Huge fire in Grenfell Tower - West London

[tsr]

I used to work for a managing agent which had the task of dealing with communal safety in several smaller blocks elsewhere in London. This is absolutely the worst nightmare, waking up to find a building has gone up and theoretically may have killed people, though nowhere near the terror of those stranded. I think being stranded at the top of a burning building, potentially falling from it or being incarcerated, is all of our worst nightmares.

I think the implication, even the body language and general aura, of the PM's visit to the site and from the way this is being handled, is that this is indeed an era-defining disaster and one which has probably affected many more lives than we can possibly know at the moment. Even the Great Fire of London may have had fewer casualties. For this to happen in our times is all the more shocking.

When the full total of bodies is known we may see significant mistrust, social unease and legislative changes. I suspect we will see some buildings condemned or heavily rebuilt. It is absurd that my friends had to completely rethink a small loft extension in a small semi-detached house and build fully-signed secondary fire escapes into their back garden, but this tower apparently had no secondary escapes whatsoever, after millions spent.

It seems we don't yet know how much of this incident was caused by older design flaws, and how much by recent refurbishment or human factors, but perhaps a number of industries need to reconsider how "grandfather rights" are dealt with. The same, in context of this forum, is probably something which needs to be a cultural change in the rail industry - we still have units carrying 400 people each, without so much as a smoke detector, or alarm override to get out of a tunnel or off a viaduct.

Watching the responses to the official statements in Westminster by MPs at the moment, it is clear there is more than a bit of a rapid change in the way they want responses to these sorts of incidents, and it's heartening to see that whatever you may think of their political beliefs, they do seem to want action for residents to be confirmed by Parliament today or within the week. The proposed speed of checking people's accommodation is only right (as well as issuing advice about what to do in the event of fires, and advice afterwards) and I just hope there are sufficient resources around the country to do that.

However, as ever, actions speak louder than words...

 

[AlterEgo]

I think the implication, even the body language and general aura, of the PM's visit to the site and from the way this is being handled, is that this is indeed an era-defining disaster and one which has probably affected many more lives than we can possibly know at the moment. Even the Great Fire of London may have had fewer casualties. For this to happen in our times is all the more shocking.

Indeed. This is going to be at least as era-defining as the Marchioness Disaster or the Herald of Free Enterprise.

 

[Antman]

If they're in administration, they still exist, legally speaking.

Somebody employed in the area of ensuring building regulations are adhered to was interviewed on the radio. He was asked if a sprinkler system could have prevented the fire spreading: he replied that a sprinkler system would (not could) have stopped it in its tracks. When asked how much such a system would have cost to be retrofitted as part of the refurbishment he was very specific. If I heard the figure correctly it was between 3 and 4 thousand pounds per flat.

What price human life?

I can only hope that you misheard and he wasn't somebody employed in the area of ensuring building regulations are adhered to because frankly it sounds like he doesn't know what he's talking about. Obvious question, how is a sprinkler system going to stop a fire spreading up the outside of the building?

 

[w0033944]

I can only hope that you misheard and he wasn't somebody employed in the area of ensuring building regulations are adhered to because frankly it sounds like he doesn't know what he's talking about. Obvious question, how is a sprinkler system going to stop a fire spreading up the outside of the building?

I heard the same interview, and, though don't recall the man's identity, I do recall that he was a professional in this area. I think the point is that, had a sprinkler system been installed, it would have activated while the fire was contained to the flat (olr at worst, the floor) in or on which it originated, before it had a vhance to get under the cladding surface to combust the insulation (if indeed that was what happened).

 

[Ianno87]

I can only hope that you misheard and he wasn't somebody employed in the area of ensuring building regulations are adhered to because frankly it sounds like he doesn't know what he's talking about. Obvious question, how is a sprinkler system going to stop a fire spreading up the outside of the building?

I'm not an expert, but presumably a sprinkler system could have dealt with a small fire quickly at its source, before it had chance to spread anywhere near as catastrophically as it did?

