Deadly high rise fire in Hong Kong

I saw this last night and just saw a video with someone going over the details about this. It was a disaster waiting to happen. All buildings were covered in bamboo and nylon mesh and they told everyone to stay in the buildings. Plus there were many elderly in there. Reminiscent of Grenfell.
 
The Guardian reports that firefighters are now heading to the top floors to reach those who had been trapped. What surprises me is that the buildings have been burning for around 24 hours and are still structurally sound enough so that there's been no mention whatsoever of a threat of collapse. It seems like they were well built in that regard, at least.

We were talking about it at work being in the safety department. The mesh that covered the buildings were designed to stop debris falling during maintenance works. Looks like the mesh was the bigger safety risk.
I followed the live updates from the BBC for a while and one of their reports included that the building block was from the 80s and likely still had single-pane windows which, they said, would shatter rather easily in a fire whereas newer building have double-pane windows which are more resistant.

All in all, it's just horrible and I think that the scale of the tragedy was avoidable makes it even more tragic and horrific.
 
All buildings were covered in bamboo and nylon mesh and they told everyone to stay in the buildings.
what is the reasoning for this? I worked in a building that was having penthouses built up top and the construction set off the fire alarm sometimes more than once a day and after a while they told us to just stay it was a false alarm without even investigating it and most people were tired of going back and forth so they stay put. I know it is a pain to move a lot of people but I dont know why this is a good idea. I'm not going to die so some shortstop can live on the roof.
 
what is the reasoning for this? I worked in a building that was having penthouses built up top and the construction set off the fire alarm sometimes more than once a day and after a while they told us to just stay it was a false alarm without even investigating it and most people were tired of going back and forth so they stay put. I know it is a pain to move a lot of people but I dont know why this is a good idea. I'm not going to die so some shortstop can live on the roof.
I think that is what happened with Grenfell. Somehow they think that staying in the building is safer than getting out. And when you look at it the videos of this fire it did appear pretty dangerous with burning debris falling all around.

Don't mean to be funny but we evacuated our office this week because someone burnt toast and it set the fire alarm off. Gave us a chance to practice our yearly fire drill. But you certainly need to take these things seriously because when it comes to the real thing you are prepared.
 
Last edited:
I think that is what happened with Grenfell. Somehow they think that staying in the building is safer than getting out.
A couple of days ago, I stumbled over a video celebrating 50 years of a three-building high rise block in Köln, Germany. One of the residents who they interviewed mentioned a time when a fire broke out on floor 4. He and his partner were on the upper floors (20-something or maybe even higher), and they, too, were told to remain in the building.

To me, it sounds like they prefer to be sorry rather than safe. Of course, there were 20+ floors between the couple and the fire, between 400 and 1,200 residents would have to be evacuated (depending on whether they'd evacuate one, two or all three buildings) and under normal circumstances, firefighters should be able to put out the fire. But what about the non-normal circumstances? What about the variables that no one can control? Fire is unpredictable.
 
Here is an article post Grenfell that talked about the stay put policy. There was quite a detailed evacuation procedure that I can see why they did it, including the assumption about a fire being contained where is happening. But I know I would much rather be safer than sorry.

 
When they say they want to keep stairwells from getting blocked, it sounds like the building isn't designed to handle large-scale evacuation but I think a high rise should be designed so that every resident could potentially evacuate.

This is the third high rise/large residential complex fire in eight years and the second in around a year and 9 months. I don't think this classifies as rare anymore. I also think by the time they realize a fire can't be contained, it's too late for those living on the upper floors and this fire seems to have started on the outside, so there was no apartment to contain it in. (The BBC has a verified video of the beginning of the fire. You can't see much other than that it seems to have started on the outside and it made me wonder if the mesh and scaffolding served as some kind of chimney effect).
The way I see it is that evacuation procedures are designed to save lives. To me, that means they should be designed with "always expect the unexpected" in mind.
Maybe it's time to re-think evacuation procedures and take into consideration where the fire started?
 
When they say they want to keep stairwells from getting blocked, it sounds like the building isn't designed to handle large-scale evacuation but I think a high rise should be designed so that every resident could potentially evacuate.

This is the third high rise/large residential complex fire in eight years and the second in around a year and 9 months. I don't think this classifies as rare anymore. I also think by the time they realize a fire can't be contained, it's too late for those living on the upper floors and this fire seems to have started on the outside, so there was no apartment to contain it in. (The BBC has a verified video of the beginning of the fire. You can't see much other than that it seems to have started on the outside and it made me wonder if the mesh and scaffolding served as some kind of chimney effect).
The way I see it is that evacuation procedures are designed to save lives. To me, that means they should be designed with "always expect the unexpected" in mind.
Maybe it's time to re-think evacuation procedures and take into consideration where the fire started?
And use something non-flammable instead of bamboo when renovating a building. This tragedy could have been avoided.
 
It seems to get worse and worse. :fragile: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn8e5j20g27o

Kiko Ma, who owns an apartment at Wang Fuk Court, says the alarms had been turned off amid renovation works, as construction workers regularly used fire escapes to get in and out of the building.

...

Residents often saw construction workers smoking and found cigarette butts along their window ledges, she adds.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information