Ot: Or not. tower fire...

Lets face it, if the BR are weaker now than they were in the 70's politicians of all colours have had a hand (or lack of hand) in it ...

Reply to
Andy Burns
Loading thread data ...

Eco and disability now trumps fire safety

However having watched some very strange additions being out in the timber frames going up round me in the name of 'fire safety' I think they are on the case mainly. This one simply has slipped through the net.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

And parasites like you think it's OK to break up the place. Create yet more strain on the police and more cost to the public purse.

Reply to
Richard

In message , at

05:47:24 on Sat, 17 Jun 2017, Adam Aglionby remarked:

I don't think anyone who understands how sprinkler systems work[1] is claiming they'd be ineffective.

Slide 2 is interesting:

Tower blocks: 10% of population 25% of fires

[1] Some talking heads on TV appear to think all the sprinklers in all the flats turn on at once.
Reply to
Roland Perry

In message , at 13:10:22 on Sat, 17 Jun 2017, mechanic remarked:

And many implicated will say "no comment" to every question unless give immunity from prosecution. There's a fine line between putting scapegoats' heads on a pike, and finding out what went wrong so it can be prevented in future.

Reply to
Roland Perry

In message , at 11:00:31 on Sat, 17 Jun

2017, RJH remarked:

he

Reply to
Roland Perry

Sprinklers aren't going to help much while we continue to wrap tower blocks in fuel. It would be better to spend the money on something that will stop fires like that. For instance, remove the fuel.

You could even tighten up the regulations so only fire proof furnishings are allowed.

Fitting sprinklers won't stop someone deliberately starting a blaze on the outside will it?

Reply to
dennis

In message , at 11:00:31 on Sat, 17 Jun

2017, RJH remarked:

The land itself has no value where it's sited (other than farmland, and probably why it was viable to create initially, with zero rent) and by

2013 the buildings were run down and the operations uneconomic, consistently losing around 10% of turnover annually.

Rather than close it then, a group of local charities and corporate sponsors chipped in refurbished it and continued to run it. After the fire the trustees have declared it in effect beyond economic repair and presumably uninsured.

One reason for keeping people nearby is to avoid having to find them all new GPs, schools and so on. The Academy next door is closed until the Autumn as a result o the fire, and the children spread around several other schools locally for what remains on the term.

Reply to
Roland Perry

Modern houses don't in general burst into flames and when they do the smoke alarms get people out before its dangerous. Except in the case where nobody bothers about smoke alarms or they are so disabled they can't get out.

Any fireman will tell you that most people are unharmed when there are working smoke alarms. They will also tell you about finding perfectly good smoke alarms with the batteries removed, next to the bodies.

Reply to
dennis

That's how they go off in films, isn't it?

Reply to
Andy Burns

In message , at

11:01:23 on Sun, 18 Jun 2017, "dennis@home" remarked:

Apparently the residents of the Dubai block all survived because the sprinklers inside meant the "stay put" policy worked.

Reply to
Roland Perry

Surely councils etc will have details of which materials were used for this?

Of course the gutter press is incapable of realising their are different types of cladding. Reflecting many of those who read it.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

They would if they protected the means of escape. This to me is the main point that needs addressing. Not that the outside of the building went on fire so quickly, but why the means of escape didn't work.

I don't give a stuff about the building - that can be replaced. Lives can't.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Hmmm. Explain why the population increases then.

Reply to
Richard

And that is the problem. These morons on TV get their education from their environment. FFS, there was some woman on the BBC this morning (a relative or something of some victims perhaps) - anyway, she was not happy that there were helicopters filming and none actually rescuing people or fighting the fire. Where the f*ck was Spiderman when we needed him?

Reply to
Richard

Always sniping at the gutter press - must be a guttersnipe.

Reply to
Richard

Natural selection at its finest.

Reply to
Richard

In article , Dave Plowman (News) scribeth thus

Or possibly saving taxpayers money?..

Reply to
tony sayer

I notice that he is now saying the fire wasn't caused by the refurbishment, but by "years of neglect" ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

Dave's not interested in that. He just wants to squander it.

Reply to
Cursitor Doom

HomeOwnersHub website 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.