Agree, it would likely be useless once it had spread to the cladding.

 

[BestWestern]

Presumably an internal fire sprinkler system would, potentially, have prevented the fire from engulfing the insides of the building, pehaps offering the fire service a better chance to deal with the burning material on the exterior?

 

[Cowley]

I'm not an expert, but presumably a sprinkler system could have dealt with a small fire quickly at its source, before it had chance to spread anywhere near as catastrophically as it did?

Agree, it would likely be useless once it had spread to the cladding.

I heard someone on BBC 5 Live talking about retro fitting sprinkler systems to the outside of blocks clad in this way to prevent the same thing happening again. He also said that the stairs, stairwells etc be fitted with sprinklers which would be cheaper than fitting every single flat in a large block.
Lots of things will be said for a while though and we'll have to wait to see what actually gets done.

 

[Antman]

I'm not an expert, but presumably a sprinkler system could have dealt with a small fire quickly at its source, before it had chance to spread anywhere near as catastrophically as it did?

Agree, it would likely be useless once it had spread to the cladding.

I think it's quite irresponsible for somebody to state categorically that a sprinkler system would have stopped the fire, given the ferocity with which it spread I don't think a sprinkler system would have made any difference but best to wait for the public inquiry rather than speculate further.

 

[DarloRich]

I heard someone on BBC 5 Live talking about retro fitting sprinkler systems to the outside of blocks clad in this way to prevent the same thing happening again. He also said that the stairs, stairwells etc be fitted with sprinklers which would be cheaper than fitting every single flat in a large block.
Lots of things will be said for a while though and we'll have to wait to see what actually gets done.

surely you wouldn't fit the flats - they should offer a containment cell for the fire - you would fit the communal areas to give people a chance to escape and to contain any fire that gets out of a single flat.

Note - Containment only works if the fabric of the flat remains as designed/installed and was actually installed correctly in the first place.

 

[Ianno87]

I think it's quite irresponsible for somebody to state categorically that a sprinkler system would have stopped the fire, given the ferocity with which it spread I don't think a sprinkler system would have made any difference but best to wait for the public inquiry rather than speculate further.

Aso depends what the source of the fire was. E.g. if it wss a chip pan type fire, water from a sprinkler may have just aggravated it. So I agree - wrong to make such a claim.

Don't disagree with you - pointless trying to say what definitely "would" have happened ahead of a proper investigation by the LFB who will have full access to *all* the facts and evidence.

 

[cjmillsnun]

I think it's quite irresponsible for somebody to state categorically that a sprinkler system would have stopped the fire, given the ferocity with which it spread I don't think a sprinkler system would have made any difference but best to wait for the public inquiry rather than speculate further.

It's quite likely sprinklers could've stopped the fire before it got to the external cladding, which appears to have been the way the fire spread. For now, we have to wait for the official report.

As for mains gas in high rise. It was initially banned after Ronan Point, but was allowed back subject to certain conditions after fire regulations were reviewed. Personally I don't have a problem with it, providing certain conditions are met (the risers are external and that there are valves that can be easily accessed close to the property to isolate the whole block). What concerns me is that many people want internal risers, which I understand may have been the case here. This generally means the pipes are hidden and in the even of an escape, gas can accumulate in ducts. Also the isolation valves can be inside the building (and therefore inaccessible).

 

[BestWestern]

Lots of things will be said for a while though and we'll have to wait to see what actually gets done.

I rather suspect very little, in reality. Simply far too many properties and nowhere near enough money.

 

[Busaholic]

It's quite likely sprinklers could've stopped the fire before it got to the external cladding, which appears to have been the way the fire spread. For now, we have to wait for the official report.

As for mains gas in high rise. It was initially banned after Ronan Point, but was allowed back subject to certain conditions after fire regulations were reviewed. Personally I don't have a problem with it, providing certain conditions are met (the risers are external and that there are valves that can be easily accessed close to the property to isolate the whole block). What concerns me is that many people want internal risers, which I understand may have been the case here. This generally means the pipes are hidden and in the even of an escape, gas can accumulate in ducts. Also the isolation valves can be inside the building (and therefore inaccessible).

