Okay, we've done the "firestarting" theme to death, time to move on to the next step - keeping it going once it's lit.

I feel reasonably comfortable that I can get a fire going using a "tipi" or a "lean-to" type fire - as long as the wood is propped vertically and is burning from the bottom, it seems to burn quite well. (My dad taught me long ago that fire wants to burn upward, and if it can't burn upward, it wants to go sideways, but it will only burn downward with great difficulty. This is why anybody who uses wooden matches learns to hold them pointing downward at a 45 degree angle.)

However, any time I try to convert the fire from a vertical position to the traditional "horizontal logs" type, it just slowly loses energy and dies out; at a minimum, it seems to need a great deal of constant attention to keep it going, not something I'm comfortable with providing in a solo survival sitch.

Is there a "critical mass" needed to have a fire going in horizontal format? i.e. a minimum number of logs, or a minimum size of logs? My dad never had a problem keeping a fire going in our fireplace when I was growing up (I guess I should have got him to teach me when I had the chance <img src="images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> )

I'm teaching a Wilderness First Aid course to our group next month (if we get enough interest) and, although it's not technically part of the requirement, I do want to ensure that everyone has the necessary skill to build a campfire. Be a little embarrassing if I can't do it myself. <img src="images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

(Yes, I'm familiar with the saying "Those who can't, teach." <img src="images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> )

Howdy,

I love campfires, and consider fire building an art. Speaking from my own experiance the only time I have ever had a fire go out on accident was because it ran out of fuel or the fuel was to spread out.

I imagine the type of wood also has a great deal of impact for instance using green wood or wet wood will naturally slow the cumbustion process.

As far as laying out a fire horizantally I stick to the teepee or lean to to get the fire started and make sure it gets good and hot. Once there is a good bed of coals it doesn't really matter how I add wood as long as the logs are close to each other.

I have found that it is much easier to get larger logs to catch fire by putting them on top of smaller logs that are already burning. Of course this rule is the same for building the fire in the first place. Start small and work up to big.

Hope this helps.

Josh

That's an unusual and interesting question. Really... Most people don't care about this kind of stuff until their first night in a lean-to <img src="images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Then, they soon find out that sleep deprivation is a big problem in survival <img src="images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

To answer your question, it's all a matter of dispersion...

A good, thick bed of coals can ignite and will keep the combustion of a large log going. Yes, even just one log, provided you can concentrate the heat properly. A few large rocks around your fire, very close to your bed of coals, will avoid the dispersion of coals as well as heat (watch out, any rock containing water can explode if heated). Ideally, you want to shape the bed of coals with the rocks so it makes a nice, even and thick bed for your next log.

Fireplaces act pretty much the same way as the large rocks in concentrating heat and coals... that's why your father had no problem keeping the fire going in it.

I can keep a fire going for a long while using the rocks method, without needing to take care of it at all for hours... That's a good thing for those long cold nights when you want to sleep a little, and not always take care of the fire. It also burns a little more slowly, so you save on wood. Even better, when the fire is almost dead, the large rocks will keep on radiating heat for a while (depending on their size, etc.)... and when you wake up because of the cold, there are always hot coals left to start the fire again. Just blow on the coals a bit and throw a log over them.

Hope this helps,

David

This is a thread a long time coming...

With five trioxine bars, 100 vaseline impregnated cotton balls, a can of Coleman fuel, Quick-Tabs soaked in Kerosene, my last roll of T.P., the Money section from the paper (what do I need that for?), a squeeze bottle of lighter fluid, Magnesium bar and Double mill Bastard file, and the last of the gas siphoned out of my truck, my 70# pull PSE compound bow (that's how you make a fire bow, right?) I think I ought to be able to get a fire satarted. Now, where did I put those matches....

Now, both the tipi and lean-to style fires have their advantages. The tipi is a bit easier to light, but the lean-to is much better to cook over. So, here's what I do...

