• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Massive Fire in High Rise Apartment in London

Sage00

Once And Future Member
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...amilies-will-lower-house-prices-a3570331.html

Good to see folks in the luxury complex have got their priorities right.

Fucking hell.
Well, to be fair, they're right. Bad roll of the dice that they had a big investment slashed in value through no fault of their own, and have a right to complain (why their flat and not another?) Too bad though. Their suffering is nothing compared to the victims.

But they can use drones to fly in and investigate - this doesn't seem like a valid excuse.
Or James Bond can show up in an invisible car and then fly in with his jet pack.
 
Yep. I think they want to to blow over a bit more before stating any further numbers.



They couldn't afford that. Budget cuts and all that.

Well, drones aren't actually in the budget for most fire services yet, so they'd actually have to go out and acquisition them for that purpose. Which then means going through a process of figuring out what to get; do they grab something that could be of long term use to them, or something cheap but functional for their current needs? How do they ensure the drones will actually remain responsive up to the distances required, on such short notice?

It's doable, but is enough of a headache of a process, plus ultimately misinterpretation of the footage (especially if they got lower quality cameras) could create false positives on the body count. They're going to do this the slowest, safest, and most verifiable way they can - firefighters climbing floor by floor to recover corpses, and counting them as they go.
 

Theonik

Member
Well, to be fair, they're right. Bad roll of the dice that they had a big investment slashed in value through no fault of their own, and have a right to complain (why their flat and not another?) Too bad though. Their suffering is nothing compared to the victims.
Too bad. All investments have risk. Don't see people crying over those poor tobacco companies anymore. People like to point out all investments carry risk whenever they want to justify their gains but never when that risk leads to losses.
 

spineduke

Unconfirmed Member
Or James Bond can show up in an invisible car and then fly in with his jet pack.

Maybe you're just taking the piss, but there are plenty of search and rescue drones in deployment out there. It's not exactly new or outlandish.

I have no idea on what branches of government are involved at this stage but I'd be surprised if they don't have access to such machines.
 

Par Score

Member
So, this is terrifying.

Grenfell Tower: Similar cladding used in around 600 high rises
Around 600 high rises across England are using similar cladding to Grenfell Tower, says Downing Street.

Tower blocks across the UK are being examined after the London blaze, which left 79 people dead or missing, presumed dead.

Three samples have been shown to be "combustible" and more results will be made public in the next 48 hours.

More from political Twitter
Councils in England have estimated there are 600 high-rise buildings that used "similiar" cladding to Grenfell

Not clear if all of the 600 will be necessarily combustible. Councils need to send in samples for testing. Govt can test 100 a day

A “small number” of samples have come in so far and been tested. As a result, THREE have been confirmed as combustible

Those 3 high-rises haven’t been identified, but residents are being informed. Sounded like that will happen today. Urgent, top priority.

If they’re found to be unsafe, those people will be rehoused. But as yet, to be clear, people are still living in those 3 towers

Govt is encouraging local authorities to urgently send samples to be sure. But could take 6 days to test those in Eng w/ similar cladding

In summary: We have potentially thousands of people living in deathtraps like Grenfell, and councils the length and breadth of the country are culpable for cladding these places using material which has been deemed unsafe and illegal for use on high-rise buildings.

I don't know how the people living in the potentially affected places are coping to be honest. This is a national disgrace and the Grenfell enquiry (or inquest, or whatever it ends up being) needs to examine the full scope of this wide-scale neglect.
 

Theonik

Member
So, this is terrifying.

Grenfell Tower: Similar cladding used in around 600 high rises


More from political Twitter


In summary: We have potentially thousands of people living in deathtraps like Grenfell, and councils the length and breadth of the country are culpable for cladding these places using material which has been deemed unsafe and illegal for use on high-rise buildings.

I don't know how the people living in the potentially affected places are coping to be honest. This is a national disgrace and the Grenfell enquiry (or inquest, or whatever it ends up being) needs to examine the full scope of this wide-scale neglect.
So... Why are we trusting the councils to provide samples?
 
