So you do agree that the core killed the people not the cladding.
The cladding is a quick fix that will keep people happy until it happens
The cladding needs fixing anyway but I wont say why for what should be
obvious reasons to anyone with intelligence. At least for a few floors
"Inadequate" fire doors probably. There are strong hints that the flat
with the original fire had a front door which was sufficiently open,
suffieicently long, for neighbours to be able to see inside. Perhaps
they could be equipped with explosive bolts to ensure that once a fire
has started they could never be opened?
To cope with the smoke from one burning flat, not a hundred.
Wrong kind of smoke. The problem smoke is that getting into the
not-on-fire core from flats which are ablaze. Those are the flats where
the cunning evacuation plan only has one per tower block alight at any
On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 16:13:57 UTC+1, Roland Perry wrote:
Would a huge fan at the entrance help to some extent? During the moments wh
en the front door wasn't open it would blow outdoor air in to clear the sta
irwell of smoke and to some variable degree reduce smoke in the passages to
the stairs. By the time the stairs are clogged with people & the front doo
r open all the time it would stop being effective, but it could be of use b
efore that point. And it would be very cheap.
On 04/07/2017 17:19, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
It was supposed to have mechanical smoke ventilation fitted already.
It should have been able to keep the core fairly clear of smoke.
It didn't do its job and that killed the people.
Now why it didn't is the real issue.
No I don't think having multiple fires is a good enough reason for it
not to work as there isn't really any limit on the amount of smoke one
flat fire could cause.
I think that is unfair, I am sure it was sized on the assumption of a
small number of flat fires, more than one because it would be
conservative to assume that there could be no propagation.
Hopefully the enquiry will come to useful conclusions. And you need
someone who is bloody competent at investigating the precise contract
terms of the cladding and other refurbishment, not someone who has great
empathy like Noel Edmonds or Paul O'Grady.
You really are thick as pig shit, dennis. Here it is in words of less
than one syllable for you, since you seem rather hard of thinking:
1. The core was designed to allow escape from one or two individual
flats if those were on fire. It was not designed for a mass evacuation.
2. The building was originally designed to contain a fire within a flat
for up to 30 minutes or an hour, depending which spec you read.
3. The residents were told to stay put if the fire was not in their
flat. Here's a picture for you, since you appear to have reading
4. The cladding, fitted after the building was constructed, started
simultaneous fires in multiple flats, meaning mutiple tenants needed to
escape, which meant the escape stairwell and smoke ventilation system
were not able to cope.
5. Had the cladding been fire-retardant as per the original spec, the
disaster would not have occurred. Why do you think councils and housing
associations all over the country are right this minute ripping off non-
(='.'=) "Between two evils, I always pick
Because its the easy thing to do and it makes tenants happy.
It makes you happy.
It makes the councillors happy.
You may have to eat your words when it happens again without the need of
But you are too thick to work out that there isn't any limit to how much
smoke a single fire could cause and its still a better idea to be able
to get out when the unexpected happens.
It'll stop a fire spreading to more than one flat, at which point the
regular evacuation processes will be sufficient in most cases.
Have you forgotten, so soon, that the LFB is called out to two high-rise
fires per *day*?
Its called out to a lot more but >50% are false alarms.
Many of the actual fires were in blocks fitted with the same cladding
but they didn't kill lots of people so I will say again it wasn't the
cladding, something else went wrong.
They have to remove the cladding now for obvious reasons that its best
not talked about in public until the cladding has gone.
Why are you trying to put words in my mouth? As I keep on saying, the
emergency exit became unusable far too quickly due to smoke, etc. The
stairwell didn't collapse (or whatever) as it would have if a core issue.
What hopefully an enquiry will find out is just why it no longer worked as
It's the usual meja thing. Non technical journos latching on to the one
bit they can sort of half understand.
*Income tax service - We?ve got what it takes to take what you've got.
Dave Plowman email@example.com London SW
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.