วีดีโอ

I think it goes back to what you get for pressure flow from your public water system. If you don't get get the pressure or flow that dictates your nozzle. Does anyone remember when fog meant smaller droplets and faster breakup up to steam and heat absorption?

Great video as a volley station Cheif it’s one of my goals to switch over to smooth bore I just need to convince my fire fighters

Are smoothbores ruining the American fire service culture? NO but boring fire service content is!

And then there’s the Akron SabreJet nozzle… 😅

Never a fan of smooth bore we tried um but over time went back to fog

The only comment I will make is in regards to the idea of reducing your crew down to 2 on a 2.5" line. It's not about whether two men can handle the nozzle reaction, its the fact that 50' of 2.5" hose weighs approximately 130lbs. Most companies are running at least 150' up to 200-250' of 2.5. At bare minimum at 150' of 2.5" hose you are advancing 390lbs in and around the structure and it's contents. That alone would exhaust a crew of 4 more less a crew of 2! I hope you reconsider your thinking process

It is wild to me to hear smooth bore described as “progressive” and modern. Back in my day only old men would couldn’t fight fire anymore advocates smooth bore.

I've never cared about what nozzle was on the line. You open up and the fire goes out. The hose in-between the nozzle and the pump is WAY more important

I've never cared about what nozzle was on the line. You open up and the fire goes out. The hose in-between the nozzle and the pump is WAY more important

While I don't disagree with your thoughts, there's also a large group of us who like smoothbore nozzles because of what they do, and that's a solid stream of water that hits the seat of the fire and puts it out vs it breaking apart from a fog nozzle where your attack relies on the water evaporating and absorbing heat. I love being able to grab a deuce and a half with an inch and an 8th tip on it by myself, but I also love grabbing and inch and 3/4 line with a 7/8s with a full crew and going interior. It all depends on the type of fire for the nozzle I'm gonna grab.

th-cam.com/video/5o9FWUgb7wU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Oil1U2YHazujaI72 Heres some data that cannot be overlooked, and for those who wanted to argue modern furnishings (hydro carbons). You are attacking the problem all wrong. Fire is measured in Kelvins your turnout gear is rated to absorb radiation or Kelvins. Self adjusting nozzle are defeating particle size of water mist. Large volumes of water smothers burning materials, water vapor/steam can flow freely throughout a structure and find flow path to the seat n vent of fire. 1950s tech nozzles created the same droplets size at 50psi to 100psi. Only thing that increased was surface area.

Yep! Right along with ground monitors and vertical venting.

LP 50psi fog with mercedes hose is the way to go

The art of fire suppression has been lost to time and so called technology 😂. 2" line running a 15/16th tip, we always see them over pumped. And a empty booster tank in 2min or less. Its crazy to see in 1939 Ahrens Fox had a high pressure system that flowed 60gal a minute @375psi. And they would kick ass with a fog application through windows. It created its own flow path to the fire or throughout a closed structure.

We run both fog and smooth. Interior attack it smooth bore all the way. So first line in is always smooth bore. We use the fog and foam inductor for over hall. Surround and drown fires in the country with no hydrant support we swap out the smooth bore for a fog nozzle. Smooth bore move’s alot of water.

QUICK HISTORY LESSON: Metropolitan department doctrine for stacked tip smooth bores was to permit a single man, usually nozzleman, to make a quick attack using 1" tip (210 GPM). When the officer and additional firefighter were able to join, the diminutive 1" tip was removed, increased to 1¼" tip (327 GPM) and the line was advanced or attack continued with full crew applying an appropriate fire flow. When the fog nozzle was introduced, with its benefit in compartmentalized fire, one legitimate complaint was that the versatility and maneuverability provided with variable flow of stacked tips was lost. The industry answered by introducing manually selectable flow fog nozzles. The same manpower considerations could be now addressed, with the added benefit of fog patterns. Some erroneously thought it was intended to match fire conditions to flow, as if anyone could actually eyeball a fire and determine that it called for a certain flow, LOL. Back when fireground hydraulics were actually taught, the automatic nozzle allowed the man on the pump panel to adjust the flow, according to manpower, by using the throttle. This was considered beneficial as he is working in relative safety / controlled environment of the the street, as opposed to the low visibility, chaotic conditions of the nozzleman. That concept is great, if you have a qualified operator, otherwise it can have deadly consequences. Unfortunately the dumbing-down of the job through over-simplification, and loss of historical roots has created a great deal of confusion and misinformation. This is exemplified by the uploader who confused nozzle reaction as a function of PSI, not volume. Only when increased PSI increases the flow does nozzle reaction increase.

