NotwellsDad Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 4 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said: Woke up for a pee at 5am...and saw this in full flame. You normally pee the sheets. Embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shake me up Judy Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 Albert hasn't woken up in a dry bed for years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 17 minutes ago, NotwellsDad said: You normally pee the sheets. Embarrassing. 13 minutes ago, Shake me up Judy said: Albert hasn't woken up in a dry bed for years FFS, get a grip. People have died here and you're taking the piss. How this (the towering inferno) can happen today is beyond belief. Some expert on radio 4 was explaining why this sort of thing is impossible for the fire service to deal with (height, external flammability, impossibility of cutting off the oxygen etc) - why is it legal to use anything as cladding that burns even slightly? Have we learnt nothing from previous disasters? I thought this sort of conflagration was a thing of the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrie Stevens Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 According to the housing magazine "Inside Housing" (Google on line) the planning permission for the refurbishment included the temporary removal of that part of the structure that would have prevented the fire spreading through the individual floors..."Inside Housing" says that this protective shielding was not replaced as at the time of the fire...(Allegedly)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackCarter Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 2 minutes ago, wrighty said: How this (the towering inferno) can happen today is beyond belief. Some expert on radio 4 was explaining why this sort of thing is impossible for the fire service to deal with (height, external flammability, impossibility of cutting off the oxygen etc) - why is it legal to use anything as cladding that burns even slightly? Have we learnt nothing from previous disasters? I thought this sort of conflagration was a thing of the past. Questions will need to be answered. Those black acrid clouds reminded me of Summerland. How on earth a building can be clad in flammable material like that in this day and age is astounding. You expect something like that to happen in China or India but not in the West. You can only speculate that some dodgy deal will be exposed whereby the specs of the QS were ignored in favour of buying in cheap inferior spec material to save money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 6 minutes ago, wrighty said: FFS, get a grip. People have died here and you're taking the piss. How this (the towering inferno) can happen today is beyond belief. Some expert on radio 4 was explaining why this sort of thing is impossible for the fire service to deal with (height, external flammability, impossibility of cutting off the oxygen etc) - why is it legal to use anything as cladding that burns even slightly? Have we learnt nothing from previous disasters? I thought this sort of conflagration was a thing of the past. It's the external flammability that's the problem. The cladding they use to prettify the exterior. High rise buildings do have safety features such as fire breaks to confine the affected area and dry risers, so the height should not defeat them. It's the sheer speed of this conflagration that is puzzling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 2 types of cladding used in projects like these. One less fire-resistant than the other (and cheaper) as it has a polyethylene core (probably accounts for all that blackening and choking soot). No points for guessing which one was used on Grenfell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 48 minutes ago, woolley said: It's the external flammability that's the problem. The cladding they use to prettify the exterior. High rise buildings do have safety features such as fire breaks to confine the affected area and dry risers, so the height should not defeat them. It's the sheer speed of this conflagration that is puzzling. The height was referring to the inability of the fire service to get a hose up 24 floors to extinguish at that height - that's why they were defeated. The guy on R4 referred to films we're all probably familiar with where helicopters drop massive buckets of water from a great height, and basically said that it was bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 Oh certainly. That would do no good at all. But there are effective safety features such as the dry riser in all tower blocks that would normally mitigate the situation. High rise is inherently safe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_riser It simply appears that this conflagration spread from bottom to top so fast that the the normal procedure was impossible to enact. Fire Chief interviewed said that in 29 years she had never seen anything like it. There was clearly something unorthodox at work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bear Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 It's possible that the dry riser wasn't usable for some reason. Possibly blocked access or open ends. At this point it looks like the flames were transmitted across the cladding very quickly and then transferred into every home by the plastic glazing frames. What started as a simple kitchen fire was coupled to every flat above. It's horrific. I can't even imagine how many bodies may still be in the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 It's suggested this external cladding is identical to that used on a high rise at Melbourne Harbour which burned out 4 years ago. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/15/cladding-in-2014-melbourne-high-rise-blaze-also-used-in-grenfell-tower?CMP=share_btn_fb its use was widespread from 1980's onwards. building Regs require external cladding to be fire resistant. It ( or a similar predecessor using polystyrene foam ) was widely to insulate and rehabilitate old public housing stock on Island 30 years ago. Fortunately none more than 5 stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GD4ELI Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 4 hours ago, Mr Bear said: It's possible that the dry riser wasn't usable for some reason. Possibly blocked access or open ends. At this point it looks like the flames were transmitted across the cladding very quickly and then transferred into every home by the plastic glazing frames. What started as a simple kitchen fire was coupled to every flat above. It's horrific. I can't even imagine how many bodies may still be in the building. The suggestion is up to 100 have died, the number will probably be lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackCarter Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 24 minutes ago, GD4ELI said: The suggestion is up to 100 have died, the number will probably be lower. It's terrible to think about. It will take them days to structurally secure the building and do full checks. Doesn't even bear thinking about how grim that task will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 Watched an interview with a housing post-fire research guy. As mentioned previously the air gap between the outer and inner walls should have blocking fire defences on every floor. So in theory a fire cannot spread between floors and is contained. Take them out and the air gap then forms a massive chimney that encircles the entire building. So if there is a fair the extra draught will fan the flames upwards and around the whole building very very quickly. Speculation but very plausible speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted June 15, 2017 Share Posted June 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.