Proudly serving those who serve
|
Featured Article
|
|
Timeless tactics:
How 19th-Century firefighting principles shape today’s operations
By Etienne du Toit, Provincial Disaster Management and Fire and Rescue Services, Western Cape Government
Article from FRI Volume 8 No 4, Firefighting principles
In his book, ‘Fire Prevention and Fire Extinction’ (1866), James Braidwood, first superintendent of the London Fire Brigade, laid out operational principles that continue to underpin modern firefighting. I strongly encourage all firefighters to read this book, not only to gain insight into the evolution of the fire service and the traditions we uphold but also to be reminded that the fundamentals of firefighting remain just as relevant today as they were nearly two centuries ago. Braidwood’s observations continue to inform effective fireground tactics, safety and the professional ethos of our service.
In 1866, James Braidwood, the inaugural superintendent of the London Fire Brigade and a recognised pioneer in the field of structural firefighting, articulated operational principles that remain foundational to contemporary fire service practice. He observed that upon the first indication of a fire, “it is of the utmost consequence to shut, and keep shut, all doors, windows or other openings.” Braidwood noted that it was not uncommon to find one floor of a dwelling comparatively undamaged while those above and below were severely affected, an outcome directly attributable to a closed door that restricted airflow and altered the development of the fire. This early recognition of the role of flow path and ventilation control prefigures modern concepts of compartmentation and flow-path management that are now embedded in firefighting doctrine and standards.
In 1866, James Braidwood, the inaugural superintendent of the London Fire Brigade and a recognised pioneer in the field of structural firefighting, articulated operational principles that remain foundational to contemporary fire service practice. He observed that upon the first indication of a fire, “it is of the utmost consequence to shut, and keep shut, all doors, windows or other openings.” Braidwood noted that it was not uncommon to find one floor of a dwelling comparatively undamaged while those above and below were severely affected, an outcome directly attributable to a closed door that restricted airflow and altered the development of the fire. This early recognition of the role of flow path and ventilation control prefigures modern concepts of compartmentation and flow-path management that are now embedded in firefighting doctrine and standards.
James Braidwood, first superintendent of the London Fire Brigade
Thornton's Rule is a fire science principle stating that the amount of heat released during the complete combustion of organic materials is directly proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed. Published in 1917 by WM Thornton, it's the basis for oxygen consumption calorimetry (OCC), a method used to estimate a fire's heat release rate by measuring oxygen consumption. This rule is valuable because the heat released per kilogram of oxygen consumed is remarkably consistent for different organic fuels, allowing for a reliable approximation of heat output.
In simple firefighting terms, ventilation openings, especially the size thereof, such as doors and windows, determine the (heat release rate) or development of the fire.
In some situations, enriched oxygen atmospheres greatly increase ignition likelihood and fire intensity, posing greater danger than the fire itself.
Braidwood further provided practical guidance on initial interior attack; guidance that continues to resonate with today’s structural firefighting practices. He advised that once a hose-line is charged, the branchman should advance “so near the fire… that the water from the branch may strike the burning materials.” When heat or visibility prevent an upright approach, he instructed firefighters to advance on hands and knees, supported by the crew behind, noting the presence of a reliable layer of cooler, breathable air “from six to twelve inches from the floor.”
I appreciate that those fires primarily involved legacy materials, with minimal synthetic content. The absence of modern synthetic materials, which release energy more rapidly and produce hazardous products of combustion such as hydrogen cyanide, resulted in significantly different flashover dynamics and overall fire behaviour.
This acknowledgement of thermal stratification and the corresponding need for low-profile advancement, remains consistent with modern operational procedures, including those reflected guidance documents and established best practice.