th-cam.com/video/vkNFPWyidlc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9bTKwTXX3iZkTopd This is why

Along with pressure it is also about big droplets of water vs small droplets of water.

An interesting listen. Nice work!

I’m not taking advice from a fire service that still wears leather helmets designed in the 1800’s.

we are a very Rural very small dept. I appreciate your logic but for us the selectable gallonage is so important to us . We have to use and conserve every gallon of water since we are totally dependant on tankers. As we gain control over the fire we can thottle back our gpm and conserve water also rarely do we have enough personel to make entry on our arrival so we do alot of work thru windows and doors the fog cababilty really produces alot of steam fast that we horizontilly ventilate which takes down a room and contents fire fast.We position our lines before we charge them initially so one man can handle the 1 3/4 " line until more help arrives. We do use a smooth bore when we need to get penetration or if its windy and we have plenty of water available. I think its a matter of useing the correct tool for the job.

My question to you is is a disadvantage of a smooth bore that if you did have a flammable liquid you wanted to try to put out with water would not the best chance of getting it out be fog ? I guess if insisted on smooth bore I would think you would have to flow foam instead?

Fire Fighter From Australia here. I really enjoyed your approach to the topic. In my experience and from an Australian response, respective it comes down to quite a few things. As a some what standard response line and nozzle in Aus we run typically What you call fog nozzle, selectable flow rate on bumper ring with 120° adjustable flow on 38mm 1 1/2 line at 700kpa 230lpm but can flow up to 475lpm and down to 115lpm. We can and do run bigger hose smoth bores and fixed monitors with both types of nozzles. We typically use selectable pattern nozzles due to full fog protection at any time on fire ground for fire fighter safety of radiant heat in what we call a full fog left to life or full cone, for fighting most fires or water applications we run a power cone and almost smooth bore but with slightly deflected droplets for more surface area coverage (more this shape < <<<<<< 🔥 ). We will do aggressive seat attack on fire internally similar to U.S but we don't generally like to separate the search team without a hose line from a safety approach. Typically response is search team deals with fire whilst getting victim next teams in continue further searches or fire fight. If the fire is ventilation limited we will control the flow path and use short sharp burst to cool gases in thermal layer to allow the fire fighter to find the seat of fire as that can cool the layer enough to stay suspended but not flash over or lower if done properly. If the fire is ventilation drive post flash over its aggressive attack with power cone transitional to internal aggressive if and when viable just like you guys. However you prefer smooth bore. We don't typically have as much large building responses as you guys that changes things again completely. However we are seeing changes in that and I have never served in that metro of an area.

I like the smoothbore nozzle. At the fire district that I retired from I fought the guy in charge of the nozzles. I got smoothbore nozzles and we did a demo with them. After the demo one cross lay and the 2 1/2 cross lay were smoothbore.

This is the Glock vs 1911 debate of the fire service. This debate will continue well into the future.

What's the difference in weight between the thinner wall versus thicker wall hose per 50'?

We switched from sm20 and sm30 automatics to 7/8 and I’ll never go back

Smooth Bore Nozzles make as much sense as Ground Monitors or Vertical Venting. They all equal, ineffective firefighting. Pressure and GPM are not the important topics in firefighting. Effective water application, is. The USA fire disservice doesn't get that.

dave .

