Mike, i went back a reread all the pages in this discussion. I agree with you on some points. I, like you agree that some depts copy and think because the FDNY does it one way it is the only way. That is wrong. I also do not agree with everything the NFPA writes nor do i agree with the " I was taught this in class" or the " The ifsta manual states this" mentality. Alot of people who post on this forum have little to no true experience and can only quote what they have read or had read to them! This was not meant for any one person.Tread lightly Dave, you may be labeled a liar, "just plain wrong", be accused of denigrating well respected dept.s, blaspheming Harvard Graduate students or maybe even worse......just
by agreeing with me.
What i dont agree with is the use of a 2.5 as a supply line or defensive only. If your dept still uses a handline... to be honest with you thought it died with the invention of the gas engine...then good luck with that.See, that is what I like about this world......we disagree on some things......yet you still gave your input without resorting to name calling first
And I'm not really sure about your last sentence , seems like you deleted some of it (careful with things like that, or minor typo's.....the Hounds of Hell will be unleashed over those ever so slight mistakes)
Good golly, this thread has taken on a life of its own!
Michael, I'm gonna try to explain it to you. And I will make it make sense to everyone who reads it with one possible exception. And I'll bet even you know who that possible exception would be.It seems as this might be a trick.....cleverly disguised to mean that if I have a different view, then I am dumb.....and lack the intelligence of all that agree with you....but whatever, I'm game....lets go.....and I will interject some of my un-understanding incoherent babbling along the way
Think of all the jobs you've made in typical 2 story dwellings with approximate dimensions of 15' X 35'. Let's say you have one or two bedrooms going on the second floor - what the hell, let's say the entire second floor is going pretty good. A 1 1/2" line can certainly handle the one or two rooms and maybe the whole floor. You'll take a beating putting it out, and I'm sure you have, but you will put it out. The building is not "that far gone" for you to enter because you have the appropriate size line for a building of that size and a fire of that volume.I agree......does that mean you are getting dumber?
Now, think of a much larger building, like a church. Think of this church as having a proportionally larger volume of fire than the previously described dwelling. It's a lot of fire, but it's in a much larger structure, that is to say that most of the church isn't on fire. The builing is tenable. You can enter and fight the fire. But a 1 1/2" line, aside from the fact that it won't give you enough water, may not be enough to even reach the fire.
A 2 1/2" line, with its considerably greater flow, reach, and penetration is much more likely to handle this fire because of its proportionally greater extinguishment capability. It's up to the task in a large building just like the 1 1/2" is up to the task in a smaller building.
You still may end up getting chased out of the building, but if that's the case, you would certainly get chased out with the smaller line.Depending on the situation, knowing the building....seeing what I can see while on the scene......all those little things that can't really be typed on a forum because it would take too long, I/we would more than likely have numerous 1.5's inside (if like you say, it was still tenable ) and if conditions changed or got worse, a deluge gun (or whatever you call it) with 3" lines would be taken inside, and then the interior lines would be backed out and the masterstream put into operation.......or something along those lines........I know...I know I am wrong, lying...or just not understanding what the average educated person would understand
You might prefer the 1 1/2" line, but you should realize that using a 2 1/2" line for an interior attack on certain occupancies under certain conditions - just like using a 1 1/2" on certain occupancies under certain conditions - is far from dangerous, useless, or ridiculous. And you just might avoid having a giant hose-laying exercise as the place burns itself down six alarms later.We seem to have differing opinions on interior attack lines.......I dunno what to tell ya.......you have tried to make it so simple that even I might understand (and altho I understand.....I don't agree with the way you operate in regards to my depts.......now that could possibly change if I worked/rode in YOUR dept, hell, I might even be the biggest proponent of 2.5 inch interior lines if I was there......but unless I go elsewhere, or things here drastically change......I stand by my opinion)
So....in the end......it seems to be : Smart people 20 (I didn't go back and count exactly how many agreed with you)
And Dumb Me 1 (ahhh what the hell.....I'll give myself 1.5)
Does the term "Fire Science" ring a bell?Hmmm...I thought that was the Ice cream Man
If you can flake out an extra 400 feet of 1.5 inch prior to charging it, then you can flake out the same length of 2.5 inch and then charge it with very little additional effort. That gives you more water power, lower friction loss, and less stress on the pump.I don't recall saying I couldn't do it, I recall saying that I don't use 2.5 as an interior line
I have studied better ways to fight fires - for over 3 decades - and while I don't claim to know everything, I know that using 1.5 inch lines longer than 250 feet or so is not a best practice, regardless of whether the line is preconnected or not.Alas....us poor unknowing fools that perform tasks everyday that you believe to not be the best practices......I have no idea how we haven't burned down our respective areas doing things the way we operate.
Maybe I should just go out and replace all the 1.5 we have on all the engines with 2.5.....just because your dept operates that way
Here is the 2 1/2 high rise pack power point with all of our research and pictures on how we deploy and utilize a 2 1/2 on high rise and big box occupancies, keep in mind we utilize 3 inch hose for leaderlines but demonstrated some different techniques and the flexibility of the 2 1/2 in various operational modes. Keep in mind we operate with 3 man engine companies (driver, officer, firefighter) and we routinely have success using the 2 1/2 in two and one man operations.
Feel free to use it at your FD and make any adjustments you see fit for it to work for you. I thought you were going to stop following this thread?
