Massive fire in London



no not a fireman but am involved with a local authority

when we chose to refurb our high rises, we chose a a thermal render over the exterior of the building an higher performing internal insulation, along with aluminium window frames rather then PVC

it meant more disruption for the occupants as we has to move them out temporarily when each flat was done...but it means no external means of any fire transfer
 
The Resource said:
It shows how quickly the cladding goes up, only difference is that looks to have started on an open balcony so it's already outside?
Click to expand...

none of ours have balconies

but I know other officers in other authorities.....and you would be amazed by the number of people who have to be told not to have a barbecue on their balconies, especially as people tend to use them as outside sheds, storing loads of crap on them

I have seen the results of tenants putting disposable barbecuea on small wooden tables on a balcony...they panicked and just chucked the lot over the edge 8 floors up...luckily it didnt hit anyone down below!
 
---Nemo--- said:
We saw that much the other night. How likely is a transfer from outside to inside? My concerns are over the potential for terrorism.
Click to expand...
I guess that will all depend on the investigation into the cause of the fire. Was there a weakness in the inner shell, did the flame get through an open window? It seems strange for a fridge freezer fire to spread like that - I'm by far no expert on these so happy to be corrected, but most of the pictures you see of the aftermath of appliance fires are generally fairly contained.
 
---Nemo--- said:
Are you a Fireman Nick? If so do you reckon the cladding could be ignited from the outside? Or were the particular conditions that night required to produce this nightmare?
Click to expand...

The 1st small fire in that lads flat was put out mate so these particular conditions couldn't have been that hard to achieve. The tower went up like a proverbial fireball. No accelerant needed by the looks of it.
 
Camden already removing panels claiming they are not to the standard that they commissioned. They are taking legal advice. Wonder if it is the same contractor who put them up?
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
The 1st small fire in that lads flat was put out mate so these particular conditions couldn't have been that hard to achieve. The tower went up like a proverbial fireball. No accelerant needed by the looks of it.
Click to expand...

Where was that reported? I've only seen one person on here mention that and I wouldn't take anything he says at face value.
 
this sort of job is bread and butter to the lfb, they get hundreds and hundreds of these every year
the response time before they tory's shut the local station was 2 minutes, because of that the first appliance took 6 mins, they put the flat fire out very routinely, and the gaffer was just about to put the stop in for the job, when he looked up and noticed a flicker. he thought shit I better take a look at that, he went round the other side, and the whole side of the building was alight. it looks like cause of the time of year and the open windows, it had crept up the underside of the cladding, and flashed on the other side of the building. it is unheard of really ! again cause of open widows with the heat it got inside the flats as people slept
I have my feelings about what the extra 4 minutes have caused, but not allowed to air them !
also it was at an important time of Ramadan when they have parties and cook food etc (the sun went down about half 11) so they haven't got a clue how many people could actually be in there !
there are loads more horrendous stories, but that's about all I can give out.......
 
apparently the cladding has a small gap to stop it getting wet and to breathe a bit etc, this has caused it to flash underneath it
it is a catalogue of errors from start to finish, and hopefully some people will be jailed !
 
wilberforce said:
apparently the cladding has a small gap to stop it getting wet and to breathe a bit etc, this has caused it to flash underneath it
it is a catalogue of errors from start to finish, and hopefully some people will be jailed !
Click to expand...
Which leads to the question was the insulation layer also flammable, that would only exacerbate things.
 
The Resource said:
Which leads to the question was the insulation layer also flammable, that would only exacerbate things.
Click to expand...

that's why arses will be KICKED mate, did anyone expect the whole block to go up.... NO
but why on earth would you use flammable materials where people live, it's like using a flammable fire guard ! :confused:
once they took away the fire brigades statutory rights to do fire inspections on properties it was a recipe for disaster ! they can self regulate now, which means...........
the residents had said before the fire that fire doors were missing etc
also they had retro fitted a gas main all the way up the stair well, coring thorough floor by floor, this would have been heaven to a fire wanting to spread, it would just rush through the gap around the pipe ! this would cause a massive problem for the people trying to get down the stairs to escape ! stairwells should have fire protection, and lots have pressurised stairwells to keep the smoke out
 
ProfessionalMackem said:
http://www.insurancebusinessmag.com...d-be-europes-biggest-ever--reports-71072.aspx

Norwegian insurer Protector Forsikring initially revealed that last week’s Grenfell Tower fire could lead to an insurance bill of more than £25 million - but now the total payout is estimated to be as high as £1 billion.

Kensington and Chelsea Council, which owns the freehold of the tower, reportedly switched insurance providers about three months before the fire that the Metropolitan Police said has left 79 people missing as of June 19.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of WTC7; Larry Silverstein bought the lease for it in June 2001 for $3.2bn, couple of months later the 9/11 attacks occur and WTC7 catches fire and is hit by falling debris from the other two towers, causing this to happen:

Logon or register to see this image


Insurance pay out to the new owner was $4.5bn, he wanted $7bn but lost a court case. Silverstein was supposed to be in a meeting on one of the top floors of WTC1 on 9/11 but his wife made him go to a medical appointment instead. Lucky bloke.
 
wilberforce said:
that's why arses will be KICKED mate, did anyone expect the whole block to go up.... NO
but why on earth would you use flammable materials where people live, it's like using a flammable fire guard ! :confused:
once they took away the fire brigades statutory rights to do fire inspections on properties it was a recipe for disaster ! they can self regulate now, which means...........
the residents had said before the fire that fire doors were missing etc
also they had retro fitted a gas main all the way up the stair well, coring thorough floor by floor, this would have been heaven to a fire wanting to spread, it would just rush through the gap around the pipe ! this would cause a massive problem for the people trying to get down the stairs to escape ! stairwells should have fire protection, and lots have pressurised stairwells to keep the smoke out
Click to expand...

Do you mean the fire brigade don't do the checks anymore and local authority can do checks themselves?
 
For those wondering about cladding, my view is as follows:

The tender was submitted to government with different cost options for each section. Governement, under cost pressures, opted for the cheapest of each option. Nowhere in the tender was it highlighted that the cheapest type was less fire-proof or that it could only be fitted to a certain height. Once the tender was returned, no-one deigned to mention that cladding couldn't be used over 12m in height or that it was more of a fire risk than the alternatives. So, unless the council clarified and then ignored that info by other means, the cladding being illegal is Rydon at fault.

Regarding the government, labour from 1999 were warned about cladding being a fire risk and ignored it. That was then ignored along with unreported issues from 2009 fire (report not completed) by the coalition. The conservatives and particularly Gavin Barwell then sat on a report from 2013 until present day regarding sprinklers in high rises, despite direct prompts from fire safety groups. All 3 governments should be held to account for that.

The local council seem quite lucky as they can currently only be held responsible alongside the conservatives for the appalling response to the disaster (apologised for by TM but no sign of anything but contempt and stupidity from Piggott- brown).
 

Back
Top