|
|
| New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower (1441652) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (1441652) | |
New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017 This is incredible. The pictures are harrowing. How could a building so tall not have a adequate fire suppression system?The tower was fully involved in a fire that started on the fourth floor.  Witnesses break down as they recount seeing children falling from burning flats |
|
|
| (1441654) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jun 14 09:51:11 2017, in response to New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017. How could a building so tall not have a adequate fire suppression system?Built before such a system was required, maybe? Or else the sprinklers were out of order (e.g., they sprang a leak 10 years ago, someone shut off the water to it until the leak could be fixed, and that was the end of that). Systems that only get used once every 30 years have a serious tendency to not work. |
|
|
| (1441655) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jun 14 09:56:32 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by AlM on Wed Jun 14 09:51:11 2017. Hmm. Major renovation completed May 2016. That should have included making sure there were working sprinklers. :( |
|
|
| (1441657) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by jimmymc25 on Wed Jun 14 10:05:24 2017, in response to New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017. Saw that on the news last night. Sad and scary knowing people were in there.Jimmymc25 |
|
|
| (1441660) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jun 14 10:11:37 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by AlM on Wed Jun 14 09:56:32 2017. That's what I don't get. Even if this was an "old law" building, a major renovation should have included installation or upgrade of the sprinkler system. |
|
|
| (1441664) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 10:43:13 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jun 14 10:11:37 2017. Something feels very "wrong" about this fire. Modern buildings just don't burn like that (other than in Dubai and some other spots in the Middle East where they made the mistake of coating the exteriors of many skyscrapers with a flammable material). |
|
|
| (1441674) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 11:02:16 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 10:43:13 2017. Reading a bit more on this now and it appears quite likely that the exterior cladding is the culprit here as well -- similar to the Address Hotel fire in Dubai on New Year's Eve a few years back. All the internal fire suppression and safety gaps in the world can't help if the fire climbs the outside of the building.I really would have expected that the U.K./London powers that be would have ensured that this was remedied. There have been at least 4 modern skyscraper fires in the Middle East in the past 4 or so years due to flammable exterior cladding. It is not like the problem is unknown. |
|
|
| (1441688) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by 3-9 on Wed Jun 14 11:48:11 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 11:02:16 2017. But if it's the exterior of the building that's flammable, how much will it affect the interiors? The walls, at least, should be fireproof. |
|
|
| (1441691) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Wed Jun 14 11:54:19 2017, in response to New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017. Forgive the silly question, but what exactly is burning? Aren't these made out of concrete, block or brick? Or is the fire going through the conduits? ie like how they plugged up all the mail shoots in old buildings because they were found to easily allow fire to shoot up all the floors. |
|
|
| (1441692) | |
Re: New York Times: London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jun 14 12:00:25 2017, in response to New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017. David Frum is especially callous in this tweet. |
|
|
| (1441695) | |
Re: New York Times: London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Wed Jun 14 12:11:30 2017, in response to Re: New York Times: London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Olog-hai on Wed Jun 14 12:00:25 2017. The internet is great. Condescending replies saying not to be condescending. |
|
|
| (1441726) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 13:09:43 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by 3-9 on Wed Jun 14 11:48:11 2017. In Dubai, the intensity of the heat melted the windows and allowed fire to enter. You would have the same issue here, plus many of the windows were likely open given the time of year and age of the building (almost certainly no central a/c) |
|
|
| (1441729) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 13:15:50 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 13:09:43 2017. Which all raises the question, what purpose is this new outside cladding supposed to accomplish? |
|
|
| (1441732) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jun 14 13:18:49 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 13:15:50 2017. I bet it saves money. :( |
|
|
| (1441745) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 13:38:42 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 13:15:50 2017. I don't know whether the cladding in London was new or not. In general cladding is used for insulation purposes but also for cosmetic purposes. Otherwise many buildings would be hideously ugly. |
|
|
| (1441837) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Jun 14 19:25:09 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 13:38:42 2017. The BBC article mentions in passing that new cladding was part of the renovation. Why safe, boring brick or concrete isn't good enough is a question for the engineers. Look at the new cladding on those towers down by Coney Island (as seen from the F), hopefully not another towering inferno waiting to happen. |
|
|
| (1441964) | |
Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Thu Jun 15 10:29:21 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Charles G on Wed Jun 14 10:43:13 2017. There are some reports now that the death toll in the recent fire will exceed 100 based on the number of people still unaccounted for.Just awful. |
|
|
| (1441967) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jun 15 10:42:23 2017, in response to Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Charles G on Thu Jun 15 10:29:21 2017. That's horrible. I'm not surprised in a way, given that people were told to stay put and not try to escape. (Of course, maybe they would have died of smoke inhalation in a stairwell if they had tried to escape.) |