The above techniques were developed during Braidwood’s era, when firefighters operated with minimal personal protection and used low-pressure delivery hose. Today, firefighters have access to extensive PPE, including bunker gear, flash hoods, breathing apparatus and a range of hose options from 19mm to 45mm and even 65mm in extreme conditions, paired with adjustable nozzles. Fire remains an exothermic reaction that releases heat primarily through radiation. Although this differs from alpha, beta and gamma emissions from radioactive sources, the fundamental protection principles of time, distance and shielding still apply. Modern PPE significantly improves shielding, enabling firefighters to work closer to and for longer periods in high-heat environments. Early in my career, before flash hoods, I recall fires where we left with blisters on our ears.
Drawing on Braidwood’s enduring principles, effective structural firefighting in South Africa continues to hinge on two critical elements: ventilation control and disciplined water application. Restricting doors, windows and openings limits the flow path, slows fire growth and preserves tenable conditions for crews. Concurrently, advancing a hose-line to apply water directly to burning material, often from a low, cooler layer remains essential to rapidly reducing heat, arresting fire spread and supporting safe interior operations. Later advancements, such as positive pressure ventilation (PPV), significantly enhanced flow path management in firefighting, improving smoke control, heat removal, visibility and overall firefighter safety when applied correctly within coordinated fireground tactics.
In simple firefighting terms, ventilation openings, especially the size thereof, such as doors and windows, determine the (heat release rate) or development of the fire.
In some situations, enriched oxygen atmospheres greatly increase ignition likelihood and fire intensity, posing greater danger than the fire itself.
Braidwood further provided practical guidance on initial interior attack; guidance that continues to resonate with today’s structural firefighting practices. He advised that once a hose-line is charged, the branchman should advance “so near the fire… that the water from the branch may strike the burning materials.” When heat or visibility prevent an upright approach, he instructed firefighters to advance on hands and knees, supported by the crew behind, noting the presence of a reliable layer of cooler, breathable air “from six to twelve inches from the floor.”
I appreciate that those fires primarily involved legacy materials, with minimal synthetic content. The absence of modern synthetic materials, which release energy more rapidly and produce hazardous products of combustion such as hydrogen cyanide, resulted in significantly different flashover dynamics and overall fire behaviour.
This acknowledgement of thermal stratification and the corresponding need for low-profile advancement, remains consistent with modern operational procedures, including those reflected guidance documents and established best practice.
The above techniques were developed during Braidwood’s era, when firefighters operated with minimal personal protection and used low-pressure delivery hose. Today, firefighters have access to extensive PPE, including bunker gear, flash hoods, breathing apparatus and a range of hose options from 19mm to 45mm and even 65mm in extreme conditions, paired with adjustable nozzles. Fire remains an exothermic reaction that releases heat primarily through radiation. Although this differs from alpha, beta and gamma emissions from radioactive sources, the fundamental protection principles of time, distance and shielding still apply. Modern PPE significantly improves shielding, enabling firefighters to work closer to and for longer periods in high-heat environments. Early in my career, before flash hoods, I recall fires where we left with blisters on our ears.
Drawing on Braidwood’s enduring principles, effective structural firefighting in South Africa continues to hinge on two critical elements: ventilation control and disciplined water application. Restricting doors, windows and openings limits the flow path, slows fire growth and preserves tenable conditions for crews. Concurrently, advancing a hose-line to apply water directly to burning material, often from a low, cooler layer remains essential to rapidly reducing heat, arresting fire spread and supporting safe interior operations. Later advancements, such as positive pressure ventilation (PPV), significantly enhanced flow path management in firefighting, improving smoke control, heat removal, visibility and overall firefighter safety when applied correctly within coordinated fireground tactics.
The Manchester Woolworth fire on 8 May 1979
When I joined the fire service, I was informed that residential fires in the older southern suburbs—generally constructed from the early 1900s to around the 1950s—seldom, if ever, experienced roof collapse. Fire extension into the roof space was reportedly rare and, in most cases, fires remained confined to the room of origin. In contrast, the opposite was said to be true for the northern suburbs, which were developed largely from the 1960s onwards and reflected far more modern construction methods.