So, this is terrifying.

Grenfell Tower: Similar cladding used in around 600 high rises


More from political Twitter


In summary: We have potentially thousands of people living in deathtraps like Grenfell, and councils the length and breadth of the country are culpable for cladding these places using material which has been deemed unsafe and illegal for use on high-rise buildings.

I don't know how the people living in the potentially affected places are coping to be honest. This is a national disgrace and the Grenfell enquiry (or inquest, or whatever it ends up being) needs to examine the full scope of this wide-scale neglect.

...So there's basically a high rise at a similar risk to Grenfell Tower, for each resident that was in Grenfell Tower.
 
So, this is terrifying.

Grenfell Tower: Similar cladding used in around 600 high rises


More from political Twitter


In summary: We have potentially thousands of people living in deathtraps like Grenfell, and councils the length and breadth of the country are culpable for cladding these places using material which has been deemed unsafe and illegal for use on high-rise buildings.

I don't know how the people living in the potentially affected places are coping to be honest. This is a national disgrace and the Grenfell enquiry (or inquest, or whatever it ends up being) needs to examine the full scope of this wide-scale neglect.

My sister has recently moved into a high-rise with her 2 year old daughter. Top floor too...
 

Lo-Volt

Member
Well, to be fair, they're right. Bad roll of the dice that they had a big investment slashed in value through no fault of their own, and have a right to complain (why their flat and not another?) Too bad though. Their suffering is nothing compared to the victims.

I'm going to reinforce this: fuck their feelings because people burned in a rocket of a building for hours calling their families to say goodbye and breathing in smoke, for the "crime" of being poor in London.

Second, inherent in the understanding of 'investment' is the risk of loss. It's really inappropriate (absurd really) to act like real estate is always a safe investment that deserves to be protected by the state at all costs. That's just not true. What if London or New York or another global city suffers from a new pattern of flight over unaffordability, poor infrastructure or the effects of rioting or a new recession? What if the city goes "insolvent" or the appropriate equivalent in the U.K.? What if the sea takes your home?

It's fallacious to think that these investors in homes will always be able to keep the profit while socializing the risk.
 

LakeEarth

Member
If it's one of the towers near me they are fucked, their sprinklers and fire alarms don't work. None of the old towers near me have sprinklers or working sprinklers.

I was thinking about how terrorists could take advantage of this. Identify a building with similar problems, sneak in, identify a good place to set a fire and do so in the middle of the night.

Hell, if we wanted to turn it into the plot of a bad movie, he could actually move in the building, bringing in bomb materials in the furniture (no one would look twice), and then build it right then and there. Then kill someone your height and gender, file down their teeth to match yours...
 

spineduke

Unconfirmed Member
To clarify this a little, the drone is apparently being used primarily to observe structural damage. So I imagine in that regard that means having it fly around and measure from outside, maybe hovering each to check out standing structures, rather than fly throughout the building counting bodies on the floor.

I'm not suggesting they should fly inside with it. S&R drones tend to be much larger and may have trouble fitting in narrow spaces.
 

bosseye

Member
Everybody getting very hung up on the cladding, but there is vastly more to how the fire spread than this; the cladding appears to have been the obvious means for the fire to travel up the facade, but if the building is properly compartmented as it ought to be, then that shouldn't matter too much. Each flat ought to be giving at least an hour fire resistance, each flat should be containing any fire within; the fire tore through the entire building, so there are serious questions about the fire stops and fire breaks in the main structure and the cladding, the non existent fire alarm, the extract ventilation, the number of escape stairs and capacity, the 'stay in your flat' advice, the potential ruptured gas main in an escape stairwell etc etc...

Just having this type of cladding does not instantly mean a building is a deathtrap,there are many other factors at play here.
 

Nevasleep

Member
I hope they are checking the cladding on newer private blocks. A lot of talk about council blocks, but the government should be checking private blocks too, because some landlords are greedy.
 