There is a basic principle involved in the construction of high-rise residential blocks/towers that has applied ever since the first ones were built in this country in places like the Barbican in the City of London and that is that each flat is a self-contained box completely surrounded by flameproof materials meaning that a fire that starts in any flat can be contained entirely within that flat and, if left, would eventually burn itself out. This is why the policy of 'stay in your flat' is handed out to the other flat-dwellers. This principle was reinforced when water sprinkler systems were introduced and became mandatory in new-build projects a long while ago now, but crucially did not include the flats built in the 1960s and most of the 1970s, even when these were being refurbished. The question of the suitability of the cladding would then become almost irrelevant, because it would never be an issue from a 'normal' flat fire. Even in this case, and the cladding goes up, with a sprinkler system plus a WORKING FIRE ALARM SYSTEM it might well have been possible to get almost everyone out of all those flats, no matter how far up, because the firemen would have been able to go up all those stairs and shepherd people down without them coming anywhere near any flammable materials except (possibly) at the entrance/exit.

I don't claim any expertise in this area. but I worked for a council Housing Department in North London at the time when Grenfell House was built and similar blocks were going up in my own borough and have always taken an interest in the subject of social housing.

 

[backontrack]

Bit late, but my thoughts are with everyone affected by this tragedy.

 

[w0033944]

Members may find the following comment from a forum on such structures of interest:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=140650816&postcount=72

 

[w0033944]

Members may find the following comment from a forum on such structures of interest:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=140650816&postcount=72

Further through the same thread, we have this:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=140658346&postcount=113http://

 

[eMeS]

...fitting sprinkler systems to the outside of blocks ...

Firstly, my condolences to all concerned in this tragedy.

Back in ~1970 I worked in Borehamwood for an electronics company, and we had a 6 storey extension built; and the external walls of the new extension had an external sprinkler system fitted. From memory the cladding was ceramic tile, and the external sprinkler system was to control fire spread should a fire start on the ground production floor.

 

[bussnapperwm]

No, no no no. Of all the ways to die that has to be the worst...

Its utterly horrible, hopefully the reason for this can be discovered and this sort of thing won't happen again. Although I'm sure in West London council office the paper shredders are busy and the document mislaying department are working hard...

You mean that it'll be "Under Consideration"

 

[RichmondCommu]

The Prime Ministers apparent lack of interest in the survivors of the tragedy is nothing short of astonishing.

 

[AlterEgo]

The Prime Ministers apparent lack of interest in the survivors of the tragedy is nothing short of astonishing.

Indeed. A complete open goal for Corbyn, who has been pictured and filmed extensively with the victims and the destitute.

How you can become PM like May has, with no people skills is absolutely incredible.

Has she learned nothing from her election failure?

 

[DarloRich]

The Prime Ministers apparent lack of interest in the survivors of the tragedy is nothing short of astonishing.

I agree with you ( and Corbyn stepped into that gap very quickly) but i can understand why she might have thought her presence among the bereaved would offer them little and might create a risk to her.

After all what help would it bring anyone for the PM to meet the grieving and basically be called a shunt for an hour? Would that help the families? Would it get answers? I assume she thought she could help them more by pushing for answers asap.

I think she was wrong but I can understand why she felt her presence might not be helpful.

 

[IanXC]

The Prime Ministers apparent lack of interest in the survivors of the tragedy is nothing short of astonishing.

She didn't even have to go walk about (let's face it Sadiq Khan hardly had an easy ride), but she could have done a stage managed meeting with, perhaps even some volunteers. But to conduct such a limited visit and keep it so secret...

