Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By FyredUp
  • 1 Post By DeputyChiefGonzo
  • 1 Post By FFWALT

Thread: Was pondering this gpm vs application quandary

  1. #1
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14

    Default Was pondering this gpm vs application quandary

    So I was thinking...

    I might do a round table discussion about needed fire flows and the formula to figure that then I starting thinking about disproving the formula by showing that improper application of your stream can affect the calculation.

    I was thinking maybe a throw away couch or something that I can get a measurement and come up with a NFF on then use a 2 1/2 gal APW to show that even though you're flowing high enough gpm, improper application won't put the fire out.

    What are your thoughts on this?


  2. #2
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    2,951

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bingebob View Post
    So I was thinking...

    I might do a round table discussion about needed fire flows and the formula to figure that then I starting thinking about disproving the formula by showing that improper application of your stream can affect the calculation.

    I was thinking maybe a throw away couch or something that I can get a measurement and come up with a NFF on then use a 2 1/2 gal APW to show that even though you're flowing high enough gpm, improper application won't put the fire out.

    What are your thoughts on this?
    I think you'd be wasting your time to a large extent because that's a pretty obvious conclusion (at least to me).

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14

    Default

    The knowledge base of the people that ill be demonstrating to on fire flows is extremely limited to "water come out truck. Me put water on hotness"

    I'd like to highlight the importance of application technique as well as throw in some pump operator math. Most of these guys have some real talent and could really benefit from some extra information that isn't really "required" (at that level) but good to know

  4. #4
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,872

    Default

    If they are as basic as your caveman talk implies then time would be better spent on basic skills and fire behavior.
    JayDudley likes this.
    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

  5. #5
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If they are as basic as your caveman talk implies then time would be better spent on basic skills and fire behavior.

    If they talk like cavemen.. don't waste your time trying to explain gpm vs. BTUs and pump operations... they are truckies. They will relate to a course on opening up and breaking stuff!
    Last edited by DeputyChiefGonzo; 07-21-2013 at 05:26 PM.
    BoxAlarm187 likes this.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14

    Default

    We are volunteers. Most of them have FF1 from the state. It's been a while since I went through the academy but I don't remember getting very much fire flow in ff1+2.

    I think it would be beneficial to show the science behind the gpm's vs application to get a good grasp on the theory.

    We don't have a ladder truck. But like i said these guys all have a lot of talent and the drive to get some use out of it.

    I'm more interested in whether my experiment would even work.

  7. #7
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,872

    Default

    The problem comes in if you don't do a fire behavior class including proper application of water all it is is a dog and pony show.

    Is the attack a direct attack? Indirect attack? Combination attack? What? I would think teaching attack techniques would be time far better spent.
    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

  8. #8
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    The problem comes in if you don't do a fire behavior class including proper application of water all it is is a dog and pony show.

    Is the attack a direct attack? Indirect attack? Combination attack? What? I would think teaching attack techniques would be time far better spent.
    Here is the issue with most basic firefighter programs around the country. We spend too much time teaching how to fold salvage covers and roll hose and not enough time teach behavior. If it isn't vital to life safety it can be taught once that person gets to a department/company. I could care less if you can roll hose 4 different ways but can't rattle off the stages of fire without having to look it up.
    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**.

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Hear, hear!

    It'd be tough to find a guy that has any level of certification that doesn't know to spray fire with water. The real challenge is to find a guy that is knowledgeable enough to know why he's doing it on a scientific level (and understand it).

    A fire behavior class is a great idea. I can probably incorporate that into my discussion AND my practical presentation.

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    I would think teaching attack techniques would be time far better spent.
    I feel like we could go over different attack techniques but to make it a closed circle they would have to know why we use different techniques and when to use each one. I feel like the missing puzzle piece is that bit of science to validate your initial training.

  11. #11
    Forum Member FFWALT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    357

    Default

    Bingebob,

    To truly make this sink in you need something like a motel or cubicles. That way you can use a uniform container (room) with a uniform fire load (sofa) and apply water using different flows and techniques. I've found through past experience that if you only expose them to the idea they will revert back to what has always been done. If you show them the difference, then they will consider using it.

    Good luck,
    Walt
    RFDACM02 likes this.
    Train like you want to fight.
    www.kvfd.net

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,808

    Default

    I think it a decent idea. Anytime you can show or have the group participate is better than just standing up front telling them that no matter what the GPM if you don't apply it correctly it won't be effective or at least efficient. While this seems pretty basic you can see it daily on more news stories than not, particularly defensive fires where the FD blasts copious amounts of water into the tongues of flames and then wonder why it took so long. We seem to be great at putting the water on the burning material when the nozzleman is inside but as soon as it changes to defensive basic application theory goes out the window. Maybe spouting stupid lines like "put the wet stuff on the red stuff" minimizes the actual tactics, while on the other side some are paralyzed from action by an overwhelming need to figure out every variable before making a decision. Maybe it should be "put the wet stuff just below or at the base of the red stuff" ?

    Of course the best of these experiments are ones that are repeatable, thus cribbed wood or stacked pallets works nice, try finding the same couch for next years class! It often takes a lot of "proof" to erase what people think they know and virtually none to disprove anything new.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Just pondering..
    By medstudent13 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 01-16-2010, 07:48 AM
  2. Application anyone?
    By blake1334 in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-23-2007, 09:53 AM
  3. RIT Application...
    By MoneyMan29 in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-18-2007, 12:59 AM
  4. After the application
    By firefighter3419 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-11-2007, 04:56 AM
  5. I just sent in an application!
    By mattmac in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-26-2002, 12:55 AM

Posting Permissions

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