|
|
| (1441993) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Thu Jun 15 11:51:59 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by AlM on Thu Jun 15 10:42:23 2017. I'm still hoping I'm wrong, but it really seems like it is going to be faulty (cheap) cladding that allowed the fire to spread the way it did.That such a wealthy neighborhood in such a wealthy city could allow their poorest residents to live in a vertical fire trap leaves me seething with anger. You would expect this type of thing to happen in a developing nation. |
|
|
| (1441994) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Thu Jun 15 11:56:25 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Charles G on Thu Jun 15 11:51:59 2017. The neighborhood is wealthy but Grenfell Tower was public housing. |
|
|
| (1441996) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jun 15 11:59:36 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Dave on Thu Jun 15 11:56:25 2017. That was Charles's point. It was what the wealthy built for the poor among them. |
|
|
| (1442008) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 15 12:25:25 2017, in response to New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by SLRT on Wed Jun 14 09:45:38 2017. I'm a little surprised that the building didn't collapse like the WTC Towers. Maybe this fire wasn't as hot or as damaging as the WTC fires. Still, for anyone who witnessed 9/11 (like me)these images are chilling. |
|
|
| (1442012) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 12:35:30 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 15 12:25:25 2017. No hot jet fuel. |
|
|
| (1442013) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 12:37:50 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Mitch45 on Thu Jun 15 12:25:25 2017. What also assisted the Twin Towers to collapse was the unique monocoque construction, spreading of the exterior walls, and pancaking of floors.Had they crashed into a more solid building like the Empire State or Chrysler buildings, the results may have been different. |
|
|
| (1442026) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 14:29:48 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 12:35:30 2017. Irrelevant |
|
|
| (1442027) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 14:42:13 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 14:29:48 2017. No it isn't. |
|
|
| (1442028) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 14:48:09 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 14:29:48 2017. http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html"Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire." |
|
|
| (1442041) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 16:15:29 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 14:48:09 2017. That excerpt does not support your assertion. |
|
|
| (1442042) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 16:18:42 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 16:15:29 2017. It said it does not melt steel.It does say it can deform it, which is what lead to the collapse. |
|
|
| (1442045) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 17:03:13 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 16:18:42 2017. The jet fuel only initiated the fire. It was gone in seconds. |
|
|
| (1442047) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 17:21:33 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 16:18:42 2017. the right wing is claiming that green standards made the building less safe.stay tuned. |
|
|
| (1442049) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Jun 15 17:30:06 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 17:03:13 2017. Most of the jet fuel was gone in "seconds", that is correct, but the rest saturated everything. The Towers were primarily office buildings, except for the tourist-trap restaurant. That meant there were all kinds of combustibles present to be ignited. Some of the fuel was splattered or sprayed onto these materials at the moment of impact, which certainly made things worse. Think about all the kinds of chemicals that got mixed together with this jet fuel: solvents, cleaning solutions, toner, plumbing fluids, hair spray and other beauty products, etc. It's all burning, too.The WTC fires were unusually hot for a poorly-ventilated high-rise fire, sufficient to weaken and deform the structural steel. Add to that that the side loads placed on both towers were far in excess of the worst the architects anticipated (a 707 flying at approach speed). I suspect the Grenfell Tower fire didn't cause a collapse because it was a concrete-over-steel building of "old-law" construction. No fancy core concepts to maximize office space there. |
|
|
| (1442053) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:01:12 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 17:21:33 2017. It was built in 1970 of monocoque construction. It has nothing to do with "green standards". |
|
|
| (1442054) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:03:34 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Jun 15 17:30:06 2017. Makes you think had they chosen to crash into the Empire State Building, would it have collapsed to the ground in 2 hours ?I don't think so. Probable total destruction of upper floors though. |
|
|
| (1442055) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 18:04:26 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:01:12 2017. the right is claiming green standards contributed to the fire spreading.It's on the internet. |
|
|
| (1442060) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:09:55 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:03:34 2017. Didn't collapse the last time you t was struck. |
|
|
| (1442062) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 18:11:33 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:09:55 2017. Smaller plane, moving more slowly. Also, I believe carrying less fuel. |
|
|
| (1442065) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:19:20 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 18:11:33 2017. Wingspan are almost the same but the 767 weighs about 3 times as much. I suspec.t that the real difference is the temperatures both fuels burned at. |
|
|
| (1442066) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:21:46 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:19:20 2017. You know my mother's oldest sister (still alive at 94, and sharp as a tack in a nursing home in Oceanside) was at work in the ESB when that plane hit so many decades ago. |