Over time, and without recalling exact statistics, my own operational experience confirmed this observation. Fires in older homes very rarely resulted in complete structural collapse, whereas more modern dwellings were demonstrably more vulnerable. Construction methods differed considerably. Older houses typically had roofs covered with corrugated iron supported by heavy timber trusses or rafters. These substantial timber members demonstrated far greater resistance to early structural failure under fire conditions. By comparison, newer houses were often roofed with concrete tiles supported by lighter timber components, which were further compromised by the additional dead load of the tiles once exposed to fire.
Other features of older homes also influenced fire behaviour. Window openings were generally much smaller, limiting the availability of oxygen and slowing fire development. Ceilings were significantly higher; often around 3.2 metres and frequently constructed of pressed metal, which acted as a barrier to early fire spread into the roof void.
These construction differences also resulted in distinctly different ventilation tactics. Vertical ventilation on older homes was almost never attempted due to the difficulty and risk associated with removing corrugated iron roofing, unlike tiled roofs where such tactics were more feasible. Collectively, these factors contributed to markedly different fire dynamics and operational outcomes between older and more modern residential structures.
Early in my career, I responded to a domestic dwelling fire that appeared, on arrival, to have partially involved the house. The owner, his wife and his sister, occupied the single-storey, three-bedroom brick dwelling with a corrugated-iron roof. They were awakened by the sound of breaking glass in an adjoining room and a strong smell of smoke. On investigating, the owner opened a bedroom door and was immediately confronted by a rapidly developing fire in the third bedroom. Realising the severity of the situation, they raised the alarm and escaped through the front door, later describing how the fire seemed to “explode” behind them as they exited. However, in the confusion and the speed at which smoke filled the passage and living areas, the sister was unable to exit her room. Within seconds, conditions deteriorated to the point where she could no longer evacuate due to the extensive smoke logging.
The fire report indicated an attendance time of 11 minutes, measured from the moment the initial emergency call was received to the arrival of the first responding unit on scene. On arrival, flames were clearly emitting from the windows of at least two rooms enriched and auto ignited by the outside 21 percent oxygen concentration.
Over time, and without recalling exact statistics, my own operational experience confirmed this observation. Fires in older homes very rarely resulted in complete structural collapse, whereas more modern dwellings were demonstrably more vulnerable. Construction methods differed considerably. Older houses typically had roofs covered with corrugated iron supported by heavy timber trusses or rafters. These substantial timber members demonstrated far greater resistance to early structural failure under fire conditions. By comparison, newer houses were often roofed with concrete tiles supported by lighter timber components, which were further compromised by the additional dead load of the tiles once exposed to fire.
Other features of older homes also influenced fire behaviour. Window openings were generally much smaller, limiting the availability of oxygen and slowing fire development. Ceilings were significantly higher; often around 3.2 metres and frequently constructed of pressed metal, which acted as a barrier to early fire spread into the roof void.
These construction differences also resulted in distinctly different ventilation tactics. Vertical ventilation on older homes was almost never attempted due to the difficulty and risk associated with removing corrugated iron roofing, unlike tiled roofs where such tactics were more feasible. Collectively, these factors contributed to markedly different fire dynamics and operational outcomes between older and more modern residential structures.
Early in my career, I responded to a domestic dwelling fire that appeared, on arrival, to have partially involved the house. The owner, his wife and his sister, occupied the single-storey, three-bedroom brick dwelling with a corrugated-iron roof. They were awakened by the sound of breaking glass in an adjoining room and a strong smell of smoke. On investigating, the owner opened a bedroom door and was immediately confronted by a rapidly developing fire in the third bedroom. Realising the severity of the situation, they raised the alarm and escaped through the front door, later describing how the fire seemed to “explode” behind them as they exited. However, in the confusion and the speed at which smoke filled the passage and living areas, the sister was unable to exit her room. Within seconds, conditions deteriorated to the point where she could no longer evacuate due to the extensive smoke logging.
