of the operator.

    As for pumping differently based on manpower and other conditions....you bet we do it. I may pump a line differently when the 2 guys on the end are small compared to 2 guys on the end that are larger. That is a part of the volunteer world...you can get very varied people on the end of that line. I also may pump differently if they are going in the front door attacking and whether they are making 10 turns before getting to the fire room.

    Good discussion here guys....
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  20. #20
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,854

    Default

    One of the things that always amazes me, even to this day after being an instructor for 31 years, is how little most firefighters actually know about the nozzles they use. Let alone the other choiuces that are out there on the market.

    I have more times than I care to remember asked the simple question "How many GPMs are you getting from that crosslay?" Only to be met usually with one of these answers "Enough," "Hell if I know," and on a VERY rare occurrence they will actually know the target flow. Scarier still is when none of the officers know the answer. How do you buy hose and nozzles with no clue what you want to flow?

    You want to see some firefighter's eyes glaze right over? Ask them to tell you what a combination nozzle is. Ask them to tell you the difference between an automatic nozzle, a selectable gallonage nozzle, a constant gallonage nozzle, a smoothbore nozzle and then throw in low pressure nozzles. Most haven't got a clue.

    I like to use the analogy when I am teaching of an auto mechanic and his tools. The good ones can tell you every tool they have in their tool box, where it is, what it is, and what it is used for. How many times do you believe that mechainc has had to use a ratchet in the heat of battle where he may get killed if he doesn't utilize that tool right? So tell me, why does that mechanic know more about his ratchet than you do about the nozzle that you use that may save you or your fellow firefighter's lives?
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Solid Stream Smootbore Nozzles vs. Fog Nozzles
    By SeavilleFire in forum Fireground Tactics
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 12-13-2006, 11:49 AM
  2. What a load! FE Nozzles and hose debate
    By imtxff44 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-20-2003, 12:38 PM
  3. Fog nozzles have better penetration than smoothbores?
    By erics99 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 10-13-2003, 06:52 PM
  4. Product Info. Needed (Nozzles)
    By AsstChief591 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-26-2002, 08:03 AM
  5. AFFF or FFFP
    By Lallo in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-18-2002, 08:34 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts