Tower block on fire in London

a reply to: violet

"Do you mean a fridge caught fire?"

Apparently that's the alleged cause so far.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn
I lived in these buildings as well amd you just ignore fire alarms, kids used to turn them on.
Apparently the alarm was hard to hear in this tower. Should t they be in the halls every so many feet apart? Maybe all they heard was the odd smoke detector coming out of a flat

I was considering a move to a condo last week. Changed my mind now. One thing though, they would have had sprinkler systems in place.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: violet

"Do you mean a fridge caught fire?"

Apparently that's the alleged cause so far.

Ok. You put "fringe" .

I read there were complaints of faulty wiring. Perhaps that triggered the fridge fire
I've read it started in the second floor and also the fourth floor.

a reply to: skywatcher44

I don't know but in some of the pictures I saw, the exterior of that building looked like tests that were done to figure out how the Hindenburg went up. One of the suspects was aluminum paint and tests showed it burned very well and very fast. I read that there was aluminum cladding added during the renovations to the exterior of the building. If the renovations were cheap or shoddy, is it possible that they used the way wrong thing just to cut corners and look good and it let what should have been a more or less contained fire rage out of control and spread like wildfire?

a reply to: violet

Sorry buddy i'm dyslexic, sometimes i miss small errors like that, especially so when i'm on the phone.

I herd about complaints regarding faulty wiring of the alarm system.

Even so faulty wiring that went on fire could never cause such a building to go up like it did, in the manner that it did.

It's the cladding, air gaps between such, not to mention the PVC window frames that contributed to the spread of the fire.

Granted other poor measures and contributing factors also played there part, but my bets on the actual construction codes being at fault.

End of the day these contracts go to the lowest bidder and the poor, pensioners and disabled people that occupy such accommodation generally don't have a clue as to whether or not the materials being used to supposedly renovate and upgrade there properties are up to code or otherwise.

And even if the materials are up to code they can still be of a combustible nature, they may be fire retardant but they are not fireproof or retarded enough.

a reply to: violet

I find this little tidbit to be rather curious pertaining to the timing of it. Something stressed to do so much just a mere few days before the tragedy? Hmmmm

Apparently a fire brigade team had visited the building on Saturday, telling residents to follow the stay put rule, that this gave them 30 minutes of time until help arrived. The stay put notices were posted all over the building , by every elevator door, ground floor etc. In hindsight it was bad advice

I have worked on many buildings like that sprinkler systems are not used they have whats called a dry riser this is used by firefighters to get a water supply at any required floor.

A dry riser is a normally empty pipe that can be externally connected to a pressurized water source by firefighters. It is a vertical pipe intended to distribute water to multiple levels of a building or structure as a component of the fire suppression systems.

Also the cladding system should have fire breaks to stop fire spreading any penetration through walls and floors for pipes & wires should have intumescent fire stop products to stop the spread of smoke and fire.

A fire that migrated to the cladding (flammable cladding) would be very dangerous because the ventilation system would pull the surging flames into the interior of the building. It wouldn't just burn up the side of the exterior wall.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: violet

And even if the materials are up to code they can still be of a combustible nature, they may be fire retardant but they are not fireproof or retarded enough.

Unlike the council (no organised response, all help being offered by local individuals, faith groups, charities and businesses). As one local told the Guardian, 'they (the council and landlord) are not fit to run a bath'.

originally posted by: ipsedixit
A fire that migrated to the cladding (flammable cladding) would be very dangerous because the ventilation system would pull the surging flames into the interior of the building. It wouldn't just burn up the side of the exterior wall.

Typical cladding in the UK is metal or a cement fibre board both don't burn are fire resistant the insulation behind is usually fixed with 4 plastic fixings and ONE METAL so if you have a fire the insulation wont fall also there should be firebreaks between levels see my post above yours.

a reply to: teapot

Ive had scaffolding up around my building with them fitting new PVC windows and similar cladding for the past YEAR now and Eon are still nowhere near finished, windows have been done and then redone down to poor materials and workmanship.

Council/housing association blame Eon, Eon blame the housing association, never ending circle of complaint really non of which changes the fact that said scaffolding has been up for a year.

Point is a hell of a lot of the people responsible for these renovations ether don't know there job, don't care who they employ to carry out the work, or think it's ok to attempt to cover up piss poor workmanship down to the fact the council permit or overlook the facts.

I can only imagine its no different down London way.

a reply to: andy06shake

It doesn't surprise me they would cut corners on the cost. It was done for looks after all, for the wealthy homes looking at it. That's written right into the proposal for it.

I think it's the pooorly constructed cladding and yes the Windows may have added to it.

Overall the whole thing was a mess.
Let's all hope lessons are learned.

It's still on fire too! No danger of it collapsing they say though.

originally posted by: onehuman
a reply to: violet

I find this little tidbit to be rather curious pertaining to the timing of it. Something stressed to do so much just a mere few days before the tragedy? Hmmmm

Apparently a fire brigade team had visited the building on Saturday, telling residents to follow the stay put rule, that this gave them 30 minutes of time until help arrived. The stay put notices were posted all over the building , by every elevator door, ground floor etc. In hindsight it was bad advice

Yeah I saw this in a video interview . Such a shame it was drilled into their heads. Explains why some were yelling out " No. We were told to stay". Only those who ignored it got out.

Source

I wonder who caused it

a reply to: wmd_2008

This was the situation according to the Telegraph:

www.telegraph.co.uk...

The London Fire Brigade warned ministers that building regulations were not taking into account the vertical fire issues that cladding could cause in 1999, warning that because of cladding regulations were "inadequate".

Glyn Evans from the Fire Brigades Union told a Select Committee on Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs that after the Great Fire of London only horizontal fires were considered and "we do not really recognise the problem of vertical envelopment. If you get multistorey buildings you will get fire spread up the outside if the cladding will permit it."

One guy's opinion .... "no accident"

The young man in the above video is not the first to say this. Earlier in the day a Channe 4 News interviewer confronted one of the estate managers/councillors with just the same suspicion (about redevelopment) and got into an argument with him. This might be one of those cases where the local journalists on the ground get the details that are sanitized out of the national coverage, like with the Oklahoma City bombing back in the '90s.

At 12:00 of the following video.

a reply to: ipsedixit

oh that question at 15:30

a reply to: Dr UAE

The interviewer certainly put him on the spot. There may be nothing to that suspicion, but if a new building is put there, I would be willing to bet that they will try to move it up the scale of rental properties.

This is actually a terrorist attack, committed by Islamist groups supported by the UK. New strategies of terror also include, burning down buildings and killing by means other than direct engagement. Additionally the tower burning down to that level of charring without collapsing is an additional demonstration of what really happened on 9/11