Really?

[rm1524]

This is a ad on firehouse.com.

http://pyrolance.com/?page_id=73

[nameless]

going inside is dangerous, I'm just here to get a tshirt and tell tales at the bar to women that don't know any better

[Miller337]

Beats me if it really works, I'm going to submit a request for one though. My thinking being that anything else I request will seem fairly sane and acceptable.

[BoxAlarm187]

They've been marketing the hell out of these things at FDIC and the Baltimore Show the past couple of years.

[bwalters199]

these are made for pussys that are scared of going inside

[Capt-nj]

Wow !!!!!!!!

[LaFireEducator]

Likely based on the high-pressure pulse technology being seen in Europe.

The theory is that you inject a small amount of water under very high pressure the rapid steam conversion will have a significant affect on the fire.

From what I have seen and read, thier use is similair to that of a 2 1/2g extinguisher - smaller, inciepint fires and mopup.

As far as devices such as this being for pussies, you my friend, are an
idiot.

[DeputyChiefGonzo]

Likely based on the high-pressure pulse technology being seen in Europe.

The theory is that you inject a small amount of water under very high pressure the rapid steam conversion will have a significant affect on the fire.

From what I have seen and read, thier use is similair to that of a 2 1/2g extinguisher - smaller, inciepint fires and mopup.

As far as devices such as this being for pussies, you my friend, are an
idiot.

How many of these devices have you advocated the purchase of for your FD's?

[FyredUp]

I have never seen one of these in person but it seems to be little more than a high tech piercing nozzle with a heck of a lot less flow potential once the hole is made.

[LaFireEducator]

How many of these devices have you advocated the purchase of for your FD's?

Actually none.

Since they seem to perform the function of a water can, and my combo department does not use water cans, tthey would have minimal value.

I can see some applications for these however, but I would suspect these devices are probably pretty costly and would likely not be a cost-effective purchase.

[LaFireEducator]

I have never seen one of these in person but it seems to be little more than a high tech piercing nozzle with a heck of a lot less flow potential once the hole is made.

However they do offer ther advantage ot rapid deployment and mobility on incipient fires.

I could see some applications where this device would be quite practical, except, as stated above, i have a feeling the cost would be a significant issue for most smaller departments.

[ATFDFF]

Our department has one of these. We purchased it due to a mid-size train yard we have, and though rare, fires in the containers or locomotives are a pain in the ***. Combined with the long lead-out for water supply makes it an awful operation.

The engine who is first up to the yard carries it and will put it into operation while the second engine leads into the first. Then we'll bring out the K12 and open it up and drop another line or two and overhaul it. But the Lance does a decent job of knocking it down.

I don't know the exact cost, but it was hefty. We were able to convince the operator of the train yard to split it 50/50 with us, because of the potential to limit their losses.

[KnightnPBIArmor]

I have never seen one of these in person but it seems to be little more than a high tech piercing nozzle with a heck of a lot less flow potential once the hole is made.

I agree; first time I saw the ad I couldn't help but wonder if an old-fashioned piercing nozzle and maul wouldn't be much cheaper, and probably last longer too.

[tree68]

Just another specialized tool in the toolbox. If your department has a use for it, you'll buy one and probably love it, as ATFDFF's department seems to.

If your department doesn't have a use for it, don't buy it - it'll be every bit the waste of money it seems to some to be.

As for being afraid of going inside - with shipping containers such as ATFDFF mentions, getting inside isn't always as easy as popping a door, especially if it's at the bottom of a doublestack. The railroad's eagerness to help with the purchase means they see the possibility of saving some money on damage claims.

I really don't see a use for it in "normal" structures.

[Miller337]

Likely based on the high-pressure pulse technology being seen in Europe.

The theory is that you inject a small amount of water under very high pressure the rapid steam conversion will have a significant affect on the fire.

From what I have seen and read, thier use is similair to that of a 2 1/2g extinguisher - smaller, inciepint fires and mopup.

As far as devices such as this being for pussies, you my friend, are an
idiot.

The fact that you made at least four spelling errors and used incredibly poor sentence structure to tell someone their an idiot seems ironic somehow.

[LaFireEducator]

Our department has one of these. We purchased it due to a mid-size train yard we have, and though rare, fires in the containers or locomotives are a pain in the ***. Combined with the long lead-out for water supply makes it an awful operation.

The engine who is first up to the yard carries it and will put it into operation while the second engine leads into the first. Then we'll bring out the K12 and open it up and drop another line or two and overhaul it. But the Lance does a decent job of knocking it down.

I don't know the exact cost, but it was hefty. We were able to convince the operator of the train yard to split it 50/50 with us, because of the potential to limit their losses.

I could see this as atool with value around here in several ways.

It would be pretty handy for fires between the roof of a mobile home and the added-on roof, which is fairly common. Also would be handy for the space between the interior and exterior wall.

While I agree the the piercing nozzle can do the same job, I see this tool's mobility, speed and low water usage as significant advantages. Obviously cost is a significant disadvantage.

Could see it having more suppression capability than a standard water can due to the high pressure pulse. It would be pretty interesting to get our hands on one and see what it can do.

[LaFireEducator]

The fact that you made at least four spelling errors and used incredibly poor sentence structure to tell someone their an idiot seems ironic somehow.

Maybe it is.

[johnsb]

Just another specialized tool in the toolbox. If your department has a use for it, you'll buy one and probably love it, as ATFDFF's department seems to.

If your department doesn't have a use for it, don't buy it - it'll be every bit the waste of money it seems to some to be.

As for being afraid of going inside - with shipping containers such as ATFDFF mentions, getting inside isn't always as easy as popping a door, especially if it's at the bottom of a doublestack. The railroad's eagerness to help with the purchase means they see the possibility of saving some money on damage claims.

I really don't see a use for it in "normal" structures.

I'd agree. I think their ad is overstating it's usefulness, but there are times when you just can't get into where the fire is. Definitely not for every dept., but usefull in the right situation.

[BillST]

Our department has one of these. We purchased it due to a mid-size train yard we have, and though rare, fires in the containers or locomotives are a pain in the ***. Combined with the long lead-out for water supply makes it an awful operation.

The engine who is first up to the yard carries it and will put it into operation while the second engine leads into the first. Then we'll bring out the K12 and open it up and drop another line or two and overhaul it. But the Lance does a decent job of knocking it down.

I don't know the exact cost, but it was hefty. We were able to convince the operator of the train yard to split it 50/50 with us, because of the potential to limit their losses.

Did you guys look at piercing nozzles, if so why did you decide against them? Seems like the only thing the fire lance does better (for what you use them for) is impersonate an M-16.

We have a standard POK piercing nozzle and we can/have beat that thing trough just about anything with a sledge.

[ATFDFF]

Did you guys look at piercing nozzles, if so why did you decide against them? Seems like the only thing the fire lance does better (for what you use them for) is impersonate an M-16.

We have a standard POK piercing nozzle and we can/have beat that thing trough just about anything with a sledge.

Yes we did look at some, and in the end they would have worked alright. However, the real factor we went with this prodcut was the low GPMs it puts out (I think roughly 10-12GPM....but don't quote me on that). Being an all urban/suburban area, our engines are spec'd with 500 gallon tanks. And even though we are well hydranted, it still takes a significant amount of time wait for the 2nd engine to get on scene, lay in several hundred feet of 5 inch through the rail yard, and establish the water supply.