London Tower Block Inferno

[vetran]

Blitz & Sikh spirit.

London fire: Food and clothing offered to the homeless | Daily Mail Online

London throws open its doors: Kind strangers and many celebrities offer homes, food and help to those left homeless by Tower fire
Kind-hearted Londoners are offering displaced families food, water and clothing following horrific fire
Some have also opened their homes to survivors of the tower block inferno in White City, west London
Celebrities including Jeremy Clarkson, Jamie Oliver, also chipped in and are urging fans to help survivors
At least six people have died and 20 are in a critical condition following the massive fire sparked overnight

[NotAllThere]

Blitz & Sikh & Muslim & Christian & Atheist & Agnostic & Jedi & Smells like teenage & ... spirit

FTFY. I thought you'd appreciate it since you're not the the type of person who would be anti-Muslim or Jedi etc. who've also helped.

[vetran]

FTFY. I thought you'd appreciate it since you're not the the type of person who would be anti-Muslim or Jedi etc. who've also helped.

ta

sure others did.

[Biggles78]

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpres...ing-with-fire/

Some serious questions need asking - hopefully the right people will be held accountable.

Sad.

[SueEllen]

It was known since the 90s they were death traps - https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/...205197.article

[PurpleGorilla]

London Tower Block Inferno

Thank god there were some residents awake... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ower-fire.html

[Lost It]

This is what I do...

I said it always comes down to cost. I'm in that trade. I know this for fact. That's why it's "political". The Building regs have different sections for different designs. If you building is built to protect goods, materials, a way of earning wealth if you like, the regulations regarding fire are much more involved. If it's for residential use they simply are much easier to deal with.

Add to this that fire appliances can only really reach the 7th floor, that streets were narrow, the elevating platforms need space to put the weight spreader legs out else they won't work, that the Fire Service is there to save lives, not property, and that none of these buildings are stressed for the water tank needed to support a sprinkler system, plus the regs don't say you have to have them in residential spaces...

A Case in point. I was recently involved in a hotel build in London. It's going to be an expensive one, it's 7 floors. But the owners wanted it to be classed as Residential with certain rooms termed as apartments because that means there's no need for fire drills, fire alarms in every room, escape plans in every room, types of materials used in the build have less fire worthiness, fire breaks still need to be there but a lot of "passive" fire protection technique is used. There are various other lower standard requirements.

I've also been involved in warehouse builds. Sprinklers, above ceiling fire breaks, clear MoE's, extinguishers, emergency lighting, you name it, it's there.

I suspect what we have here is a type of Cladding used on an old building that has probably had a lot of refurb work done over the years, so fire stopping materials may have been compromised, or if the builder was of the right caliber this will have been dealt with.
The regs for windows are different in residential builds. It was a warm night, windows would have been open. Fire doors are designed to isolate area's for a max of 1 hour IF the gaskets were in place. They are designed to stop fire and fumes from getting into a compartment from a corridor. Or sealing off the compartment that has the fire inside it from the corridor to allow others to escape. Fire doors need to close automatically. Door closers, magnets, sometimes little boxes are used to relase the door if they hear certain frequencies, related to Fire Alarms going off. There have to be smoke detectors in plant rooms, lift shafts, plant spaces. That's about it?

If a Window is left open and the fire and smoke come in from there, well a firedoor's main advantage is gone. My opinion for what it's worth.

The External Cladding only needs to "pass" reg O which means the surface will resist fire spread. There should be fire breaks. But the Insulation can be anything. Foam, expanded foam, wool, literally anything that will give a standard of insulation. It can even be the kind of stuff that you can light with a blowtorch. That kind of stuff gives off all the nasty gasses when it burns. Maybe we can presume that many of the dead may not even have woken up. That's got to be better than burning alive?

There are materials that can be used that are resistant to fire, but because of the "Environment" they may not be deemed suitable because of the processes and chemicals used to provide this are not "Environmentally friendly" You can blame the Environmental Lobby, BREEAM, profitability etc. for this. If you need to.

I watched this fire, it was on the News early doors, I watched in sheer horror as the fire propogated up the OUTSIDE of the building, through open windows (probably, warm night) and knew there were going to be major casualties.

But it will come down to Costs. The fire retardent stuff, simply put, costs more to manufacture. Big names are involved in the manufacture of cladding panels. Big profits.

I hope at last the Building Regs finally get the Update they have needed for years after this. Some "good" always comes after incidents such as this, it's a sad fact that it usually takes a disaster before legislators get their backsides in gear. Stadium fires, Underground station fires, you name it. After the fact something is done. It's wrong. These dangers are in front of our noses.

On a side note: If there was only one shaft open at the mine, it used to become a "9 man pit". That meant that there were only 9 men in total, including the guy on the gates at the shaft allowed to work. My understanding is because if there was an incident and 8 or 9 men died, it would only be an "Incident" and the regulatory bodies used one set of regulations to deal with it. Once more than 9 are effected, it becomes a Disaster and that needs public enquiries. This was the case back then, I believe the same rules apply now.

It's a shocking incident, Londoners are doing their bit again, the spirit of the people is still good. Sad day. The poor sod that signed off the cladding must be in his own form of personal hell.

Of course I could be wrong, but wouldn't bet on it.

