London fire

[the concerned]

With the recent tragedy in London. I was wondering is it time for the UK government to consider equipping our helicopters with the capability to assist with fires like the 1 we see

[Vulcanone]

I suspect something like a Chinook hovering over it would have not really helped. If you have ever exited a Chinook you will have discovered it gets awfully windy in the downwash from the blades.

[Agent K]

With the recent tragedy in London. I was wondering is it time for the UK government to consider equipping our helicopters with the capability to assist with fires like the 1 we see

In what way? if rescue etc. we already have helicopters to do that if applicable (Coast Guard); if you're suggesting extinguishing, then whilst it's good for forest fires you'd potentially cause deaths by dropping a large load of water on people as save them, let alone the challenge of flying within the smoke and huge updrafts from the fire.

[martmpf]

I expect you could only really drop water on the roof, which I expect is waterproof. Otherwise it would let rain in.

[bizfreeq]

That question was put to a fire chief last night on the news and he said the downdraught from any helicopter on a fire as concentrated as that would only fan the flames and make it a lot worse and much quicker. The use of helos on large, spread out fires is one thing, using them on a narrow, vertical fire is totally unworkable.

[toom317]

You've also got problems with turbulence from the heat being generated from the fire to deal with.

[TankBuster]

That tower block was like a raging roman candle and the incredible heat rising up would have put that area completely off limits to any helicopter operations. Not just the heat, but the unstable air currents being generated by the fire would probably be enough to send a helicopter spinning out of control.

The poor souls on the upper floors of that building were tragically way out of reach despite the best efforts of the emergency services. The speed and ferocity of the fire spread was just too quick.
Its just terrible .

TB

[Cornish-guy]

Could they not have used that fire fighting B727 we have over here?

C.

[jamesg23]

Its not a fire fighting aircraft, its an oil responce aircraft

[Nighthawke]

Plus throwing a large and therefore heavy amount of water at speed could potentially cause partial or total collapse of the building. Good thought to start with but the physics make it totally unfeasible.

[the concerned]

How about developing a uav/drone that has just enough capability to lift some type of hose system to enable fire fighters to tackle the blaze from above

[Agent K]

Or call in Thunderbird 2?

[Agent K]

In all honesty, think of the weight of the hose, and water required, the power/thrust required to counter the force/thrust of the hose and also the huge air movements, let alone the safety requirements and any certification for operating in the area with firefighters and people and services below.

[Gadget Man]

With the recent tragedy in London. I was wondering is it time for the UK government to consider equipping our helicopters with the capability to assist with fires like the 1 we see

The simple answer is no.
As far as I know all big buildings. Blocks of flats etc, should have been constructed according to building regulations and fire control. Not got time to search them all out but as far as I can make out, these flats should have been built so that if a fire broke out in one then by the time it spread to another one the fire brigade should have been able to contain it.
Unfortunately in this case something or someone has drastic failed. Which I am sure will be explained in the coming inquiry.

[jem60]

Everyones worst nightmare!. Whenever I stay in hotels or on Cruise ships etc. [and airliners as well], my first task is to have an escape plan. But in a highrise???. First visit to the States, wife and I staying 33 floors up in a Sheraton in New York many years ago. In those days you could rent 1 film to be shown in your room. We rented it. It was 'Towering Inferno'. Talk about tempting providence.We soon switched it off. Sadly, I think that the risk can never be eliminated of this sort of event happening, but that risk must be minimized as much, and as soon, as possible. Horrible!!!.

[Thunder]

Some serious design flaws starting to come out of this, one so far being that gas services were re located into the communal areas i.e. stairwells and landings, with the block having a single central stairwell and lift core, the poor souls didn't stand a chance.

[EGDR]

Would be far better off investing in taller aerial platforms for the London Fire Brigade, who ended up having to borrow one from Surrey as the ones available in London were far too short for this type of fire.

[TankBuster]

Would be far better off investing in taller aerial platforms for the London Fire Brigade, who ended up having to borrow one from Surrey as the ones available in London were far too short for this type of fire.

Surrey's Aerial Ladder Platform has a 42metre boom and as far as I know most others have 32 metre booms. They are a good bit of kit for high rise firefighting and rescue jobs, although they do take a bit of time to set up, and also require a substantial hard standing to work on. Once they are at work it is difficult to keep moving them due to the taking down and setting up times involved. They also require a separate pumping appliance to provide them with water as they have no pumping capability of their own .

One of the issues usually faced by ALP crews is gaining access to a job, as is often the case other emergency vehicles can sometimes unintentionally block access routes because they get to a job before the ALP does. Overall a good bit of kit which in my opinion is much safer than using the standard fire service 10.5 & 13.5 metre ladders, although as I said before the ALPs are only any good if you have a substantial hard standing for them, and also clear space above which isn't obstructed by telecom & electricity cables.

TankBuster

[ArabJazzie]

I have to ask how much water or retardant that you think would have been required to put this fire out once it had developed?

It has to be acknowledged that the fire crews managed to deal with the initial flat fire using the procedures and equipment they turned up with in the initial attendance. What was happening outside while they were doing this was well beyond normal expectation as the fire did not exceed the compartment internally. The full reasons for what happened outside are already well on their way to being understood, i just hope the lessons are learned from that!

Why is there not a high access Fire Appliance in the country that could get to the top of a building like this? I dont think there is a chassis out there capable of manouvering around some UK streets that is capable of mounting an ALP or TL that would reach. I dont even think the Germans have the capability. Then there is the risk of this event happening, which even in my never say never thinking had it at almost zero, no Fire Brigade in the country could justify procuring such a vehicle, when it has been proved time and again, they have the equipment and procedures to deal with a high rise flat fire.

As for an airborne asset to deal with this, even a hovering An-225 carrying as much water as it could would not have put that one out!

[TankBuster]

Even if a UK fire service had an ALP that could reach up 24 floors it would only have had a very limited use in this scenario.

Such a machine would require a huge area of hard standing in order to become a stable platform. It would also only be able to reach one or even two sides of the building without being moved. Also, they are very slow operating and would take an age to move from window to window not to mention that due to their operating weight limits most ALPs can only hold a few people in the cage, probably four at a push.

It would be better suited as a water tower rather than a rescue platform. At least then it could extinguish fires in upper floors, although having said that, if you dump large volumes of water onto a fire in a compartment in one go then the result is a massive expansion of very hot steam which would result in worse conditions for firefighters and it would almost certainly severely scald or kill any possible casualties. Compartment fires are extinguished in a controlled manner using fine spray to gradually cool the flammable gases and eventually extinguish the fire (plenty of videos of this on youtube).
The only way the people in that tower could have survived is if it hadn't been clad in what appears to be a type of composite panel in the first place, the firefighters had absolutely no chance of saving those people. It would have been safer to clad the tower in Asbestos!

TankBuster