7 ms·
When the hallway is on fire and the only option is the stairs behind you, I really doubt you'll care about the space 'wasted' on them. And in response to Grenf
by petee 5y ago
When the hallway is on fire and the only option is the stairs behind you, I really doubt you'll care about the space 'wasted' on them.
And in response to Grenfell, the argument is tenants don't like fire drills; just wow. Eventually everyone forgets the reason for regulations...is there a named law for this phenomenon?
- brian-armstrong 5y agoIs this basically subsidizing a slightly higher survival rate for a relatively few number of fires with a significant loss of space for everyone?
- dymk 5y agoWhy are you qualifying with “slightly” and “relatively few”? Relative to what?
- mikysco 5y agoPresumably relative to countries that don’t share these same 2-staircase fire regulations
- petee 5y agoIm not sure if I am reading your comment right, but if you're offering a choice of less space or higher survival... I mean, think of all the wasted space and weight having 8 exit doors on a airplane; they don't crash often
- xyzzyz 5y agoMost residential detached multi story houses only have one staircase. If government forced me to give up one bedroom and build an extra staircase, so that I have a slightly higher chance of survival of a very unlikely event, I’d be fucking pissed.
- petee 5y agoI don't think we are talking about modifing existing buildings or small homes, they are talking towers and large units - a lot of places still count jumping out a residential second floor as an exit, so you'd probably be fine.
- davemp 5y agoYou can get out of 2nd and 3rd story windows relatively safely.
- dpc050505 5y agoBeing on the 7th story is very different from being on the 2nd story. If the staircase was to catch fire right now it'd be like a 6 meter jump down the window, maybe less if I manage to lower myself by hanging off the edge. I can land on my legs and I'd risk breaking an ankle or something like that at worst, not ideal but I wouldn't burn to death.
- xboxnolifes 5y agoIn that case, I advocate for single floor only buildings. At least, if higher survival rate is always paramount.
- bdowling 5y ago> think of all the wasted space and weight having 8 exit doors on a airplane If we could choose to fly on the same plane with 4 doors that would give us more legroom and get us to our destination in less time, I believe a lot of us would make that choice.
- dapids 5y agoCan you elaborate how having more legroom and less doors makes a aircraft go faster?
- bdowling 5y agoAn airplane with four doors instead of eight would weigh less so the plane may fly a little faster. Legroom shouldn't affect the speed.
- dapids 5y agoSo will an airplane with 5% less luggage or fuel. Go figure.
- kube-system 5y agoI don’t think weight affects cruise speeds a whole lot, as I understand. At least, not enough to make your flight measurably shorter. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/47369/how-is-the-cruise-speed-of-an-aircraft-chosen https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/47369/how-is-th...
- bluGill 5y agoNo, the limit of airplane speed is the speed of sound, as you get very close to that aerodynamics changes greatly. While you can make a plane go faster it is rarely done.
- bruce511 5y agoEh? More legroom? Leg room is determined by the airline, not the plane. If there were fewer doors there would me more seats, and the weight of the seat, passenger, and luggage would far outweigh the weight saving on the door. And no, you ain't getting more legroom.
- mlyle 5y ago> I mean, think of all the wasted space and weight having 8 exit doors on a airplane; they don't crash often And if we had all doors except one passenger seat, it might be even safer. We neither optimize for absolute highest survival rate nor for absolute highest convenience/efficiency. The question is-- how much does the second staircase improve survival? Is it the most economic way to get that survival difference?
- nullifidian 5y agoA giant heavy emergency ballistic reserve parachute system (currently used on smaller planes) is a much better analogy than 8 doors, which don't change the equation that much. Let's waste 20% more fuel to be able to recover from the rare all engine failure.
