Left for Life?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Stephen Blizzard on August 18, 2009 at 3:44am

Yes we use left for life, and I know it came from the LPG fog attack. Yes, like you say there is no room for the expanding steam generated to go but down onto the crew/occupants. On a separate note, thanks for bringing these topics out for discussion.

Mike Walker said:

Oh yes, the genius of gang nails. The department I work for has always used fog nozzles and is just now beginning to use smoothbores. Even though 95% of our guys still have the fog nozzle on their lines, they use a straight stream for interior attacks. The comment that is going around now, "right for reach" means they adjust the fog nozzle to a straight stream by turning the fog adjustment all the wat to the right, and "left for life", turning the fog nozzle adjustment all the way to left gives a very wide fog pattern. I'm sure the practice has come from LPG training where firefighters are taught to use a wide fog pattern to protect them from the fire.

My major concern with instructors advocating this practice for interior attack protection is that inside a structure fire, there is no clean, cool air that is being drawn into stream. The entire atmosphere is very hot and fuel contaminated. By using the wide fog pattern in an extremely hot environment, the water quickly, almost instantly, turns to steam. The super heated moisture infiltrates our bunker gear, causing a very painful experience. If the situation is bad enough, it burns the dickens out of the crew.

Permalink Reply by Mike Walker on February 3, 2011 at 7:41pm

Glad you liked the October Article. In this months issue, a deep look at nozzle selection is showcased. Check it out. Gets deep at times so wear your hip waders but the wading is worth the effort. Great data. 

Ian Ramirez said:

I have heard this since I moved down south and can only figure it comes from confusing industrial firefighting tecniques with interior structural firefighting. I have heard this from Chiefs to Lieutenants and echoed over and over at probie schools during "fire streams" class. When asked I simply tell people to google "left for life" and nothing comes up with respect to structural firefighting. Fire Engineering has a great article in the October 2010 issue titled "Fog Nozzle Training: Are We Creating A Hazerdous Impression" by Michael L. Walker.

 

If I can open up Pandora's Box of Fog vs. Smooth Bore, both have their place on the fireground. I am a student of Andrew Fredericks and his articles make the case for the Smooth Bore/Solid stream. Raed his stuff here in Fire Engineering for yourself.

 

Stay Low and let it blow!

Permalink Reply by Joe McClelland on February 6, 2011 at 11:18am

When I was in the Academy some 19 years ago, the left for life thing was told to us if we were ever caught in a flashover to lay down, point the nozzle up, rotate the 'bale' left and flow. Sounded good to a kid with no fires under his belt, but after a few good ones, I remember thinking there is no way I am going to fog this atmosphere and get cooked. I still have people tell me this move when I am teaching classes and I disway them from this tactic. We know this should never be done inside a building, but the method is still being taught. In the classes I teach, I show what this does to the atmosphere and the body when applied. Safely of course. I have never had someone say they will still use this thinking in a building.

 

As with anything, training is key and needs to be done.

Permalink Reply by Mike Walker on February 8, 2011 at 8:05am

Well said Joe

Joe McClelland said:

When I was in the Academy some 19 years ago, the left for life thing was told to us if we were ever caught in a flashover to lay down, point the nozzle up, rotate the 'bale' left and flow. Sounded good to a kid with no fires under his belt, but after a few good ones, I remember thinking there is no way I am going to fog this atmosphere and get cooked. I still have people tell me this move when I am teaching classes and I disway them from this tactic. We know this should never be done inside a building, but the method is still being taught. In the classes I teach, I show what this does to the atmosphere and the body when applied. Safely of course. I have never had someone say they will still use this thinking in a building.

 

As with anything, training is key and needs to be done.

Permalink Reply by Pierre-Louis LAMBALLAIS on June 26, 2011 at 8:44pm

. We know this should never be done inside a building, but the method is still being taught. In the classes I teach, I show what this does to the atmosphere and the body when applied. Safely of course. I have never had someone say they will still use this thinking in a building.

 

Sorry, but we teach that, and we can proove it works fine. We have some guys still alive after flashover, by the use of this method. You are not hurt by the steam, as the nozzle create a venturi effect, sucking fresh air to you. A girl, friend of mine, has been caught in a flashover and survived. As she was able to describe the event, we had the opportunity to build a computer simulation of the fire wih amount of fuel, location of opening and so on. At flashover, they had face about 12MW.

And are still alive.

Read that:

http://www.tantad.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&si...

At the end, you have the HRR of the Bully Les Mines fire during which this "protection method" has been used. We have also another example during a basement fire in west of France but with no computer simulation.

 

Notice you don't have to lay, point up, rotate and flow. You must flow first,then lay and rotate. But maybe it works because when this happened, we are in fog position, so it's easier to open then lay. Also, it works only at max flow, as 135GPM is the only flow rate able to absord the HRR of a flashover.

 

 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page