Just watched some videos on the BBC website, my God, what a catastrophe.
Cannot get my thought away from the children who lost their lives....
Very sad news. Thoughts go out to the families of those who have lost their lives.
Just watched some videos on the BBC website, my God, what a catastrophe.
Cannot get my thought away from the children who lost their lives....
Awful news to wake up to this morning. Reports that a family where told to stay put in there flat by emergency services, then 40 minutes later only to have enough courage to battle through the smoke and fire and escape the ongoing blaze. I just pray for the families, You can't even imagine the scenes inside.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sad news. Awful images.
I wish them all the better.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Horrific ! At first I thought it might have been a terrorist attack or bomb factory gone wrong. I used to live in Ladbroke Grove and know exactly where it is.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Very sad news . My thoughts are with the families.
Terrible news, thoughts and prayers with all involved.
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Shocking stuff, made all the more shocking because these kinds of calamities are thankfully pretty rare these days.
So sad to hear lives have been lost.
So clever my foot fell off.
That is terrible, 120 flats and only 50 or so in hospital, i hope that means most got out rather than lots still inside.
Someone's going to prison over this one for sure
"In November 2016, a residents organisation, Grenfell Action Group, published an online article attacking KCTMO as an "evil, unprincipled, mini-mafia" and accusing the Borough Council of ignoring health and safety laws. The Group suggested that "only a catastrophic event will expose the ineptitude and incompetence of [KCTMO]". The group had also published articles criticising fire safety and maintenance practices at Grenfell Tower."
"In a July 2014 newsletter, KCTMO wrote:
Emergency fire arrangements
Our longstanding 'stay put' policy stays in force until you are told otherwise. This means that (unless there is a fire in your flat or in the hallway outside your flat) you should stay inside your flat. This is because Grenfell was designed according to rigorous fire safety standards. Also, the new front doors for each flat can withstand a fire for up to 30 minutes, which gives plenty of time for the fire brigade to arrive."
https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpres...ing-with-fire/
Very sad. Regret turning the news on in a morning now..
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
I heard that the fire started on the 2nd floor and the fire crew could only spray up to the 17th floor.
Firefighters apparently made it up to the 12th floor after it started on the 4th - that's beyond brave.
CHAIR NAMED IN NEW YEAR'S HONOURS LIST
KCTMO Chair Fay Edwards has received the British Empire Medal (BEM) in the new year's honours list for her services to the community in Kensington and Chelsea.
She says: "I'm quite amazed and honoured to receive this award. It's been an absolute pleasure to serve on the Board of the TMO, which I have chaired since 2012, and I have enjoyed every minute of it. The TMO plays a very important part in the life of the whole community and I'm proud to represent it, doing everything I can in the interest of our residents."
Chief Executive Robert Black added: "I'm delighted that Fay has received this much deserved honour. Under her leadership the Board has become more strategic and representative of the community, gaining the respect of both residents and the local council. As a result there has been increase in overall resident satisfaction with the company; increased attendance at the AGM; and more residents voting for TMO's continued management of the council's homes. We couldn't be more pleased for her!"
December 31, 2015
Compare:
"We believe that the KCTMO have ensured their ongoing survival by the use of proxy votes at their Annual General Meeting that see them returned with a mandate of 98% in favour of the continuation of their inept and highly dangerous management of our homes."
(quoted from: https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpres...ing-with-fire/)
I bet there are a few arses being covered and blame ready to be attached. Horrific events. I fear the death toll will rise. Looking at the building it seems it was the cladding that spread the fire, which when the windows blew out with the heat the fire spread internally. There is no way a concrete building would burn that quickly, it as to be the cladding.
Last edited by hilly10; 14th June 2017 at 15:57.
Very sad and just down the road from me.
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
From Chris Sullivan: "As my Portobello Radio colleague Piers Thompson who lives a stones throw away will attest, the authorities deliberately ignored all requests to attend to the building and its hazards because the singularly right wing, rapacious Tory Kensington and Chelsea Council have been pushing plans to bulldoze the who area and build luxury flats (and probably nick a few backhanders to boot) for the last three years. Piers has been fighting this initiative ever since and created the Save the Silchester Estate campaign to do so.He was facing a compulsory purchase order as he lives in the shadow of Grenfell Tower. But I can see some Tory councilor rubbing his hands with glee a few weeks ago as they ignore the pleas to improve the block because they knew that ,after a time, the tower block would be declared unsafe and closed, the residents rehoused in Reading and this incredibly valuable chunk of prime W11 real estate then ready to sell off to the highest bidder. But things haven't worked out as they thought and now whoever is responsible needs to be gaoled and the council replaced. This stinks of corruption at the highest
No idea how this correlates with the refurbishment that was carried out last year. It beggars belief that a refurb would not include water sprinklers
It's beyond tragic and one of my personal deep rooted fears is being stuck in a building like that under similar circumstances.
i always try and stay on the ground floor of any hotel I have to use when away with work, which I realise is probably pretty daft really as they all appear to have room alarms/fire doors etc..
