Grenfell Tower firefighters 'put out fridge fire' before flats fire erupted

www.express.co.uk...

FIREFIGHTERS had extinguished the fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the block when the blaze flared dangerously out of control, it has been revealed.

Fire crews thought they had put out the blaze at the tower when they saw flames rising up the side of the building, firefighters told Panorama.

Now I don't know how valid the Express is as a news source but this news of putting out the fridge fire before any other fires started adds to the conspiracy issue off the main fire outside the building being set intentionally. As the burning tower stories started coming to the internet I'm almost certain that there was one story of someone pouring some sort of liquid on the outside of the building causing the fire. I wish I could find that story again.

Maybe arson if the fridge fire was out. That would change the complexion of this whole affair. This is why the investigation will be vital to understand the course of events, and the cause.

originally posted by: LookingForABetterLife
www.express.co.uk...

FIREFIGHTERS had extinguished the fridge fire at Grenfell Tower and were leaving the block when the blaze flared dangerously out of control, it has been revealed.

Fire crews thought they had put out the blaze at the tower when they saw flames rising up the side of the building, firefighters told Panorama.

Now I don't know how valid the Express is as a news source but this news of putting out the fridge fire before any other fires started adds to the conspiracy issue off the main fire outside the building being set intentionally. As the burning tower stories started coming to the internet I'm almost certain that there was one story of someone pouring some sort of liquid on the outside of the building causing the fire. I wish I could find that story again.

The fridge contains isobutane, which is a flammable liquid. So wherever it went, that would catch on fire. If the electrical socket caught fire, and the internal wiring behind the socket caught fire, then it would spread internally. From the photographs of the burnt out room, the interior walls consisted of chipboard. There wasn't any electrical cable left. Window frames were PVC which could catch fire as well. Even if something looks black and burnt in daytime, in darkness, you will see it smouldering away. So if the walls were scorched from the inside, they could still be burning on the outside.
Normally, firefighters will tear away at the burnt fabric of the walls until they are certain there is nothing left hot.

So nobody thought to look outside to see if anything was still smouldering????
Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'

It would be interesting to find out if the fire service had extinguished the original fire and had left the area leaving the fire to reignite, in fact, not reignite, but spread even further.

Dave Green, national officer at the Fire Brigades Union, said the first firefighters at the scene might not have expected the outside of the building to be flammable. The union official said that 1970s buildings like Grenfell Tower were designed so each flat was a box that contained fire within itself, with a non-flammable concrete exterior. Mr Green said: "Clearly it was a hot night and if the (fire) was fairly close to an open window then potentially the flames could have got outside - if there were net curtains, something like that, it could have got up. "Then the cladding might well have been smouldering. "As a firefighter you wouldn't have thought to look outside. We would assume that the outside of the building would not be compromised."

I'm sorry but as far as i know or have seen in the past, the fire service are usually there on the job until not only is the fire out, but any and all remaining threats have been dealt with. ...I'm simply not buying the statement that " As a firefighter you wouldn't have thought to look outside..

Looks to me like the Fire service might have some serious questions to answer. We would assume that the outside of the building would not be compromised."

Assumed.?..You wouldn't have thought..?

I'm not a fireman but i'm bloody sure checking the outside as well as the inside would be the sensible thing to do.

www.express.co.uk...

"What was this block built of? It was burning like a box of matches," said one. "It looked as if somebody poured burning liquid on top of it and ignited the fire."

Sorry if this is the only source for the pouring liquid bit but that quote is from some Russia fire expert.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

I agree that with the window open and the type of fridge fire going on that the fire brigade should have at least taken a quick looky outside.

I watched them talking about this on BBC's Panarama last night.....

The fire crew in this following video are obviously not the crew who dealt with the fridge fire....but this video shows what they were looking at as they apporoached the fire....nightmare.

Fire crews reaction to seeing the tower fire

If these guys don't get a pay rise next time round.....

CX.

This doesn't make sense.. The fire brigade arrived within 6 minutes.. and that building was apparantly a huge inferno within 15 minutes.
So they had entered the block.. completely put the fire out and were leaving just 7 minutes after arriving..
Something doesn't add up here..

originally posted by: LookingForABetterLife
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I agree that with the window open and the type of fridge fire going on that the fire brigade should have at least taken a quick looky outside.