- ruined 5y agoyeah. it is. but only in the same way that the prohibition of tetraethyl lead merely subsidized a slightly smaller amount of brain damage for relatively few children at the significant cost of the cheapest anti-knock agent known to mankind seriously, who is pushing this weird anti-fire-code agenda and why is it in slate
- petee 5y ago"Architects and developers", the people with a financial stake in recovering floor space, and sounds like they formed a lobby. Why its in slate is confusing, especially since the article definitely has a pro stance, with little research to back it up
- pas 5y ago> research why is questioning a regulation that already lacks evidence for its efficacy requires research? it's plenty of research to point at the other parts of the world that is not in flames despite higher urban density and only one egress per unit.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- petee 5y agoThe journalist was lazy. The only 'statistics' offered is a graphic from the lobby against 2nd exits...that website's home page says: "This website is a tool to make sense of the wicked problem of the second egress in Canada and prepare a building code change." It is super biased, and the bigger issue is that it is impossible record what-if situations like how many minor US fires could have been major tragedies if they had a single stair instead of two, and firefighters could tackle a fire from two sides. Just looking at one of their sources even states that rapid smoke/fire in stairways and vertical opens is a significant portion blocked-escape deaths -- https://cjr.ufv.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Murdoch-University-Fire-and-at-Risk-Populations.pdf https://cjr.ufv.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Murdoch-Univer... Another for canada clearly says a majority of deaths are "trapped-by" -- http://nfidcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Fire-statistics-in-Canada-2005-to-2014.pdf http://nfidcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Fire-statist...
- Falkon1313 5y agoThe standard is "Safety regulations are written in blood." That's short enough and better than indirectly referring to it via a named 'law'.
- pas 5y agoThe regulations are not evidence based, they are outrage based though :/
- lrem 5y agoThese things correlate though. Sure, sometimes we get misses like child car seats, but more often than not outrage-induced regulation manages to make things better.
- pas 5y agoBut that's the point. Outrage based policy itself has a very bad efficacy. All the think of the children shit leads to almost universally bad policy. Cancer outrage? You get the California meaningless stickers. Police brutality? Racism? You get polarizing protests and no real change. Outrage is at best the first step. But it's really the sign of decades (or more) of gridlocked politics.
- afirement 5y agoA dozen extra staircases wouldn’t have done much to save people in Grenfell tower. They were instructed to stay in place, because when building regulations are followed, that’s the safest place to be. The problem with Grenfell was that building regulations had been violated, at which point, all bets about safety are off.
- dpark 5y agoI could see a layperson like me thinking “yeah, thick concrete and fire doors; you’ll never need to fully evacuate”. I would expect architects, fire marshals, city planners, and other experts to see the obvious problem with this. Or at least one of them. It’a a single building. How do you build a plan around never needing to evacuate the place? It seems straightforward and appropriate to support a full evacuation strategy. Is “stay in your flat while the building burns down around you” a common fire safety plan in the UK? Because that seems scary as hell. And also negligent.
- afirement 5y agoApartment doors, walls and floors can withstand many hours of continuous burn. The building would never be on fire, at worst you’d have one apartment or one floors public areas on fire before it’s put out. If my apartment was on fire, no alarms would sound in the building, only within my apartment, it doesn’t matter to my neighbours. There’s certainly scenarios in which you might need to evacuate, like a bomb threat, but we are speaking about internal fire, in which case there’s more danger in hundreds of people fleeing in panic down stairs (whether that’s 1 stair case or 2) than staying inside.
- dpark 5y ago> there’s more danger in hundreds of people fleeing in panic down stairs (whether that’s 1 stair case or 2) than staying inside. Is there? I’ve never seen people panic when a fire alarm goes off. Maybe if the fire alarm is going off as the building is filling with deadly smoke people would panic. But then that seems appropriate (or at least better than sitting and waiting to die of smoke inhalation). Pretty sure the Grenfell situation would have ended better by having everyone evacuate. And yes, the incompetent cladding work makes that a special case. But a huge amount of our codes are for a special case. Every so often it saves 70 lives.
- Pxtl 5y agoCan we not go above 2 storeys at least? It seems ridiculous when many detached houses are 3 storeys and sure don't have a 2nd stairwell.