Dino I have heard you mention your solution a couple of years ago but you have never shared any more details with us.
We are interested, please give us a summary of what it is, what it does and how it is used. I fully recognise that you want to preserve some secrecy over your idea but currently it seems to be getting nowhere without publicity and wider support. You wont get it off the ground unless you create some demand.
Hi Kurnal
I totally agree with your comments and feel that this does need wider support or at least exposed to a wider audience for scrutiny and assessment.
Firefighters hate using guidelines because they have absolutely no faith in them and they don't work in their present form.
Any training venues we used for guideline training firstly had to be fitted with handles so we could actually secure the guidelines onto (if only we had this luxury at incidents)!
I carried out tests with the new design and the handles we fitted and got the following results.
Firstly, using handles to tie off the guideline
On average, crews use approximately 1.5 metres of line to tie off a guideline to a suitable object in a building.
It took them an average of 1 minute to locate a securing point and tie each knot.
During the trial, we had 10 securing points within the premises.
This meant that we used 25% of the line to secure it within the building to be searched.
It also meant that almost 25% of cylinder contents was used up whilst the crews were securing the Guideline instead of
searching off it.
We then tried the new design and got the following results
The crews used 20 cm of line to tie off each knot using the new design.
It took an average of 10 seconds to secure the line using the new design.
This meant that we only used 3% of the line to secure it within the building to be searched
The results also showed that a maximum of 3.5% of cylinder contents was used up whilst crews were securing the Guideline.
One of the most surprising results was that to get to the same point within the building, the crews using the new design used
50% less air than the previous crews.
Both crews were comparable in age and fitness and the crews who were securing the line in the conventional method stated that
they felt that was more stressful and may have contributed to them using more air.
Another factor in using less air to get to the same point was that they would have got there almost 7 minutes quicker.
I will put the details up later but I have got work to do just now.