KDR_11k

Member
Everybody getting very hung up on the cladding, but there is vastly more to how the fire spread than this; the cladding appears to have been the obvious means for the fire to travel up the facade, but if the building is properly compartmented as it ought to be, then that shouldn't matter too much. Each flat ought to be giving at least an hour fire resistance, each flat should be containing any fire within; the fire tore through the entire building, so there are serious questions about the fire stops and fire breaks in the main structure and the cladding, the non existent fire alarm, the extract ventilation, the number of escape stairs and capacity, the 'stay in your flat' advice, the potential ruptured gas main in an escape stairwell etc etc...

Just having this type of cladding does not instantly mean a building is a deathtrap,there are many other factors at play here.

True but the flats were all connected to the cladding which would light them all up at nearly the same time. Only the area with the stairwell would be compartmentalized and if any of the 120 flats was "leaking"...
 

bosseye

Member
True but the flats were all connected to the cladding which would light them all up at nearly the same time. Only the area with the stairwell would be compartmentalized and if any of the 120 flats was "leaking"...

Every flat ought to be it's own self contained fire break, but I do agree. It's this 'leaking' thats a huge issue, the apparent total failure of the compartmentation. I do wonder at the quality of construction during the refurbishment, how much was skipped or missed, how many corners cut; how much value engineering and poor management killed all those people.
 

Par Score

Member
Everybody getting very hung up on the cladding, but there is vastly more to how the fire spread than this; the cladding appears to have been the obvious means for the fire to travel up the facade, but if the building is properly compartmented as it ought to be, then that shouldn't matter too much. Each flat ought to be giving at least an hour fire resistance, each flat should be containing any fire within; the fire tore through the entire building, so there are serious questions about the fire stops and fire breaks in the main structure and the cladding, the non existent fire alarm, the extract ventilation, the number of escape stairs and capacity, the 'stay in your flat' advice, the potential ruptured gas main in an escape stairwell etc etc...

Just having this type of cladding does not instantly mean a building is a deathtrap,there are many other factors at play here.

Since the cladding transmits the fire into every flat via the windows i am not sure what you are saying about compartmentalising. The fire ripped vertically then spread horizontally over a longer period.

There were lots of other issues however with two sides of the building quickly burning into half the apartments the smoke would do the rest of the work to trap people until the cladding fire worked its way around.
 

TimmmV

Member
I hope they are checking the cladding on newer private blocks. A lot of talk about council blocks, but the government should be checking private blocks too, because some landlords are greedy.

IIRC the government have only said about checking council owned blocks, private ones are up to the landlord

I live in a private block that has cladding and the building residents are all shitting themselves over it, and so far the only thing the landlords have done is send a notice to each resident repeating the fire process - including the policy to stay in your flat if there is a fire

After hearing about the people who were told not to leave their flat in Grenfell, and then never came out, there is no way I would be following that advice if a fire did start
 
After hearing about the people who were told not to leave their flat in Grenfell, and then never came out, there is no way I would be following that advice if a fire did start

I'm not an expert, but I think that advice would have been okay if the fire services were able to contain the fire. I assume the risk of smoke inhalation is normally greater than your building burning down if you are in a "safe" part of it.
 
The number is now up to Eleven, plus Three Premier Inn hotels.

As usual, it takes a massive tragedy to finally bring to light years of neglect and shoddy practices. And people dare, they fucking dare, to complain about "Health and Safety".

Premier Inn cementing their trash tier status.

This is why I'm happy Airbnb has blown up, I'd much rather stay in someone's home than a hotel. It's usually cheaper, the hosts are usually more attentive, it's generally much cleaner and you get some cool little treats. Like the last one we stayed in near the Lake District, the host (sweetest lady) cooked fresh biscuits everyday. The smell was amazing and she'd always leave a few on a little coffee table she'd put aside for Airbnb guests.
 
Premier Inn cementing their trash tier status.