The fire report indicated an attendance time of 11 minutes, measured from the moment the initial emergency call was received to the arrival of the first responding unit on scene. On arrival, flames were clearly emitting from the windows of at least two rooms enriched and auto ignited by the outside 21 percent oxygen concentration.
Fire will grow in direct proportion to the oxygen supplied to it
Persons were reported missing and an interior attack was initiated through the front door using a 38mm low-pressure hose and nozzle set at, which I presume, the maximum setting of 475l/min.
The fire involved the master bedroom of approximately 25m², the third bedroom of about 20m² and roughly 6m of the passage, giving a total affected area slightly exceeding 50m². Applying Paul Grimwood’s recommended formula for residential compartment fires, surface area × 5 to determine the required flow rate, this incident would require roughly 250 litres-per-minute of water for effective suppression (Grimwood, Fog Attack). This aligns with modern compartment firefighting principles, ensuring sufficient cooling of the fire gases and burning surfaces to prevent rapid fire development or flashover.
The missing elderly woman was believed to be in the second bedroom that was inaccessible from the passage due to intense rollover. Fire was spreading beyond the third bedroom being the room of origin into the passage and main bedroom. During the external 360, crews located the victim in the second bedroom through a window, which they broke after removing the curtains. Although she was visible on the bed, little smoke was present. Heavy burglar bars prevented access. The officer in charge instructed crews not to open the closed passage doors while attempts were being made to remove the burglar bars, this proved to have been unsuccessful and aborted once it became clear that fire suppression was successful. A second 38mm line was redeployed to the window of the second bedroom in case of fire penetration. The interior attack pushed the fire back into the rooms of origin, venting through broken windows. A firefighter then entered the victim’s bedroom through the door, which was of solid wood construction, as typically found in houses build in the 1940s and 50s and found her conscious but confused and closed the door. The door was fortunately located slightly further down the passage and not diagonally opposite the room of origin. Given the progress of suppression, he sheltered in place with her until the fire was extinguished. Minutes later, both the woman and a medium-sized dog were safely removed.
The fire involved the master bedroom of approximately 25m², the third bedroom of about 20m² and roughly 6m of the passage, giving a total affected area slightly exceeding 50m². Applying Paul Grimwood’s recommended formula for residential compartment fires, surface area × 5 to determine the required flow rate, this incident would require roughly 250 litres-per-minute of water for effective suppression (Grimwood, Fog Attack). This aligns with modern compartment firefighting principles, ensuring sufficient cooling of the fire gases and burning surfaces to prevent rapid fire development or flashover.
The missing elderly woman was believed to be in the second bedroom that was inaccessible from the passage due to intense rollover. Fire was spreading beyond the third bedroom being the room of origin into the passage and main bedroom. During the external 360, crews located the victim in the second bedroom through a window, which they broke after removing the curtains. Although she was visible on the bed, little smoke was present. Heavy burglar bars prevented access. The officer in charge instructed crews not to open the closed passage doors while attempts were being made to remove the burglar bars, this proved to have been unsuccessful and aborted once it became clear that fire suppression was successful. A second 38mm line was redeployed to the window of the second bedroom in case of fire penetration. The interior attack pushed the fire back into the rooms of origin, venting through broken windows. A firefighter then entered the victim’s bedroom through the door, which was of solid wood construction, as typically found in houses build in the 1940s and 50s and found her conscious but confused and closed the door. The door was fortunately located slightly further down the passage and not diagonally opposite the room of origin. Given the progress of suppression, he sheltered in place with her until the fire was extinguished. Minutes later, both the woman and a medium-sized dog were safely removed.