The fire brigade cannot be blamed for this.. They are all hero's in my book. They risked their own lives to save others.

The blame lies squarely with those that chose to put a flammable material all around the building to save £2 a piece (£5000 in total) on fire retardant cladding.

a reply to: paraphi

I think it was arson but time will tell on that one. It could just be a horrible accident but there are a few things that don't add up already.

originally posted by: Misterlondon

originally posted by: LookingForABetterLife
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I agree that with the window open and the type of fridge fire going on that the fire brigade should have at least taken a quick looky outside.

The fire brigade cannot be blamed for this.. They are all hero's in my book. They risked their own lives to save others.

The blame lies squarely with those that chose to put a flammable material all around the building to save £2 a piece (£5000 in total) on fire retardant cladding.

I bet they cut a few more corners than just that and I also would bet that a few folks pocketed a fair amount of money.

a reply to: Misterlondon

As more and more stories come to light the Grenfell fire is more and more becoming a story of overall neglect of the building and the lack of concern over the safety of the residences. We can blame the firefighters, we can blame the builders, we can blame the building owners, and who knows we can blame the residence for living there. I'm not saying that any of them are 100% behind the cause of the building burning down but as money always has the last say in who is guilty we know that the ones with the most money will be the ones never charged with causing the fire.

originally posted by: Misterlondon

originally posted by: LookingForABetterLife
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I agree that with the window open and the type of fridge fire going on that the fire brigade should have at least taken a quick looky outside.

The fire brigade cannot be blamed for this.. They are all hero's in my book. They risked their own lives to save others.

The blame lies squarely with those that chose to put a flammable material all around the building to save £2 a piece (£5000 in total) on fire retardant cladding.

If what they are saying is true that they never checked to see the fire was completely out then they have to hold their hands up.

It is looking like the fire was able to get through the building possibly when pipework etc was carried out, if the correct procedures and protocol was not followed it would allow the flames to get past and engulf the building like a chimney..

I am not a expert but this is what has been proposed by a few people that know how to properly fire proof a building.

People where told to stay in their homes and had the fire doors etc worked then this would not be a topic, so somewhere something failed catastrophically causing the devastation... A building should not be able to burn in such a manner as what we witnessed it is a concrete structure that somehow became a Furness. The whole building was engulfed in a matter of minutes from the fire source to the top floors just how did that happen??, poor cladding or third party adjustments??, no modern building should burn like it did..


RA

I guess one question that should really be asked is where did the "totally engulfed in 15 minutes" come from. When exactly did that clock start?
If they arrived in 6 minutes and had it out in 7, that is 13 right there. This isn't accounting for getting up to the apartment with equipment etc. That had to take at least a couple minutes. Another couple minutes to get it all together too leave.

Now we are at fifteen minutes and this is assuming everything just roller right along. Humans being human I would think it would be safe to say we could probably add at least a couple minutes to this.

So technically the firecwould have been already raging around them before they had even gotten back down to the ground floor.

I wonder what the time difference was between the first brigade being called and the second one and all the others.

I can't believe that the firemen left with out being sure that there could not be a re-flash. Do the fire departments there have IR or thermal imagers?

Has anybody said that the cheaper cladding was against the fire code? I'm real curious on that one. If it was to code, it wasn't "cutting corners". If it wasn't to code, why didn't building inspectors catch it?

a reply to: JIMC5499

www.dezeen.com...

According to this story, the cheaper cladding used is illegal in the UK

a reply to: LookingForABetterLife

OK I maybe off the mark here but with all the witnesses interviewed and the intense media interest over the past days, why does this come to light now?

www.telegraph.co.uk...

And why wax it a Fire Brigade Union official commenting on behalf of the Fire Brigade?

Scapegoat finding season starting?

Any ideas?

It seems there was application for demolition of the tower in 2014... www.rbkc.gov.uk...

a reply to: LookingForABetterLife

OK Thanks. I'm familiar with the US Building and Fire Codes, I don't know the UK's. That still leaves me wondering about the Building Inspectors. I have no problem with heads rolling over this, I'd just like them to be the right heads.