Ah so there is more to the story.  These were trained members of a fire
brigade.  I give you the training at best for the time was probably not
adequate enough.  The equipment was probably not adequate enough.  But both
are irrelevant.  

As you state there was a proper sprinkler so even with fire brigade
activities I agree that these people should not have died.  So there we have
one documented incident 26 years ago. 

The NFPA probably classified them as fire service getting around apparent
falsity of their statement.  Ever ask NFPA to explain the statement
considering this incident.  But even they should be counted when we talk
about sprinklers and fire death.  (As long as the fire killed them and not
the driving to the station or a heart attack directing traffic) 

Chris 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Hankins
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 10:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Boat Storage

Four people died in the fire I am referring to.  On September 7, 1982, 
an early-morning fire at a textile plant in Washington killed four 
members of the National Spinning Company fire brigade.

Joe

[email protected] wrote:
> I have heard this quoted from various sources :
>
> "The National Fire Protection Association has no record of more than two
deaths in a completely sprinkled building where the system was properly
operating. Fire sprinkler systems are very effective and may cut fire deaths
by one-half to two-thirds in properties where they are installed.
(Congressional Fire Services Institute)"
>
>
> Craig L. Prahl, CET   
> Fire Protection Specialist
> Mechanical Department
> CH2MHILL
> Lockwood Greene
> 1500 International Drive
> PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC  29304-0491
> Direct - 864.599.4102
> Fax - 864.599.8439
> [email protected]
> http://www.ch2m.com 
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Cahill
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 10:20 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Boat Storage
>
> Given a properly designed, installed and maintained sprinkler system.  
>
> Do exits matter?  How many cases do we have of a bedroom catching on fire
where the sleeping occupant wakes up from getting wet or in the recent case
didn't wake up.
>
> Do rated separations matter?  I've seen fires in the unsprinklered side go
through code complying rated walls only to be stopped by the sprinklers with
no fire damage to the sprinklered side.  How about the high rise fires that
burn until they reached a sprinklered floor.
>
> Does smoke control matter?  If there is residual smoke it's minor and well
diluted.
>
> Do fire hydrants and access roads matter?  In 10 years with an average of
16 sprinklered fires in St. Paul, MN I was only aware of the use of the FDC
4 times.  And actually 2 of those were for the standpipes in unsprinklered
buildings.  I talked to the Chief's on most of those calls about issue they
had. 
>
> Fire alarms?  I contented if it's sprinklered fire alarms should not
operate.  Fire alarms are to warning people about uncontrolled fires that
are a threat.  Uh, if the sprinklers operated is it a threat? Do you know
there is a trend in FD's only sending a Chief or one company to investigate
water flow alarms or fire alarms.  The FD's get it, the number of alarms
where that is the only indication of a problem that result in fire is about
0 (not 0 but real close).  In 18 years of riding big red trucks I never went
to a fire that was only reported by an alarm.  These FD's send a full
assignment if they get a phone call that follows up on the alarm. 
>
> Basically where is the body count?  I've been on this forum for a very
long time I don't recall any discussion ever about a fire death in a
sprinklered building.  I've always asked national figures in conversation
about actual fire deaths in sprinklered buildings that they have been a part
of.  So far none is the answer.  Back in '99-'00 when I saw shepparding
through the IFC requirement for all buildings with an R be sprinkler I asked
the committee about their knowledge of fire deaths and sprinklers.  Either
they had none
> or thought I was being rhetorical.   Where is the cost benefit of further
> mitigated losses with the other stuff after sprinklers?     
>
> So one might argue about the balanced design crap and the possibility of
sprinkler failure.  If it's properly designed, installed and maintained has
there ever been a failure?  Maybe but rare.  We also know really bad
sprinkler jobs still put out a lot of fire.  We tried all the other fire
protection schemes with in my opinion limited success.  Talking about the
code from Hammurabi to the early 1980's.  So if the proper or incorrect
sprinklers fail we are back to the designs of the yesteryear and we know the
outcome.  We have the choice to put money into the backup plans which will
fail or money into the sprinkler to make sure they don't.  This is a
cultural shift that is occurring since the late 1980's.  And just like our
vested interests pushing on direction the lobbies for the other interests
are arguing the opposite slowing the proper transformation.
>
> So I wasn't bashing FPE's.  I also wasn't suggesting how one gets a proper
system - that may or may not involve an FPE.  I was summarizing all the
other FPE type stuff as marginal effect after proper sprinklers.  
>
> I know there are exceptions to every thing I said.  For every exception
anyone can come up with 1000's of examples exist of the normal.  Perhaps
someone has knowledge of a fire death in a properly sprinklered building.  I
think Joe Hankins once spoke of 4 deaths but I recall something wasn't
right.  From a minimum public policy point of view I don't see the point in
planning for the exception when they are very, very, very rare. 
>
> Or perhaps it's just my memory?       
>
> 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
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd
Williams
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 5:08 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Boat Storage
>
>
>   
>>   And hey if it's properly sprinklered (to an
>> extent) fire protection engineering is a marginal concern.
>>     
>
> Curious comment. Care to expand on that?
>
>
> Todd G. Williams, PE
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
> Stonington, Connecticut
> www.fpdc.com
> 860.535.2080
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>
>   

_______________________________________________
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)

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to