Aggressive, well-coordinated interior attack combined with strategic exterior support maximises suppression efficiency
This incident, later used as a drill case study, demonstrated that her survival depended on two key factors: a solid wooden door that remained closed and an aggressive interior attack using a high-flow hose line. A standard 19mm hose reel operating at 25 bar cannot deliver more than about 120l/min, which is clearly inadequate for a developing compartment fire exceeding 50m², where significantly higher flow rates are essential for effective cooling and suppression. A hose reel would likely have been insufficient to control the fire and instinctively opening the door to search would almost certainly have worsened conditions.
The above incident can be criticised from several angles and despite its successful outcome, it underscores the narrow margin between effective decision-making, risky improvisation and unintended escalation during structural fire operations.
Swedish firefighting procedures requires three firefighters for single line entry; two on branch and one for door control. Managing the door keeps fire ventilation controlled making gas dilution more effective.
Although the concept of gas cooling only became widely known at a later stage, we effectively practised it in principle. We were taught that, when entering a room on fire, firefighters should kneel as low as possible and use building elements for shielding wherever feasible. A narrow jet was then swept along ceiling level. This technique was intended primarily to dislodge any objects that might present a falling hazard. In practice, however, it also served to cool and displace the hot fire gases accumulating at high level, reducing thermal stress and improving conditions for entry and advance.
Water expands dramatically when it turns into steam and the amount of expansion depends strongly on temperature (and pressure).
At the boiling point (100 degrees Celsius, atmospheric pressure), 1 litre of liquid water → ±1 700 litres of steam. This is the commonly quoted figure used in fire service training-expansion ratio ≈ 1 : 1 700 at ±1 bar.
As temperature increases, steam occupies more volume:
Higher gas temperatures mean greater expansion, producing more effective:
This is why fine sprays and short pulses at ceiling level are so effective in controlling fire gases without excessive steam production at floor level.
In enclosed spaces, this rapid expansion also explains the risk of steam burns to firefighters if application is uncontrolled.
The above incident can be criticised from several angles and despite its successful outcome, it underscores the narrow margin between effective decision-making, risky improvisation and unintended escalation during structural fire operations.
Swedish firefighting procedures requires three firefighters for single line entry; two on branch and one for door control. Managing the door keeps fire ventilation controlled making gas dilution more effective.
Although the concept of gas cooling only became widely known at a later stage, we effectively practised it in principle. We were taught that, when entering a room on fire, firefighters should kneel as low as possible and use building elements for shielding wherever feasible. A narrow jet was then swept along ceiling level. This technique was intended primarily to dislodge any objects that might present a falling hazard. In practice, however, it also served to cool and displace the hot fire gases accumulating at high level, reducing thermal stress and improving conditions for entry and advance.
Water expands dramatically when it turns into steam and the amount of expansion depends strongly on temperature (and pressure).
At the boiling point (100 degrees Celsius, atmospheric pressure), 1 litre of liquid water → ±1 700 litres of steam. This is the commonly quoted figure used in fire service training-expansion ratio ≈ 1 : 1 700 at ±1 bar.
As temperature increases, steam occupies more volume:
- 200 degrees Celsius → ~2 100 litres of steam per litre of water
- 300 degrees Celsius → ~2 600 litres
- 500 degrees Celsius → ~3 500 litres
Higher gas temperatures mean greater expansion, producing more effective:
- Gas cooling
- Oxygen displacement
- Reduction in flame intensity
This is why fine sprays and short pulses at ceiling level are so effective in controlling fire gases without excessive steam production at floor level.
In enclosed spaces, this rapid expansion also explains the risk of steam burns to firefighters if application is uncontrolled.
Ventilation openings, especially the size thereof, determine
the heat release rate or development of the fire
Approximately 85 percent of fires are contained to the room of origin (ROO), with only about 15 percent extending beyond it, based on a three-year study of incidents attended by the Welsh Fire Services.
