Hello Cliff, Well for $30,000 per unit I will send a crew from the east coast... I think I could make money even with having to get all the licensing and beauratic B.S.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007, 2:55:23 PM, you wrote: > Scot, > I agree with most of your post but the issue that we are discussing isn't > from decades ago but from a TV interview with a professional from an > engineering firm a few days ago regarding the necessity (or lack thereof) > for sprinklering existing hi-rise buildings in downtown San Diego. If you > go back to the original post and listen to the interview, the FPE states > that sprinklers would not really benefit in this situation. (I'm > paraphrasing from memory, which we all know isn't the best thing to do!) I > believe that most of the folks in the sprinkler industry would agree that he > is incorrect in his opinion and it is very detrimental to the sprinkler > industry to have "professionals" make statements like that. Sprinklers do > save lives and shouldn't cost "$30,000.00 per unit" even in a retrofit > situation, even on the West Coast. > We all know that sprinklers work and in the case of a fire in a high rise, > will save many lives. > Cliff > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of å... .... > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 12:44 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Schirmer Engineering > That fire was quite a while ago, > but the people too, have long since been gone as well. > Everyone makes risky, calculated, sometimes even > dubious professional design decisions. I have seen > authors in this thread make plenty of their share. > These days there is a techno-babble name for it: > "Risk Analysis". > If you make a bad decision, you should pay or > be punished for it, regardless of whether you > are a PE -- for penis envy > or a PE -- for prostitute extraordinare (french spelling omitted) > or a PE -- for professional engineer. > The anamoly with fire protection is, the odds of incendiary > damage are so small that many of these dubious decisions will > never see their trial-by-fire. The risk-based design decisions > remain hidden and unnoticed to all but the professionals. And > by professionals, I mean EVERY person involved in bringing > a life-safety sprinkler system to commission and keeping it there. > Sure there is more responsibility given to the PE, but she can not > guarantee that the fitter responsibly wiped away excess cutting > oil, or tightened down all the flange bolts. It is a team effort. > Slander does not make the issue of > personal and corporate accounability go away, > and it reduces the caliber of discussion from > ideas to people. > Everyone (designer, contractor, inspector ) has to > step up to the plate and do their individual time > at bat with their own integrity regarding the sprinkler > system. Rather than libelling an entire league of > players for a couple of individuals' very bad > judgment more than a decade ago, why don´t > we stick to discussing the ideas and decisions > involved in that incident, and cast stones as we > should, at only those individuals whom signed > and reviewed the report? This name calling and > finger pointing sounds like a discreditation gambit > and grab for market share, to a distant observer. > One thing positive I sense coming from this thread > is a need for more peer review on "performance-based" > design. Needed it for quite some time. > scot deal > excelsior fire > (pe: phonically educated :- ) > As we all know, PE can also stand for Prostitute Extraordinaire. > On 5/15/07, wrote: >> Might be a good time for anyone from Schirmer Engineering to speak >> up....... >> >> PROTECTION DESIGN & CONSULTING >> Ph: 858-751-2930 >> Fax: 858-751-2933 >> Cell: 619-871-8450 >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 10:08 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: Slow news day >> >> Hi Xxx >> >> I didn't mention RJA because the San Diego matter only involved Schirmer, >> at least to the best of my knowledge. >> >> But thanks for the additional info. Would you happen to have a copy of >> FM's research ?. >> > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) -- Best regards, Charles mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
