Dubai hotel fire: Inferno at 63-storey Address Downtown hotel near New
Year's Eve fireworks display.
How is a flammable product like this ever allowed to be used in
construction? Particularly on a 1106 ft tall building, when firefighters
cant get above 100 ft. They're lucky the whole building did not
Problem Described in article.
Good photos here:
On 1/3/2016 9:15 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
We often complain about government intervention and big brother tactics,
but we do have better building codes. Anything used in construction
here must comply with fire codes. Sounds like they are far behind over
codes seem to be a joke. There was 16 gauge Romex running on the inside
surface of the closet. It almost looked like bell wire. I assume it was
fused at 7 amps, but who knows. It was used to light a fluorescent lamp
inside the closet turned on by a switch activated by the sliding closet
door. There were other thing, but this stood out. Also, I was watching
them build a high rise next door. The workers where in tee shirts, open
shoes and no hard hats.
On Sun, 03 Jan 2016 08:15:06 -0600, email@example.com wrote:
The only thing that will get them to remove the flammable materials
and improve their fire safety is money. Until their revenues drop
because of lost bookings they will do nothing. "They" may be the hotel
owners or maybe "they" are the local politicians. Either way, the
driving force is money.
On 1/3/2016 5:52 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Sprinker systems come with a couple myths, this gives
me a moment to adress.
1) Myth: If we have a little fire in one room,
the sprinklers will flood the whole building.
We are better off to just let the FD put it out.
Truth: Each sprinkler head has its own fusible
element. Only puts water where it's hot. The
fusible element is typically 165 degrees F.
2) Myth: Sprinklers (since they require a person
to close the main valve to turn them off) do more
damage than a fire hose which has a person at the
Truth: Even the most professional department only
arrives at the fire after they are called. This can
be employee, night watchman or alarm system. But
there is always a delay after the fire starts, and
when the FD drives to the scene, connects to the
hydrant, stretches hose. In this time, the fire spreads
and causes more damage. Which requires more water to
be used. Sprinklers operate early, and actually do less
damage. They can also be wired into the building alarm,
so the FD and building owners can be called.
This will probably be under investigation for weeks if not longer. By
the time they determine the cause, it's considered "old news", so it's
not published. The media like the "spectacular", in other words the
things that catch people's attention. Maybe the media in that country is
different, but if they are like the U.S. news, they rarely followup on
It's like there was a local fire around here months ago. The home owner
was badly burned and was in critical condition. The news said the cause
of the fire was under investigation. There was never any followup story.
Although I did not know the person, I knew a neighbor. A few months
after the fire, I spoke to that neighbor, who said the owner was doing
well, but the fire was still under investigation. I could not believe it
was STILL under investigation. These investigators go into these
buildings shortly after the fire, and should have their reports
completed within a few days. I think they just dont want to release
their findings. But it was good to know the owner was doing well, even
though no one else in town knows it, because there was no followup in
Personally, I agree with another poster in this thread, that the fire
was caused by an incident with the fireworks. But that's just a guess
based on what was going on at the time.
On Monday, January 4, 2016 at 2:35:59 PM UTC-5, email@example.com wrote:
I would say that that is a lousy guess. The fire started way before any
fireworks were set off.
I quote from: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/fire-breaks-dubais-years-fireworks-display-36032198
"The fire broke out around 9:30 p.m., about two-and-a-half hours before the
midnight fireworks display was set to begin."
Some reports on the day of the incident indicated that the authorities
decided to go ahead with the fireworks in order to keep the crowd
Cancelling the display just hours before midnight would have sent those
crowds out into the surrounding streets - some of which were closed, along
with some of the subway stations - possibly in panic mode, which
could have seriously hampered the fire control efforts. They already
had the crowd contained, so they felt is was safest to just go ahead
with the display and then disperse the crowds via the already arranged
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.