This is why I'm happy Airbnb has blown up, I'd much rather stay in someone's home than a hotel. It's usually cheaper, the hosts are usually more attentive, it's generally much cleaner and you get some cool little treats. Like the last one we stayed in near the Lake District, the host (sweetest lady) cooked fresh biscuits everyday. The smell was amazing and she'd always leave a few on a little coffee table she'd put aside for Airbnb guests.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say the majority of people renting their accommodation on airbnb aren't ensuring it is up to code.
 

Kin5290

Member
Premier Inn cementing their trash tier status.

This is why I'm happy Airbnb has blown up, I'd much rather stay in someone's home than a hotel. It's usually cheaper, the hosts are usually more attentive, it's generally much cleaner and you get some cool little treats. Like the last one we stayed in near the Lake District, the host (sweetest lady) cooked fresh biscuits everyday. The smell was amazing and she'd always leave a few on a little coffee table she'd put aside for Airbnb guests.
Did you read the article? Premiere Inn getting singled out speaks to the company's favor, not the opposite. Basically, the media knows that three of their hotels may have unsafe cladding only because their corporate office was unusually proactive in answering media inquiries.
 

Theonik

Member
Did you read the article? Premiere Inn getting singled out speaks to the company's favor, not the opposite. Basically, the media knows that three of their hotels may have unsafe cladding only because their corporate office was unusually proactive in answering media inquiries.
And will subsequently take remedial actions. Many other companies might not bother.
 
Premier Inn cementing their trash tier status.

This is why I'm happy Airbnb has blown up, I'd much rather stay in someone's home than a hotel. It's usually cheaper, the hosts are usually more attentive, it's generally much cleaner and you get some cool little treats. Like the last one we stayed in near the Lake District, the host (sweetest lady) cooked fresh biscuits everyday. The smell was amazing and she'd always leave a few on a little coffee table she'd put aside for Airbnb guests.

Airbnb is doing a massive number on the residential property market in London, probably causing as much damage as the russian oligarchs with their empty flats
 

Javaman

Member
True but the flats were all connected to the cladding which would light them all up at nearly the same time. Only the area with the stairwell would be compartmentalized and if any of the 120 flats was "leaking"...

Sadly all it would take is one of the people on the lower floors to leave their door open when they evacuate to screw all the other people above over. We're there 2 stair cases or just one?
 

Theonik

Member
Sadly all it would take is one of the people on the lower floors to leave their door open when they evacuate to screw all the other people above over. We're there 2 stair cases or just one?
Fire doors should slam shut and contain fire and smoke for a timeframe. That means that the fire would at worst case be contained in 1 floor. The tower block in question only had 1 escape staircase that probably was not positively pressurised.
 

TimmmV

Member
I'm not an expert, but I think that advice would have been okay if the fire services were able to contain the fire. I assume the risk of smoke inhalation is normally greater than your building burning down if you are in a "safe" part of it.

Until the owners confirm that the cladding on our building isn't flammable then I won't be taking any chances tbh

But yeah, it sounds like the Firemen gave that advice on the basis that the cladding was safe in the first place, which by all accounts it should have been - there is no blame on them in this situation

Airbnb is doing a massive number on the residential property market in London, probably causing as much damage as the russian oligarchs with their empty flats

Yeah. Airbnb solve a problem for tourists with reasonable prices for holiday accommodation, but local residents are the ones paying for it. Its been discussed quite a lot how priperty prices in Barcelona and NYC have become really fucked up for locals because of Airbnb.

IIRC it also means cities get less tax income as the people on it generally aren't paying the same taxes as a hotel would have to

Not that my heart bleeds for the hotel industry, but Airbnb is definitely not something that should be championed
 

Dougald

Member
"If Grenfell Residents Move Into My Flats, I'll Move Out" - LBC @LBC https://t.co/TO8wVpYJUo

Move out then cunt

"I feel sorry for those people but my husband and I work very hard to be able to afford this.

"And for someone to get it for free, I would move."

Just because someone is paid less than you doesn't mean they don't work hard. Get to fuck. This attitude that those in social housing must live in the worst possible conditions because they didn't "earn" anything nice is what led to this tragedy in the first place
 
Top Bottom