I would imagine: There will be huge finincial pressure applied to the government from "Vested Interest" groups to prevent the regulations from being changed radically to include using materials that won't catch fire within cladding panels. Because there's a lot of profit made using the materials that are allowed at present. There will be cries of "Too expensive, it will damage the building industry, it will cost jobs, we will need to invest in new research (They don't the tech is already out there) etc." because the manufacturers will not wish to see a drop in profits and there are stockpiles of the stuff that will become un-saleable.

Same as we saw when the proposals to ban Asbestos were originally floated, eventually it took 10 years just so the building material companies could offload their stocks.

Asbestos insulation panels would have prevented that fire propogation This is how daft it is...

If you wish to know more,the HSE has it all in black and white.

Sad day, shocking, but it was just a matter of time I'm afraid.

[shaunbhoy]

I said it always comes down to cost. I'm in that trade. I know this for fact. That's why it's "political". The Building regs have different sections for different designs. If you building is built to protect goods, materials, a way of earning wealth if you like, the regulations regarding fire are much more involved. If it's for residential use they simply are much easier to deal with.

A Case in point. I was recently involved in a hotel build in London. It's going to be an expensive one, it's 7 floors. But the owners wanted it to be classed as Residential with certain rooms termed as apartments because that means there's no need for fire drills, fire alarms in every room, escape plans in every room, types of materials used in the build have less fire worthiness, fire breaks still need to be there but a lot of "passive" fire protection technique is used. There are various other lower standard requirements.

I've also been involved in warehouse builds. Sprinklers, above ceiling fire breaks, clear MoE's, extinguishers, emergency lighting, you name it, it's there.

I suspect what we have here is a type of Cladding used on an old building that has probably had a lot of refurb work done over the years, so fire stopping materials may have been compromised, or if the builder was of the right caliber this will have been dealt with.
The regs for windows are different in residential builds. It was a warm night, windows would have been open. Fire doors are designed to isolate area's for a max of 1 hour IF the gaskets were in place. They are designed to stop fire and fumes from getting into a compartment from a corridor. Or sealing off the compartment that has the fire inside it from the corridor to allow others to escape. Fire doors need to close automatically. Door closers, magnets, sometimes little boxes are used to relase the door if they hear certain frequencies, related to Fire Alarms going off. There have to be smoke detectors in plant rooms, lift shafts, plant spaces. That's about it?

If a Window is left open and the fire and smoke come in from there, well a firedoor's main advantage is gone. My opinion for what it's worth.

The External Cladding only needs to "pass" reg O which means the surface will resist fire spread. There should be fire breaks. But the Insulation can be anything. Foam, expanded foam, wool, literally anything that will give a standard of insulation. It can even be the kind of stuff that you can light with a blowtorch. That kind of stuff gives off all the nasty gasses when it burns. Maybe we can presume that many of the dead may not even have woken up. That's got to be better than burning alive?

There are materials that can be used that are resistant to fire, but because of the "Environment" they may not be deemed suitable because of the processes and chemicals used to provide this are not "Environmentally friendly" You can blame the Environmental Lobby, BREEAM, profitability etc. for this. If you need to.

I watched this fire, it was on the News early doors, I watched in sheer horror as the fire propogated up the OUTSIDE of the building, through open windows (probably, warm night) and knew there were going to be major casualties.

But it will come down to Costs. The fire retardent stuff, simply put, costs more to manufacture. Big names are involved in the manufacture of cladding panels. Big profits.

I hope at last the Building Regs finally get the Update they have needed for years after this. Some "good" always comes after incidents such as this, it's a sad fact that it usually takes a disaster before legislators get their backsides in gear. Stadium fires, Underground station fires, you name it. After the fact something is done. It's wrong. These dangers are in front of our noses.

On a side note: If there was only one shaft open at the mine, it used to become a "9 man pit". That meant that there were only 9 men in total, including the guy on the gates at the shaft allowed to work. My understanding is because if there was an incident and 8 or 9 men died, it would only be an "Incident" and the regulatory bodies used one set of regulations to deal with it. Once more than 9 are effected, it becomes a Disaster and that needs public enquiries. This was the case back then, I believe the same rules apply now.

It's a shocking incident, Londoners are doing their bit again, the spirit of the people is still good. Sad day. The poor sod that signed off the cladding must be in his own form of personal hell.

Of course I could be wrong, but wouldn't bet on it.

I would imagine: There will be huge finincial pressure applied to the government from "Vested Interest" groups to prevent the regulatrions from being changed radically to include using materials that won't catch fire within cladding panels. Because there's alot of profit made using the materials that are allowed at present. There will be cries of "Too expensive, it will damage the building industry, it will cost jobs, we willneed toinvest in new research (They don't the tech is already out there) etc." because the manufacturers will not wish to see a drop in profits and there are stockpiles of the stuff that willbecome un-saleable.

Same as we saw when the proposals to ban Asbestos were originally floated, eventually it took 10 years just so the building material companies could offload their stocks.

Asbestos insulation panels would have prevented that fire propogation This is how daft it is...

If you wish toknow more,the HSE has it all in black and white.

Sad day, shocking, but it was just a matter of time I'm afraid.

Very enlightening, and, rather sadly, probably very close to the truth.

[Lost It]

Very enlightening, and, rather sadly, probably very close to the truth.

Grenfell Tower fire probe focuses on cladding | Construction Enquirer

[SueEllen]

Thank god there were some residents awake... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ower-fire.html

One advantages of diverse communities.