Her statements have also not spoken of learning lessons and preventing recurrance, as far as I have heard she has only said we must find out how this happened. Which also suggests a complete lack of understanding of the situation residents of such buildings find themselves in, and of the wider public mood.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I agree with you ( and Corbyn stepped into that gap very quickly) but i can understand why she might have thought her presence among the bereaved would offer them little and might create a risk to her.

After all what help would it bring anyone for the PM to meet the grieving and basically be called a shunt for an hour? Would that help the families? Would it get answers? I assume she thought she could help them more by pushing for answers asap.

I think she was wrong but I can understand why she felt her presence might not be helpful.

My point was that by taking an hour or two to talk to survivors she would look like she actually cares about the population that she serves. Politically it wouldn't help her but she should view that as being irrelevant. And for what it's worth the local borough council have been no better.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Obvious question, how is a sprinkler system going to stop a fire spreading up the outside of the building?

The fire apparently started with an electrical malfunction in a refrigerator.

I'm going out on a limb here, but a sprinkler system would have stopped the fire spreading beyond the flat where the fridge was in the first place.

This isn't a new recommendation. The same suggestion was made after the Lakanal House fire- caused by an electrical malfunction in a television- but nothing was done.

 

[Tetchytyke]

She didn't even have to go walk about (let's face it Sadiq Khan hardly had an easy ride), but she could have done a stage managed meeting with, perhaps even some volunteers. But to conduct such a limited visit and keep it so secret...

I felt sorry for Sadiq Khan, he was damned either way. He didn't immediately rush to the estate because he was at the reopening of Borough Market. He probably should have gone to the estate when it became apparent just how serious it was, but there wasn't an easy answer for him.

As for May, I think she obviously took the view that her presence would just provoke people more. Rather than being a comfort, she'd just upset them. I think that is a miscalculation, but I can see why she did it. Turning up to be a punching bag is no good for anyone, really.

The council chiefs, on the other hand. Where have they all gone?

Indeed. A complete open goal for Corbyn, who has been pictured and filmed extensively with the victims and the destitute.

This is what Corbyn is good at. I still think he's not a leader, but he's got fantastic people skills, always mucking in.

 

[Groningen]

Indeed. A complete open goal for Corbyn, who has been pictured and filmed extensively with the victims and the destitute.

Even Adele came and told with the victims.

 

[Antman]

I felt sorry for Sadiq Khan, he was damned either way. He didn't immediately rush to the estate because he was at the reopening of Borough Market. He probably should have gone to the estate when it became apparent just how serious it was, but there wasn't an easy answer for him.

As for May, I think she obviously took the view that her presence would just provoke people more. Rather than being a comfort, she'd just upset them. I think that is a miscalculation, but I can see why she did it. Turning up to be a punching bag is no good for anyone, really.

The council chiefs, on the other hand. Where have they all gone?



This is what Corbyn is good at. I still think he's not a leader, but he's got fantastic people skills, always mucking in.

I thought Mr Khan was treated appallingly, opinions vary on the actions of Mr Corbyn and Mrs May but I don't think now is the time for scoring political points.

In the longer term surely all these tower blocks from the sixties and seventies have to go?

 

[najaB]

In the longer term surely all these tower blocks from the sixties and seventies have to go?

At present the focus isn't on the original design of the block but on what was done during its modernisation. There have been fires in 1970s tower blocks which haven't resulted in disasters so it does suggest that the flaw isn't systemic to the design but possibly something specific about this block.

 

[Tetchytyke]

In the longer term surely all these tower blocks from the sixties and seventies have to go?

It'll be interesting to see whether the block, as originally designed, was to blame or whether it was something that was changed later. The obvious one is the cladding. There have been several fires with this sort of cladding, most famously in Dubai a couple of years ago. Everybody got out of the building in Dubai because it had sprinklers and the internal fire containment worked better.

It isn't necessarily the block that was to blame, it could be a botched refurbishment (and not necessarily the most recent one).

 

[Railops]

The fire apparently started with an electrical malfunction in a refrigerator.

You have no idea if that is true, wait for the professionals to decide.