Although equivalent South African data is not available, the similarity in construction methods and regulatory requirements for formal dwellings suggests that local figures may fall within a comparable range. Throughout my career, I have attended numerous fires that remained confined to the room of origin, even where higher fuelloads were present. In most of these cases the doors were closed, limiting air flow, although windows were often fractured. In Wales, double-glazed windows are common, whereas South Africa predominantly uses single glazing, yet the resulting openings remained relatively small in both contexts.
I anecdotally concluded that many of these fires did not require fire service intervention for suppression, as they were either fuel- or ventilation-controlled, once again reaffirming Braidwood’s early observations about fire behaviour.
The above case study clearly falls within the 15 percent of domestic dwelling fires where the fire extended beyond the room of origin.
Basic science, fire will grow in direct proportion to the oxygen supplied to it. A single window of an average domestic dwelling will allow a peak heat release rate of less than 10MW - not enough to transition to flashover compared to approximately 20MW when you add the door opening, again this is fuel load dependent synthetic materials has a four times greater heat release rate than legacy materials and consume twice as much oxygen. This was displayed at the Manchester Woolworth fire that occurred on 8 May 1979 where a very high synthetic fuel load consisting of inter alia polyurethane foam resulted to rapid flashover and loss of compartmentation before arrival of the Brigade, which attended within two minutes after mobilisation.
The value of an aggressive interior fire attack, supported by exterior aerial operations and adequate flow rates, was clearly demonstrated in what remains one of the most successful yet under-reported fires in South Africa. On 9 June 2004, a major building fire occurred at Miller Weedon House on the corner of Wolmarans and Twist streets in central Johannesburg. The incident involved an eighth-floor crèche where 64 children were initially protected in place under rapidly deteriorating conditions. Coordinated actions by Johannesburg Emergency Management Services, despite early loss of compartmentation, combining decisive interior advancement with effective aerial water application, prevented further fire extension, ensured structural integrity thus enabling the safe rescue of all 64 children. The same principals applied in the domestic dwelling fire cited above, namely initial attack and door control enabling flow path management and protection in place were utilised in this much larger incident.
The above clearly emphasises and reaffirms that the fundamentals of firefighting remain as relevant today as they were in the 1800s, highlighting the following key points:
These principles demonstrate that, despite technological advances, the basics of firefighting remain unchanged.
Whilst it is not the intention of this article to examine wind-driven fires, it is of utmost importance to consider the effect of wind on compartment or structure fire behaviour more specifically during tactical ventilation and direct entry.
In wildland firefighting, the following saying translates slightly differently but the principle stays the same: “Wind at your back – attack, wind in your face – defend.”
How this applies to structural fires
Wind at your back (favourable flow path):
Wind in your face (unfavourable flow path):
If the wind controls the fire, the fire controls you.
This thinking underpins modern research on wind-driven structural fires (NIST/UL studies) and supports conservative decision-making under high wind conditions.
I also acknowledge the significant advances made in ultra-high-pressure (UHP) firefighting technology and the operational benefits it offers in specific applications. Its potential to improve initial attack capability, reduce water usage and enhance firefighter safety warrants deeper examination. I intend to prepare a follow-up article in which the dynamics, limitations and practical performance of UHP systems will be explored in greater detail, allowing for a balanced comparison with conventional low- and medium-pressure firefighting techniques.
This article highlights why understanding building construction, chemistry, physics and hydraulics is essential to firefighter training, enabling safer operations, better decision-making and effective fire behaviour prediction.
Although equivalent South African data is not available, the similarity in construction methods and regulatory requirements for formal dwellings suggests that local figures may fall within a comparable range. Throughout my career, I have attended numerous fires that remained confined to the room of origin, even where higher fuelloads were present. In most of these cases the doors were closed, limiting air flow, although windows were often fractured. In Wales, double-glazed windows are common, whereas South Africa predominantly uses single glazing, yet the resulting openings remained relatively small in both contexts.