Great times Dave thanks for including Fire Facilities.

love it!!!!

in my 47th year of active interior structural firefighting, i will take a variable fog nozzle any day. great for making narrow hallways and venting rooms. plus the smaller drops absorb more then bigger drops do as the bigger drops fall faster and dont absorb as much heat in my opinion

I've watched about 100 of these videos. Not a single one directly compares smoothbore to combination and explains why they are better. Our dept went to both smooth and combination low pressure nozzles. 150gpm at 50psi. So there's no real difference. If anyone else has pros and negatives not about pressure or nozzle reaction, please comment I really want to know more.

I remember the Rockwood nozzle. 2 in 1

Never gave it a thought about the liner, thanks

We switched to break-a-part nozzles with a 7/8" tip and a 150 @50psi fog tip. By changing all of our nozzles to 50psi for both 1 3/4" & 2 1/2" we now have one basic nozzle pressure of 50psi for all nozzles, fog and solid stream. We often use just a 2 person crew on a line, and this allows for lower nozzle reaction and less stress in handling the line.

Forgive my ignorance but when I saw "smoothbore nozzle," not being a firefighter I was like "they make rifled nozzles? Does that make water flow more accurate?" 😂😂😂 Sorry.

Great job. Keep it coming. Capt. Dave Fornell Author, Fire Stream Management Handbook

I prefer the combination nozzle but i def understand the pros of the smooth bore. My dept implements both. We have one inch and 3/4 crosslay with a smooth bore stacked tips and one with a combination nozzle and 2.5" crosslay with another smooth bore.

My dept has both we have a smooth bore and fog, both are 65psi, both are on our inch and 3/4 crosslays.

I would be interested to know the department, manpower per co., and building construction of the presenter's cited experience. I would wager that it is not a metropolitan or urban FD.

Low-pressure nozzles are great when you have 5 men per company, using 3 to undo all the kinks in multi-story buildings, projects, stairwells, hallways, etc. Show me anybody who is impressed with low pressure lines, and I'll show you a small-town / rural VFD trying to mimic FDNY, but minus the manpower, and making their attack from the exterior only. I won't even get into the reduced heat absorption and droplet size of low PSI fog. It blows my mind that in 2023 it has to be explained: Nozzle reaction is a function of volume, not pressure; that is simple physics. Most overlooked that higher pressure will increase flow through a fixed orifice; bringing us back to flow affecting nozzle reaction, not PSI. This is easily documented with being able to hold a 2000 PSI pressure washer wand with one hand. Unfortunately, people take media as gospel and they are often oversimplified. At equal flows, fog produces less nozzle reaction due to the forward motion of water striking impinger, offsetting nozzle reaction. Don't believe it? Rotate a fog nozzle from straight stream to wide fog, and feel nozzle reaction decrease. Or read the manufacturer's empirical data. Unfortunately most people make an apples and oranges comparison, using the 1" tip on a 2½"( 210 GPM) compared to a 300 GPM fog, incorrectly concluding that it is pressure making the difference. Go to 1¼" tip at 327 GPM and see what happens! I must give credit for pointing out the hazards of an automatic nozzle in unqualified hands, and the difference between the three types. Presented in a masterful fashion!

Well said

A good take on the subject brother. I am still baffled and humored to this day when guys make their pitch for SB nozzles. “Reach penetration, large droplets, 50psi operating pressure” but they really just wanna get away from fogs because they crap their bunker pants over the mechanics of a variable pattern fog nozzle 😂😂😅

7/8 smooth for interior low PSI fog for vehicles

I totally agree low pressure with a smooth bore helps a lot with a low staffed crew but combinations are still useful for vehicle fires with the fog pattern helping with suppression

Great work

This sheds a lot of light on the thought process probably every first responder goes through. I never really thought about it like this but it’s true. I think it’s awesome you mentioned next rung as well. I have reached out to them and have had a great friend made because of that program. Good stuff save!

Good job David 👍

Great Stuff Dave!