I live in a high rise council estate. I received a letter from the
company that do all the maintenance on behalf of the council. I am
supposed to receive a visit from some engineers to check the state of
our sprinklers. I don't have any in my flat and I haven't seen any in
the whole building, including corridors, common rooms, etc.

I have spoken to the handyman who is responsible for day to day
maintenance. He thinks that the council will have to install sprinklers
"after the Grenfell Tower".

Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.

On 04/01/2024 10:20, Simon Ferrol wrote:
> I live in a high rise council estate. I received a letter from the
> company that do all the maintenance on behalf of the council. I am
> supposed to receive a visit from some engineers to check the state of
> our sprinklers. I don't have any in my flat and I haven't seen any in
> the whole building, including corridors, common rooms, etc.
>
> I have spoken to the handyman who is responsible for day to day
> maintenance. He thinks that the council will have to install sprinklers
> "after the Grenfell Tower".
>
> Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
> every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.

Barnet Council (my local council) have done exactly that, despite having
a fire safety report saying that it is not necessary for most of their
blocks.

The cost per flat is around £10k, but the good news is that the
sprinklers are not all that intrusive.

On 04/01/2024 10:20, Simon Ferrol wrote:
> I live in a high rise council estate. I received a letter from the
> company that do all the maintenance on behalf of the council. I am
> supposed to receive a visit from some engineers to check the state of
> our sprinklers. I don't have any in my flat and I haven't seen any in
> the whole building, including corridors, common rooms, etc.

Modern ones can be very unobtrusive, but I suspect a Council would use
the traditional bulb type.

> I have spoken to the handyman who is responsible for day to day
> maintenance. He thinks that the council will have to install sprinklers
> "after the Grenfell Tower".

Holding a cigarette lighter under a sprinkler bulb is a known form of
vandalism, so they are not without their problems in public areas. A
water mist system in each flat would have prevented the Grenfell Tower
fire, but so would fitting fire resistant windows when they were
replaced, even without considering the cladding.

> Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
> every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.
Simply ensuring that fire compartments are not compromised and that
there are adequate means of escape is probably all that is needed, but a
lot of people seem to think that sprinklers are a magic bullet, so they
might.

--
Colin Bignell

On Thursday 4 January 2024 at 12:28:44 UTC, Colin Bignell wrote:
> > Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
> > every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.
> Simply ensuring that fire compartments are not compromised and that
> there are adequate means of escape is probably all that is needed, but a
> lot of people seem to think that sprinklers are a magic bullet, so they
> might.

Ensuring that fire compartmentation is intact is not an easy task in a large building, and may be more intrusive and expensive than piping in sprinklers. Then the sprinklers should work even if fire doors are wedged open or compartmentation is compromised by future works.

Owain

On 04/01/2024 12:39, Owain Lastname wrote:
> On Thursday 4 January 2024 at 12:28:44 UTC, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>> Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
>>> every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.
>> Simply ensuring that fire compartments are not compromised and that
>> there are adequate means of escape is probably all that is needed, but a
>> lot of people seem to think that sprinklers are a magic bullet, so they
>> might.
>
> Ensuring that fire compartmentation is intact is not an easy task in a large building, and may be more intrusive and expensive than piping in sprinklers.

ISTR an estimate of £200,000 and several months of disruption for
Grenfell Tower.

> Then the sprinklers should work even if fire doors are wedged open

In a block of flats, the only true fire doors are likely to be the front
doors of the flats. The ones on the escape routes are likely to be smoke
doors. If they have more than a tiny window of wired glass, they present
no obstacle to the spread of fire through radiated heat.

> or compartmentation is compromised by future works.

Failing to check that was the essence of the Grenfell disaster. Simply
checking that the replacement window frames wouldn't melt in a fire
would have kept the fire inside the flat at Grenfell long enough for the
Fire Brigade to put it out.

Sprinklers are not a substitute for proper maintenance of what is
already there.

--
Colin Bignell

On Thu, 04 Jan 2024 23:39:36 +1100, Owain Lastname
<spuorgelgoog@gowanhill.com> wrote:

> On Thursday 4 January 2024 at 12:28:44 UTC, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> > Does it make sense? Are they actually going to install sprinklers in
>> > every flat? This seems a bit far fetched to me.
>> Simply ensuring that fire compartments are not compromised and that
>> there are adequate means of escape is probably all that is needed, but a
>> lot of people seem to think that sprinklers are a magic bullet, so they
>> might.
>
> Ensuring that fire compartmentation is intact is not an easy task in a
> large building, and may be more intrusive and expensive than piping in
> sprinklers. Then the sprinklers should work even if fire doors are
> wedged open

Shouldnt be hard to ensure that that isnt possible.

or compartmentation is compromised by future works.
>
> Owain

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 06:44:51 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

<FLUSH the abnormal trolling senile cretin's latest trollshit unread>

--
Marland revealing the senile sociopath's pathology:
"You have mentioned Alexa in a couple of threads recently, it is not a real
woman you know even if it is the only thing with a female name that stays
around while you talk to it.
Poor sad git who has to resort to Usenet and electronic devices for any
interaction as all real people run a mile to get away from you boring them
to death."
MID: <gfkt3mFe413U1@mid.individual.net>