I take the largest log that I have available and lay it on the ground, preferably parallel with the wind. If you don't have any large logs available, you can accomplish the same affect by piling several moderate logs on top of each other.

I then build a small tipi fire in the center of the main log, as close to it as possible. This fire is usually less than 1ft. tall and I feed it for afew munites to establish a good coal bed.

As that fire is burning, I build a lean-to over it and begin laying horizontal logs around the rest of the perimiter of the fire. When the lean-to is burning, I'm then able to lay horizontal logs accross my main log and onto my perimiter logs directly above my fire.

This has worked very well for me in the past. It's a combination of the tipi and lean-to and I think it's the best fire if you plan on camping/cooking. Once the coal bed is established, it doesn't matter too much how you add fuel, as long as you don't choke the fire.

thoughts and comments?

--Luke

I use the same method as Luke. If I can't find a big log, then a rock, brick, metal cooking tripod has the same effect. this provides more ventalation than a horazontal log on the bed of coals, as well as being in the direct path (above!) of the heat.

As with many things, try different methods first, and settle on what works for you...

You may not have very suitable types of wood available to you for self-sustaining open fires, although they usually do OK in a stove. If you keep the logs close (a little experimenting will be useful), it's not too hard to keep active coals eating their way through the logs (have to tend the fire to keep them close but still allow air in) - it's smoky and not a picture perfect cheery snapping fire, but it has worked for me farther North than you are.

Even down here in the northern hardwood forests there are many woods that won't burn nicely in large short sections on an open fire - split or whole. An ample supply of wrist-size splits and/or dead limbs is a better bet for open fires with less enthusiastic types of wood. Yeah, you have to wake up once in a while to toss a few more on the fire, but that's no hardship as far as I'm concerned.

Down here I can readily build a fire that holds itself well overnight, but I have a much better selection of wood to use. With the woods I believe you have available, it seems to take a honkin huge fire to build that sustaining pile of coals and ashes and wood.

I doubt that there is anything wrong with your techique - it's probably a function of the wood you have to work with. Outdoorsmen in your area probably can better answer your question than I can.

HTH,

Tom

Citizen, WOFT, Moine, and JoshE;

Thanks to all of you.

I suspect the problem was, I wasn't getting the fire hot enough before trying to "tip it over" as it were. <img src="images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Also, as Moine pointed out, fireplaces are designed to keep the fire going - plus, my father had a big grate which lifted the logs a few inches off the floor and allowed a good flow of fresh air from underneath. I don't have access to a home fireplace (except an electric one, which doesn't count); I've been practising in a local city park which has barbeque pits, so naturally the same techniques wouldn't work. (Isn't hindsight wonderful? ) I tried getting the logs to lie on top of one another, figuring at least the top one would keep burning, but it kept collapsing on me.

I probably would have had better success in maintaining a fire if I'd built it on top of the barbeque grill, rather than try to get it going underneath.

But what about building one in a wood stove? I guess the real trick there is to have the fire pre-built so you don't have to adjust it once it starts burning.

AyersTG: Thanks for the kind thoughts, but I was using split pine logs that I bought from the local gas station. I don't think the wood was the problem, so it must have been the technique. <img src="images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> As I admit elsewhere, I was probably being too impatient, trying to "lay the fire down" before I had a good bed of coals built up.

aardwolfe:

The problem I used to have when starting a fire in a wood stove was that the stove would burn up with the fire I started in it.

I now use steel and cast iron stoves.
<img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Bountyhunter <img src="images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Aardwolfe,

Glad we could help...

Another tip : self-feeding fireplace...

With rocks, you can make some sort of a V shape that points to your bed of coals. You pile up the wood there, and as it burn it collapses and rolls toward the middle, keeping the fire fed for a long while.

The more air you put in, the faster it burns... You need a minimum, of course, but if you have too much air intake, you'll just waste wood.

Just my humble 2 cents...

Cheers,

David