I anecdotally concluded that many of these fires did not require fire service intervention for suppression, as they were either fuel- or ventilation-controlled, once again reaffirming Braidwood’s early observations about fire behaviour.
The above case study clearly falls within the 15 percent of domestic dwelling fires where the fire extended beyond the room of origin.
Basic science, fire will grow in direct proportion to the oxygen supplied to it. A single window of an average domestic dwelling will allow a peak heat release rate of less than 10MW - not enough to transition to flashover compared to approximately 20MW when you add the door opening, again this is fuel load dependent synthetic materials has a four times greater heat release rate than legacy materials and consume twice as much oxygen. This was displayed at the Manchester Woolworth fire that occurred on 8 May 1979 where a very high synthetic fuel load consisting of inter alia polyurethane foam resulted to rapid flashover and loss of compartmentation before arrival of the Brigade, which attended within two minutes after mobilisation.
The value of an aggressive interior fire attack, supported by exterior aerial operations and adequate flow rates, was clearly demonstrated in what remains one of the most successful yet under-reported fires in South Africa. On 9 June 2004, a major building fire occurred at Miller Weedon House on the corner of Wolmarans and Twist streets in central Johannesburg. The incident involved an eighth-floor crèche where 64 children were initially protected in place under rapidly deteriorating conditions. Coordinated actions by Johannesburg Emergency Management Services, despite early loss of compartmentation, combining decisive interior advancement with effective aerial water application, prevented further fire extension, ensured structural integrity thus enabling the safe rescue of all 64 children. The same principals applied in the domestic dwelling fire cited above, namely initial attack and door control enabling flow path management and protection in place were utilised in this much larger incident.
The above clearly emphasises and reaffirms that the fundamentals of firefighting remain as relevant today as they were in the 1800s, highlighting the following key points:
- Interior attack with correct flow rate and application – Ensures effective fire suppression and protection of occupants.
- Flow path management and gas cooling – Controls fire and smoke movement, reducing risk to both firefighters and occupants understanding that smoke in itself is a fuel.
- Ventilation control using building features – Utilising doors, windows and other structural elements to limit fire spread and enable protection in place.
- Coordination and tactics – Aggressive, well-coordinated interior attack combined with strategic exterior support maximises suppression efficiency and enables successful rescues, even in high-risk scenarios.
These principles demonstrate that, despite technological advances, the basics of firefighting remain unchanged.
Whilst it is not the intention of this article to examine wind-driven fires, it is of utmost importance to consider the effect of wind on compartment or structure fire behaviour more specifically during tactical ventilation and direct entry.
In wildland firefighting, the following saying translates slightly differently but the principle stays the same: “Wind at your back – attack, wind in your face – defend.”
How this applies to structural fires
Wind at your back (favourable flow path):
- Fire and hot gases are being pushed away from crews.
- Hose lines can be advanced from the upwind side.
- Interior attack is more viable and effective.
- Better visibility and reduced heat on entry.
Wind in your face (unfavourable flow path):
- Wind-driven fire pushes heat, smoke, and flame toward crews.
- High risk of rapid fire spread and flashover.
- Openings (doors/windows) can act as blowtorch effects.
- Increased danger to interior crews.
If the wind controls the fire, the fire controls you.
This thinking underpins modern research on wind-driven structural fires (NIST/UL studies) and supports conservative decision-making under high wind conditions.
I also acknowledge the significant advances made in ultra-high-pressure (UHP) firefighting technology and the operational benefits it offers in specific applications. Its potential to improve initial attack capability, reduce water usage and enhance firefighter safety warrants deeper examination. I intend to prepare a follow-up article in which the dynamics, limitations and practical performance of UHP systems will be explored in greater detail, allowing for a balanced comparison with conventional low- and medium-pressure firefighting techniques.
This article highlights why understanding building construction, chemistry, physics and hydraulics is essential to firefighter training, enabling safer operations, better decision-making and effective fire behaviour prediction.