|
|
| (1442068) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 18:23:17 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:21:46 2017. was she living in Woodhaven and commuting via BMT when it happened? |
|
|
| (1442069) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:26:19 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 18:04:26 2017. I don't really care what they think. Monocoque was the structural choice. Had nothing to do with being "green". The concept didn't exist then and that predated the 1973 Arab oil embargo as well.That building was anything but "green". Blocks of 10 or 40 floors either had their lights all on or all off, and it was programmed. I was at a rail advocacy meeting there on a Saturday in 1979. When 6pm witching hour hit, the lights went off and people lit up cigarette lighters so as to see and get out. They were also exempt from NYC Fire Code. Some of that may have changed some time later. |
|
|
| (1442076) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 17 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:31:26 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:26:19 2017. Subject line corrected for accuracy. |
|
|
| (1442078) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Jun 15 18:31:43 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:03:34 2017. In July, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber got lost in morning fog, and crashed into the uith and 79th floors of the ESB. There was considerable damage, including one airplane engine that fell all the way to the basement through an elevator shaft. The building itself, though, didn't suffer the collapse of events a single floor, although extensive renovations of the top 14 floors were necessary, mostly because of smoke, soot, and water damage.I think the building would sustain (God forbid) a strike by a modern jetliner without collapsing. The structure is inherently stronger than that of the old WTC. |
|
|
| (1442080) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:32:39 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jun 15 18:23:17 2017. No. She lived in Lawrence, LI. She took the LIRR. She didn't like the Jamaica Bay routing, afraid of the wood trestle "out to sea" My mother preferred it though. She was also stranded overnight on it during a 1948 blizzard.My folks lived in Woodhaven before my time in the early '50s, then 1958 - 1969. |
|
|
| (1442083) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 17 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:35:45 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 17 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:31:26 2017. It could hit 100. So many are missing. |
|
|
| (1442086) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 17 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jun 15 18:38:01 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 17 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Joe V on Thu Jun 15 18:35:45 2017. It could but the latest number from the British Government is "at least 17". |
|
|
| (1442109) | |
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Thu Jun 15 20:08:10 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 17:03:13 2017. Oh come on, just say it already. It was done by Chaney and Mossad. |
|
|
| (1443978) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jun 24 08:54:56 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Charles G on Thu Jun 15 11:51:59 2017. it really seems like it is going to be faulty (cheap) cladding that allowed the fire to spread the way it didToo many outrageously bad choices/rules all in one place, all combined with the natural tendency of builders everywhere to not spend a penny more than actually required. Link - Britain doesn't require fire safety inspections, just self-policing, nor does it require real world testing of building materials for safety. - The British mindset with respect to fire safety is concentrated on preventing the spread of fires from one building to the next. - Arconic (formerly Alcoa) tells continental European customers not to use this particular cladding on buildings higher than 10 meters, but tells British customers to consult its Area Sales Manager and local fire codes. - The major renovation in 2016 did not require various items that would generally be required in the US, including: - sprinklers - 2 separate staircases with positive ventilation to keep out smoke |
|
|
| (1443983) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by Charles G on Sat Jun 24 09:45:17 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by AlM on Sat Jun 24 08:54:56 2017. Unreal. Just stupidity, really.From everything I've seen, the core of the building performed exactly as it should have and without the cladding there would have been no deaths and likely no injuries that night. The cladding not only overrode all of the other fire safety features in the building (as limited as those features were -- they would have worked), but actually rendered some of them counter-productive. The original fire was contained to a single apartment and from what I have heard may have actually been declared under control by the units that entered that particular flat and extinguished the interior fire (not knowing that the fire was not rapidly spreading up the outside of the building and then into other apartments). |
|
|
| (1443990) | |
Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire) |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jun 24 10:21:12 2017, in response to Re: Death toll to exceed 100? (London Fire), posted by Charles G on Sat Jun 24 09:45:17 2017. Just stupidity, really.And the politicization of stupidity. You have the "regulations are inherently good" faction that includes the EU bureaucracy and results in some really stupid stuff. That breeds the "regulations are inherently bad" counter-reaction, which results in Brexit and lax fire safety codes. In the US the IRS committed last year to updating the mortality tables used by pension plans to pay lump sums for 2018. Right now the lump sums are maybe 10% too low because the mortality tables are old. But here's the catch: to issue a new regulation with current mortality tables, they have to figure out two existing regulations to get rid of. Oops. That takes time (and they're incredibly short staffed as a matter of government policy) and more requests for comment, etc. Looks like a whole bunch of retirees may pay for that. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|