Anyways......I couldn't find the link to your powerpoint (I am sure it is just because I lack the knowledge to actually find it....but if you would be so kind as to SPECIFICALLY point it out for me.....I would appreciate it) Thanks in advance
Using your example of 600' of inch and half attack line - (your example) I am curious what you were flowing for DP, FR, NF and most importantly GPM? What would your engineer demand for RPM's from his piece for any resemblance of a decent flow?
You make your point that your preferred line will put out fire. I totally agree with you, for years it was the cadillac of chosen fire attack lines. I agree it will put out fire too. It sprays water from the nozzle and when trained upon a fire it will cool it. Do we both agree that fires of today are hotter then in the past?
Seeing the above example used on a fireground before, very few engineers pump an engine high enough to afford correct DP pressure for single an inch and half attack line. Most reduce the pressure and in the end, the nozzle team is flowing less than a booster line. Hence your gonna take one hell of a beating from a fire that could have been put out quicker with another tool from the toolbox.
I will have to get back to you on some of the specific answers ( I will have to try and find a pitot gauge, from somewhere, and try to remember to look at the actual RPM's )
If the 400' is extended to 600' it should be pumped @ 280 psi + or - elevation.
Actually I haven't made my point......my point was that I don't agree with using a 2.5 as an interior line.
If the driver can't/won't or refuses to operate the pumps as required for the lines being used.....I don't know what to tell you (I know what I would do......but my answer would more than likely drag this thread out another 100 or so pages and make even more fans)
No, actually I'm Kali, and YOU are Michael.I am well aware of who I am
I know imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, but signing my name to your last two posts is a little over the top.I signed no name....that happened to be you (or someone posting with your name) what might be over the top is you not understanding that I copied your posts, and I wrote MY replies in the bold characters, with all the earlier scolding about the heinous typo's I unjustly thrust upon all that read this.......one might mistakenly assume that you would comprehend basic copy and pasting (especially when they were your words)
I began to copy entire posts so as not to use quotes out of context
You can invoke my name, but I'd prefer that you not sign my name. As you say, to each his (or her) own.Once again, I never have...nor will I ever sign your name......unfortunately that was you...and along THAT subject line.....I say, "to each his own"......and I would prefer that you don't misquote me :-)
Kali Goddess of Destruction<-----once again......YOUR signature
and anytime you would like to answer or reply to the other comments and or questions , instead of dancing around of trying to play a poor game of semantics...... I will be waiting
Michael <-----MY signature......posted by ME
No one - including me - is suggesting that you get rid of your department's 1.5 inch lines. Regardlessof the fact that my department doesn't operate that way...in fact we use 1.75 inch for most of our fires. However, we don't have a dogmatic blind spot against taking 2.5 inch line into a structure when circumstances show it to be the best choice.
Just because your department has gotten away with it until now does not make using exclusively 1.5 inch for interior attack a best practice.
Best practices are industry-wide best practices, not just best practices for any one department.
As for your comment "I have no idea how we haven't burned down our respective areas doing things the way we operate." that is exactly the attitude that Charleston, SC had prior to June 18, 2007, and it contributed to the 9 LODDs at the SSS fire. The issue there wasn't just that the building burned down, it was that 9 firefighters died in order to prove that 2.5 inch supply lines and small-caliber interior attack lines are not adequate for large, unsprinklered occupancies.
Charleston's previous chief had exactly the same attitude that you have about using small-caliber interior lines and 2.5 inch for supply.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist - or any other kind of scientist - to figure out what the eventual result was.
I certainly hope that you keep getting away with your practice if you refuse to change. As you can see from looking around here, most of the rest of us will not deny ourselves a good tool from the tool box.
You are still ducking a very important question you've been asked more than once, too. If you aren't "advocating" the exclusive use of small-caliber interior lines and advocating against interior 2.5 inch, and if your position applies only to your department, why are you posting in this discussion at all?
No need to get a pito or remember the RPM's. My inquiry was two fold.
1. What were you going to actually flow for GPM's with that kind of DP.
2. As I recall 1.5" line at 238 psi is easily moveable and from a safety standpoint you are nearing the hoses test pressure for 400' with (100 psi combination nozzle) and would clearly exceed the hoses test pressure for operating with 600' extended.
Thanks for the response. I respect that you dislike the 2 and 1/2 for interior attack though.
I've explained my statements many times, in very simple, basic language. I've backed them up with scientific calculations, rationale, and collegial discussions with other firefighters.
You ignore all of that, insist that the structure has to be "far gone" before using 2.5 on the interior, and try to twist what others say by misquoting, using the straw man fallacy, and by making bogus statements like the "all seeing eye" one above.
You haven't given a single good reason for not using 2.5 as an interior line. "That's the way my department does it" tells the rest of us zippo about why you do it that way. Stating that the structure has to be "far gone" before using 2.5 just tells the rest of us that you wait too long to use 2.5 inch in some situations. Once again, that was the exact strategy and rationale that Charleston used before 6-18-07. They recognized that there were better ways to do it and changed how they do things for the better. I sincerely hope that your department doesn't have a LODD - or nine - before you reconsider your hoseline choices when it's indicated.
Stating that the structure has to be "far gone" before you use 2.5 inch is an oversimplification. Firefighting isn't always simple, and oversimplifications will eventually get you into trouble...or sometimes kill firefighters.
And...you still haven't replied to my question about why you want to intentionally go into interior fires in big buildings with 100 GPM less per company than what you'd be taking with a 2.5 inch interior line.
The fire doesn't understand "we've always done it that way"...it understands water power that overpowers it.