Tower block on fire in London

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Agreed.

The PVC window fixtures and cladding affixed to the outside essentially turned that building into one big roman candle.

Obviously the building regulations and the fact that we seem to have no fire brigade/engines/ladders capable of reaching some of the higher floors contributed to the blaze spreading so fast and in such a way. Then there is the fact that there was no sprinkler system installed in the building, and no automatic fire detection system.

Such a shame at something that could have been possibly prevented has been allowed to occur.

a reply to: andy06shake

Its early days but it almost sounds like this is the tower-block equivalent of the Hindenburg and that comes down to this refurbishment. I think that the results of the investigation will be quite interesting, I would go as far as saying that there may be a criminal negligence case with this.

a reply to: andy06shake

Then there is the fact that there was no sprinkler system installed in the building, and no automatic fire detection system.

In this day and age these alone should be cause for charges of criminal negligence against someone.

This has a chance to be terrorist ISIS related.......wait and see what comes out.

Probably just old building and something caught fire most likely.

a reply to: Jobeycool
It seems to me to have all the makings of another design-fault scandal.
Compare the collapse of Ronan Point in 1968.

a reply to: Jobeycool

Err, no it isn't and to allege so with absolutely no supportive evidence is nothing but scaremongering and borders on the paranoid.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: andy06shake

Then there is the fact that there was no sprinkler system installed in the building, and no automatic fire detection system.

In this day and age these alone should be cause for charges of criminal negligence against someone.

I was thinking the same but i was listening to a fire safety expert not long ago. He was explaining why some of the things we might expect to be in place are not actually that safe. For example he was saying that because there is only one stair well if everyone tries to evacuate down that stair well as the fire fighters are trying to get up to the fire it can be very dangerous hence the reason for the instructions to stay put. He was also saying that a alarm system does not work because if it goes off every time someone burns toast then people just ignore it or attempt to disarm the alarm. He was then saying that when it comes to sprinklers its kind of the same thing, if a small fire starts in one flat and a sprinkler goes off for the whole floor it causes unnecessary damage.

originally posted by: Jobeycool
This has a chance to be terrorist ISIS related.......wait and see what comes out.

Probably just old building and something caught fire most likely.

Catch up with the times man, this is 2017.

If there is a guilty party to this event, it must be the fault of the Russians.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: andy06shake

Its early days but it almost sounds like this is the tower-block equivalent of the Hindenburg and that comes down to this refurbishment. I think that the results of the investigation will be quite interesting, I would go as far as saying that there may be a criminal negligence case with this.

That outside cladding should have been to a certain extent Fire retardant but obviously if a fire is raging nothing much is that retardant. I would look at the wooden batons used under the cladding to fix it to the wall if this grid was untreated and dry you might well get such a shocking result ? very sad indeed. I will await the investigation.

a reply to: LABTECH767


Hold on. I think you will find that the slashing of Legal Aid was by reason of the (so-called) Access to Justice Act of 1999. Who was in Government at that time? One T Blair so please if you are going to peddle a political agenda in such a tragedy then please get your facts right.

This is not the time to bring politics into this horrific tragedy for your own ends.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Absolute Bull, it was Cameron and his crony's whom did the harm and whom put it into effect, Labour never did eh? and would have faced a ferocious backlash from there own back bencher's had they tried, it was cut on there watch so go and tell someone else that lie if you like because some of us are actually a little more intelligent than you obviously give us credit.

Blair was a prat and a closet moderate Tory whom should never have been a member of the Labour Party, he led us into war when we should never have gotten involved in Iraq and lost some of his best members of parliament whom resigned because of his action's.

But guess what your hero Cameron also led us into war, another destructive war but this time AGAINST the wishes of the US in Libya.
The Guy also reduced our armed forces at a time while our forces were actively engaged over sea's demoralizing an already beleaguered armed services, cut our last aircraft carrier and scrapped the Harrier Jump Jet which though aging is still a premier multi role platform and still one of the best carrier based air craft even when compared to today's model's.

Now back to the reason I was commenting which has nothing to do with your protection of the Tory scumbag's and there malfeasance riddled vested interest's (I have nothing against conservatives but hate there politics but Tory's are a different kind of animal even if they rule the Conservatives).

I was going to address something nothing to do with your comment which happened to land just as I logged in, you know the British public has a political memory of about 3 minutes or there is absolutely no way the Tory's would have gotten into power as often as they have.


Aluminium in the Cladding, it is a likely source but requires one factor, the initial heat to start aluminium combustion is over 1000 degree's, if the fire reached that temperature then the other factor is oxygen, as long as the two were present the aluminium would have spread the fire much like Thermite, in Thermite it is a mix of aluminium and iron oxide usually sparked with *A high temperature reactive material which then create a deadly heat triangle as the oxygen is stripped from the Iron and combines in an exothermic reaction with the aluminium, in this case if it WAS the aluminum and not just a non fire retardant material in the cladding that caused this disaster then it was the air gap which has undoubtedly funneled the fire much like a Roman hypercaust gone crazy, the fire would have drawn oxygen rich air in from the base and fed the flame's as the heat much like a blow torch would have beaten at the building.

At these temperatures it will be likely some of the victim's may have been completely incinerated if that is the case, the blue white flame's noted in previous comment's are likely an indication that it or another source did indeed raise the temperature high enough to cause this.

Now let's hope we get justice for the survivor's.

Posted to the wrong thread, so I deleted it.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Really. Well, just look up the Act I referred to. From 1999. Being a practicing lawyer for many years, I do know what I am talking about.

Where do you get all that about me being a fan of David Cameron from? What has any of what you are posting have to do with this horrible tragedy and why do you think it appropriate to spit your bile and venom for the Tories over this board at such a time?

a reply to: oldcarpy

So what exactly are your qualification's which field did you practice AND it was not me that led it off thread but you.

a reply to: LABTECH767

I have a law degree and am a practicing lawyer in the UK and I specialise in litigation if it's anything to do with you, pokenose.

I led this off thread? that's neat. I simply responded to your inappropriate (lying) rant about the Tories so just do one.

How about you post something on topic? This is a horiffic tragedy and this is no time to bring party politics into it.

Coupled with the recent shootings in the U.S. one wonders what this is all about and where it's headed.

a reply to: Freeborn

Thing is through if the regulations allow flammable materials to be used in construction and refurbishment of the building, which to some extent they do indeed, then who will be held to account is rather ambiguous.

Might turn out that substandard materials that were used in the refurbishment i suppose, but my bet is that the refurbishment will have been up to code and its the regulations that are at fault.

a reply to: Nightwalk

Whats a tragic fire in the heart of London town got to do with shootings in the U.S?

a reply to: starviego

Cheap and disrespectful comment was it struck by an aicraft first and the building appears to be reinforced concrete apples with apples as they say

Latest news is that 12 people are confirmed to have died in the fire but that number will likely rise.
18 People in critical care in hospital.