Grenfell Tower block disaster

[SilverFox2]

I believe all councils have or are expected to have contingency plans in place for emergencies like this. Manchester certainly did in 1996 and incidents like the 7/7 bombings would only have heightened that requirement.

Thanks PB, forgive my cynicism but are these documented and available to all employees ?

 

[squirtyflower]

Thanks PB, forgive my cynicism but are these documented and available to all employees ?

I used to work in a school and we had an 'Emergency Plan' which was vetted by the council on an annual basis

 

[BlueAnorak]

I stand to be corrected but is it possible that the 40 feet vertical limit is to ensure that there are breaks in the chimney effect which effectively ensures extra construction work if used in tower blocks etc.?
If the method statement for the installation does not include these construction breaks then an FR containing cladding should have been used because a proper risk assessment would have indicated its requirement.

Maybe mistakes in interpretation could be made but at least it explains why an apparently inferior cladding could be included onto a list of approved ones.

That's pretty much my take on it.

 

[lancs blue]

I believe all councils have or are expected to have contingency plans in place for emergencies like this. Manchester certainly did in 1996 and incidents like the 7/7 bombings would only have heightened that requirement.

Unlike many other countries the UK lacks an organised Civil Defence body to co-ordinate responses in the aftermath of major incidents like the Grenfell fire. Leaving it up to councils inevitably leads to a patchwork pattern where some councils are fully up to speed and others, for whatever reasons, lag behind.

 

[BlueHammer85]

freaky

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Unlike many other countries the UK lacks an organised Civil Defence body to co-ordinate responses in the aftermath of major incidents like the Grenfell fire. Leaving it up to councils inevitably leads to a patchwork pattern where some councils are fully up to speed and others, for whatever reasons, lag behind.

We have COBR(A), which is supposed to be for situations like this. It can involve central & local government officials, including mayors and others as necessary. It's not just about national security issues.

I bet no one even thought to call a meeting.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

We have COBR(A), which is supposed to be for situations like this. It can involve central & local government officials, including mayors and others as necessary. It's not just about national security issues.

I bet no one even thought to call a meeting.

I'm pretty certain COBRA met last week about the tower fire, although it has been reported in some places as a small version.

I think it's now called the Civil Contingencies Committee.

 

[Mike N]

freaky

Wow!

 

[Gabriel]

Police announcing that they believe that the toll is now 79 dead or presumed dead; they may have to go abroad to find dental records and DNA in an attempt to identify the dead.

Truly horrible.

 

[Bluemanc100]

I stand to be corrected but is it possible that the 40 feet vertical limit is to ensure that there are breaks in the chimney effect which effectively ensures extra construction work if used in tower blocks etc.?
If the method statement for the installation does not include these construction breaks then an FR containing cladding should have been used because a proper risk assessment would have indicated its requirement.

Maybe mistakes in interpretation could be made but at least it explains why an apparently inferior cladding could be included onto a list of approved ones.

This is what I have read too, each floor would need a tightly compacted (wedged) fire resistant barrier to prevent the chimney effect..