But I sleep better.
The refurb will be put under the microscope.
I wouldn't mind betting that the contract for the work was a "race to the bottom" in terms of price and it will have been awarded to the lowest bidder.
I wouldn't be surprised to further learn that to deliver some margin, the contractor sought to cut some corners on materials/standards, (hoping of course it would go forever un-noticed).
I'm afraid I've been around bids/deals, (although not in property refurb), where this type of thing has been countenanced after "buying" the business by bidding the win price right down.
It's a systemic issue around buying at the lowest price, rather than a more pragmatic approach where it is recognised that all parties involved have to derive some benefit to deliver a mutually satisfactory outcome.
I hope I'm wrong, but I'm getting a cynical b@stard as I get older and deal with these types of things with regularity.
Rich
A stay put policy is pretty much standard practice in social housing and it makes sense. You don't want people charging down stairwells hindering fire crews. Passive measures are in place to prevent the spread of fire but as has been mentioned it appears these have failed here. Tragic.
My mums on the 15th floor of a tower block by the river in Chelsea and could watch the fire in the distance as it happened.
That makes no sense to me. The classification of "social housing" cannot prescribe a "stay put" philosophy.
It is the physical attributes of each building, together with its passive, and active fire protection systems, and escape routes which will.
There should have been a safety case for each building - to identify the risks and also the mitigating factors.
I'm no expert on fires and how they develop inside large buildings, but I'm struggling to see how a fire in one flat results in the whole building being engulfed? What happened in this case that doesn't usually happen when a flat catches fire in a block? Surely that's the crux of it, that's the question that needs answering. I would assume all conceivable fire scenarios are considered when a building is judged to be safe and the appropriate measures are designed in.
Everyone's apportioning blame and jumping to conclusions in the absence of any facts or information, why not post some constructive hypothesis instead of jumping on the blame bandwagon?
As for the cladding applied to the building, can someone postulate how this contributed to the disaster? The sight of cladding on fire and dropping from the building was dramatic........but how does this fit with the spread of the fire?.......I can't see it, can anyone else?
Some input from the guys on this forum who have first-hand experience of firefighting would be far more interesting than the majority of what' s already being posted; some folks love a witchhunt!
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 14th June 2017 at 20:25.
Irrespective of the building you can't advise people to make a dash for it, what if the fire is in the stairwell? Some people have disabilities and can't get out. Stay put and wait for the professionals to deal with the situation and rely on the fire protection.
The cladding will principally be done for thermal and cosmetic purposes, it may have inadvertently added to the fire loading and allowed the fire to spread, if there was a gap behind the cladding this may have created a chimney effect by allowing the fire to move upwards as it searched for oxygen.
No one may be at fault and we may see a change in design and legislation.
Go back and read what you wrote and I queried.
Can you point out the metaphor for me - because I'm not seeing it.
And your use of the term "fire risk assessment" with the implication that you know better - does nothing to address other risks other than fire.
My use of "safety case", however does encapsulate other risks.
You're a BLUFFER.
In terms of 'fire development' it is significantly different when in the open than it is when it has a vertical surface involved. A fire that develops where a large vertical surface is available will see much higher flame height and rate of development than a fire in an open space.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
The fire should never have got to the cladding because the ignition point (the flat on the 4th floor allegedly) should have been compartmentalised by effective fire doors with smoke and intumescent seals, and fire retardent ceilings - presumably concrete floors and blockwork walls. (For over 20 years I was involved with ironmongery and fire safety in public buildings.)
Once the individual flat was breached, there should have been further fire doors along the corridors/line of escape to the stairwell, also protected by fire doors and a ventilation/smoke venting system. 30 minute fire doors are the minimum - and were probably those fitted to this property.
In this instance, the external fire has spread freely on the interior of the building, presumably because the fire doors failed (under-specified - badly installed) or more likely because some or all of the doors were wedged open. This is extremely common in multi-occupancy buildings, often with fatal results. One of the interviewed residents on BBC this morning said "the doors to the stairs were open because of all the people coming and going". When you see the sign on the door "Fire Door Keep Shut", that is exactly what it means, and sadly this is what happens if you ignore it.
General alert fire alarms are not a requirement for buildings of this type, although smoke and/or flame alarms are required to each apartment. An alarm throughout the building is not advisable because people trying to evacuate the building will interfere with the efforts of rescue services entering the building, especially when only one staircase is fitted, as in this case.
The cladding has aided the spread of fire and in the latest refurbishment I understand that PVCu windows were fitted - again with limited resistance to fire.
