Well, if the passive people can hire big gun FPE firms to stand up and say one in six sprinkler systems fail to operate in a fire event, then surely we can dangle a plastic carrot in front of a developer or two. Wouldn't it then behove the developer to follow through with "holding the authority's feet to the fire" and actually getting the real carrot? J. Scott Mitchell
--- On Mon, 1/5/09, Chris Cahill <[email protected]> wrote: From: Chris Cahill <[email protected]> Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting To: [email protected] Date: Monday, January 5, 2009, 9:36 AM Ron said "(I suspect the savings in mains, hydrants, fire stations, apparatus and firefighters is way more than a wash in fully sprinklered, planned communities than the cost of sprinklering schools)." Were these savings realized? Last I read which was a long time ago there was very little saved on the reduction in the list you provided. They never actually followed through in reducing mains and limiting stations etc. I will certainly say in the macro scale these saving are not being fully realized. Chris Cahill, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer Sentry Fire Protection, Inc. 763-658-4483 763-658-4921 fax Email: [email protected] Mail: P.O. Box 69 Waverly, MN 55390 Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW Waverly, MN 55390 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
