Tower block on fire in London

a reply to: Chadwickus

Contractor that secured the work:

Rain screen cladding, curtain wall façade and replacement windows will be fitted to the exterior of the building, with a completely new heating system installed to the interior. Rydon will work towards achieving a BREEAM rating and will also work with KCTMO to secure eco funding.www.rydon.co.uk...

Rydon subcontracted the cladding work to Harley.

The residents association have been raising concerns about fire safety and claim they have been ignored by the council, the landlord and the portfolio holder for housing.

There was additional criticism from residents about the new cladding around the building, that had been added for cosmetic purposes, had contributed to the speed in which the fire spread. The cladding could be seen burning and melting, causing additional speculation that it was not made of fire resistant material.[1] One resident said, "The whole one side of the building was on fire. The cladding went up like a matchstick."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire

A bit premature, pointing the finger of blame at the contractors but common knowledge tells me they work to maximise profits. Ergo, it would not surprise me if they assured the relevant parties the fire-safe product was being installed and then saving on costs by using the cheaper stuff.

originally posted by: starviego
If history is any guide, that building will collapse into it's own footprint any second now.

we all know what your saying is very correct. Delaying this observation unitl the inital horror has subsided and the status of people is a forgone conlcusion or officialy known would be appreciated by many on here today.

Unless some substantive eveidence emerges to the contary rather quickly, this is a genuine horrible occurance and one we or fear.

cheers

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Still burning.

The outside looks like it was covered in cardboard and plastic the way it is burned.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

That's messed up, what the outside was covered with.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

Thats odd, in the Manchaster blast and all other questionable events the death toll is always known within minutes and always revised downards a few days later after the intital blast of fear.

originally posted by: Pandaram
Used to live close to it. Its a dole estate.
Full of single mothers and professional breeders.

Expecting lot of deaths.

Perhaps it might be a case of someone else agreed with you and took action.

a reply to: Azureblue

This could be in the 100's I'm thinking. It started on the 4th floor and spread upwards. It doesn't look like a survivable fire from what I saw. Mass casualty event, could take some time to sort out the numbers.

It's a tombstone now.
Every single new panel burnt off. It was all flammable.

originally posted by: Azureblue

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Still burning.

The outside looks like it was covered in cardboard and plastic the way it is burned.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

That's messed up, what the outside was covered with.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

Thats odd, in the Manchaster blast and all other questionable events the death toll is always known within minutes and always revised downards a few days later after the intital blast of fear.

Odd how.? A tower that size gutted by fire could take a week maybe more to find all the bodies. The fire service forst have to establish if the building is safe to enter.

a reply to: Azureblue

well as it is burning and not only can people not get out, but the rescue services obviously cannot get in, it will be impossible to count the dead until all of the people that lived in the building have been accounted for, whether they are fine, in hospital, or still in the building. Remember this is a tower blocked that housed hundreds of people.

As for the terrorism comment, fatalities are easy to count because they are usually found in the vicinity of the attack, and in recent attacks in London and Manchester the initial death toll was actually increased, with people who subsequently died of their injuries and a body found in the Thames a few days after the attacks.

originally posted by: dianajune
a reply to: Spacespider

You took the words right out of my mouth. The last time I saw a blaze of this severity was on 9/11.

The last time I saw a blaze of this severity was on 9/11.

Sorry frind, you are confused. the fires on 911 were nearly all smoke which means its whats called a cold fire because there was incomplete combustion hence the carbon filled smoke. The fires of 911 were never like this, a few flames up the side for a bit then nothing but smoke.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Phoenix

A resident of Grenfell Tower has told Sky News his neighbour’s ‘fridge exploded’ sparking the fire.

I think you may be right with the green refrigerant being the cause of the blaze.
I'll do a thread on CFC's soon, there is no evidence they had anything to do with ozone depletion.

After reading a number of (speculations only I know) as to the cause of this fire and the materials that where used on wonders if it was a cheap and nasty reno for cheap and nasty people. One poster said this block is in a "dole suberb and populated by single mothers and professional breeders." Put two and two together and what do we get?

One is left wondering if this had been a tower block in the top end of town then I dont think the sepecualtion on the possible cheapness or inappropraiteness of the choice of some materials would have occured. One can be reasonably confident that materials used in a tower reno in the top end of town would nothing but of the highest fire rating. No millions would be spared to ensure an event like this never happens.

I fear the lessons learned from this fire, will have by the time 20 years has gone by, be gone out the door, for "dole suberbs populated by single mothers and professional breeders." Time will tell.

a reply to: Azureblue

Thats odd, in the Manchaster blast and all other questionable events the death toll is always known within minutes

Absolute rubbish.

a reply to: Chadwickus

If the building had PVC windows installed they may have facilitated the spread of the blaze from the outside, both upwards via the flames they produce to the next set of windows, and also down the way via the nasty burning plastic debris.

R.I.P to all the deceased and a speedy recovery all the injured.

originally posted by: SBMcG
Terrorism?

It appears to have been a fridge fire in number 16 on the fourth floor. Witness Mahad Egal recounted that he was woken by his neighbour in number 16 raising the alarm that his apartment was on fire due to a fridge fire.

Latest from emergency services is that there are 6 confirmed fatalities with more expected as the search continues.

Anyone else find it a bit disturbing how the news seem to have this constant live image of what is now essentially a massive funeral pyre?

Pretty grim watching over your morning cup of coffee.

originally posted by: Azureblue

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
Still burning.

The outside looks like it was covered in cardboard and plastic the way it is burned.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

That's messed up, what the outside was covered with.

The fire commissioner gal is not going to speculate on the number of fatalities.

Thats odd, in the Manchaster blast and all other questionable events the death toll is always known within minutes and always revised downards a few days later after the intital blast of fear.

why is that odd.

If she speculates that none are dead she creates false hope, if she speculates it could be hundreds then she creates even more panic.

Unlike ATS seems like she wants to stick to known facts.

a reply to: Chadwickus

Amazing! Yet another skyscraper that burns completely out and did not collapse in freefall demolition style

FFS. Behave! A 767 didn't just fly into this building with 36,000 gallons of jet fuel.

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Chadwickus

Amazing! Yet another skyscraper that burns completely out and did not collapse in freefall demolition style

a reply to: joemensor

That jet fuel did not burn hot enough to melt steel through.

I do agree however that there are no similarities regarding both tragic events.

I really dont see how this has to turn into a 9/11 thread two totally different buildings that were affected in two totally different ways.

Its really quite ignorant to make comparisons.

I think folks are insinuating building 7. Not the WTC towers.

Buuuuuutttt anywho.....