A tragic and terrible fire and the toll will increase over the next few days. Then a LOT of questions need to be asked and some new priorities in the design of these homes. It was an accident waiting to happen and concerns had been raised, and ignored. That is unforgiveable.
Terrible all round, and the way the fire so rapidly got out of control is chilling. First thing I thought of was one of those faulty driers that are known to catch fire, wasn't there another fire caused by one in a London block a couple of years ago?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Things like this make me think we are living in a 3rd world country sometimes
Very hard to comprehend how this happens in the 21st century
Tim
I find it incredible that no sprinklers are required for a building like this. If I want to convert the loft of my house (which would make it 4 stories) I need fire doors throughout, fire alarms on each floor and either a sprinkler system or a second staircase according to the building regs. All sensible requirements, and surely should equally apply to any structure of 4 or more floors.
Once the facts come to light I`m sure it'll all make more sense. I`ll reserve judgement until that point. Have to admit I`m shocked at what's happened, if it had happened in a 3rd world country I`d be more inclined to condemn poor standards, but in Britain I find it hard to jump to such a conclusion and I`m sure most right-minded rational thinkers will agree. Given the number of high-rise building we have in Britain there's got to be a concern that the fire prevention/control methodology that seems correct and credible has a serious flaw in the logic. 35 years in the Chemical Industry taught me that even the most rigorous Risk/Hazard assessments can end up being flawed.
It's a tragedy, no other way to describe it, but in the absence of facts the media are doing what they do best and 'feeding' on the story. Had a quick scan at the newspaper headlines today and the stance/reporting style was depressingly predictable, Journalists sensationalising a tragedy to fill column inches. Objectivity is a concept they simply don`t recognise!
One point that does trouble me: is it safe to install mains gas to multi-story buildings? I think not, but I`m sure there are very persuasive arguments in favour and sadly they'll be allowed to override the fundamental hazard it brings. Maybe it wasn`t a factor in this case, maybe it was.....we'll all find out eventually.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 15th June 2017 at 15:29.
Not to make light of a tragedy but how come a burnt out skeleton of a building is still standing but on 11/9/2001.......well, we all know what happened.
No impact, and no inventory of kerosene in the Kensington block.
I have some experience in fire protection and as someone else mentioned here there is the crucial issue of compartmentation. This is when the building is designed as a series of fire tight boxes or compartments. The idea being that should a fire break out, it should confined to that compartment. An overarching fire strategy takes into account active and passive fire protection, amongst other things. Active being things like sprinklers and dampers and passive meaning things like intumescent firestop devices. These exist to seal up combustible penetrations as they burn (usually within a matter of 3 minutes or so) which seals the flow of air and suffocates the fire, preventing it spreading. The same fact is true when considering a facade or curtain wall system otherwise the structure behaves like a chimney which accelerates the spread of fire and smoke upwards whilst burning debris falls down the void between the facade and the structure to ignite floors below.
I come across passive fire protection (or the lack thereof) on an almost daily basis. The neglect and incompetence in the construction industry in this country surrounding this topic is chronic and widespread. I have lost count of the number of times I have seen a complete lack of adequate passive fire protection in live, high-profile buildings and when the topic is raised the building owners or developers brush it under the carpet. Something like this was always going to happen, it was just a matter of time.
No comparison between a building hit by a commercial aircraft and a fire starting in a flat. None whatsoever.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The WTC was built from steel.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
I imagine mains gas is safer than other forms of gas supply.
Properly designed, installed and maintained gas installations have rarely caused explosions or fire in multi-occupancy buildings.
How about reserving judgment instead of wildly speculating (wrongly I predict).
Lilly Allen (of all people) on C4 news last night was the first person I have heard say a number (150) that seemed like it might be a realistic estimate of the eventual death toll. Jon Snow changed the topic very quickly, and pretty much stopped the interview.
Is there an organised effort to not put out a number until the news has died down?
It really is an absolute disaster of epic proportions and the death toll being played down really is starting to smell of political play.
One Tory councillor has already started to make noises about actually blaming residents because they didn't want sprinkler systems installed as it would "inconvenience them".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...lames-10631544
(caveat, i'm not often into tabloid sources - but this guy is on record).
Sometimes people who are in a position of power and responsibility need to enforce safety features because its there for a good reason. Shocking really.
Amazing really that considering everyone is worried about terrorist attacks these days, we seem to kill more of our own people through negligence than a terrorist could hope to achieve.
No need for the sarcasm.
My point regarding mains gas relates to the main fracturing as a fire progresses, thus fuelling the fire and causing catastrophic escalation. As I`ve said before, I don`t claim to be an expert, but the very presence of mains gas in a high-rise building has to constitute a hazard in my opinion. The hazard is completely eliminated if there's no gas supply, that's irrefutable, and maybe that should be the case.
Whether mains gas is a significant factor in the escalation of the fire is still to be determined, but I really don`t see it as 'wild speculation'.
Paul