To just leave, despite what emergency services say!

[beckysamantha91]

Long time lurker, first time poster, however - I'm watching a documentary on Grenfell, everyone who got told to stay to basically died and everyone who ignored it and left survived. It was exactly the same for the 2nd tower in 9/11 - they were all told to stay and those who did ended up dying.

Is it just me who thinks if I am ever in a dangerous situation and told to stay, I'm better off taking my family and running?

I also understand that the emergency service s are doing the best they can, but I still think in those situations where communication (and knowledge) is limited but critical, you're better off taking your chances?

I was at a Catholic prep school in the 60s, so there were lots of bombs scares. Like you, AltheaorDonna, my parents said if we were in a situation like that away from school then we should concentrate on just getting away. At school it was file out sensibly and line up in the playground. Years later, I was in Knightsbridge when the Harrods bomb went off, luckily not too close, it was vvv frightening, and yes, my friend and I ran away, no actual thought involved, just an instinct to get as far away as possible (and to be as small as possible!).

I think this is a worthwhile read for the OP

www.independent.co.uk/voices/grenfell-tower-fire-one-year-one-kensington-a8397276.html

One piece of advice I was once told and has stuck with me, is in an emergency where you are evacuating a building or space, always leave via your nearest emergency exit. There are multiple exits to ensure everyone can get to their nearest one and leave building quickly. However, people can quite often instinctively wish to exit by way they entered the building. This leads to congestion and loses valuable time in a fire situation. Multiple fire exits removes this risk. There has been instances where people have died from trying to exit via the entrance rather than nearest exit. For instance fires in bars and nightclubs. Anyway, always stuck with me and thought I would share it.

I also noted that about the people who just left the tower 2 despite what they were told.

I have told my children that if there is any kind of scuffle/violence going on, just walk away as fast as they can - no looking, no seeing what is going on.

Ditto with fire alarms/any alarms. I have said drop everything and get out by your nearest exit - you can always go back and look foolish later. There were people who were half way out of the world trade center who went back up. people who went back for personal effects. I try to tell them to just get out.

I remember in another country my parents were told to stay put after there was going to be flooding by authorities. My dad said f that and drove away. I think sometomes risking it's best. But who knows.

I was speaking to my mum about this recently that in an emergency you don't know how you will react but don't follow, think on your own.

Racontuer

That's really interesting. I can see why that would happen.

I'd wait and see what Emergency Services say. It's very situation dependent.

Let's say there's a fire. Usually we would say to get the heck out. But what if you can't? I teach at a college and we have some students in wheelchairs. I'm also a nurse and have worked in nursing homes. In the case of the college we tell students to wait in the stairwell. Due to our building designs the stairwells are usually quite safe and fire-resistant. Fire fighters would be advised to check for people in the stairwell. In the case of the hospital we have fire doors. The usual practice is to get people behind the fire doors so there's at least one set of doors between them and the fire.

In the case of a natural disaster (e.g. earthquake, severe storm) you're actually often safer to stay inside. The rationale is that if you go out you could be hit with flying debris or even swept away. Usually in my area we tell school kids to get under desks and people in their homes to go in the basement and away from windows.

In the case of an active shooter situation we tell students to get out, hide, or fight. If you can, try to get out; if it's not safe to do so, you should hide (barricade the door, keep away from windows, turn off your mobile, turn off the lights, and stay quiet). If the shooter enters the room, fight with anything you have on hand.

So it's very situation dependent.

Thursdaydreaming

A friend got stuck in the bush in Australia. Had to walk miles without much water. They only had a bottle. They chose to walk and was the right decision but were picked up by rescue trucks. Scary thing is they only do a weekly tour of the area. The trucks went out on same day as friends were stranded. It was supposed to be the previous day only they had a staff meeting. Apparently salt just was all over their skin. Gives me the heeby jeebys.

I would think that a serious fire in a high rise, would create a situation,where some people would stay, and some would try and flee the fire, despite what they might have been advised to do.You cannot really know for certain ,in a panic situation,what all the people would do.

The most important thing to remember though is that most domestic fires don't happen in high rises. They happen in low rise single family occupancy buildings.

Have you got an evacuation plan for your house? Does everyone know what to do? What if the stairs are blocked? Can you unlock doors and windows quickly? What would you use to smash a window? When did you last check your smoke alarm? Have you ever done a drill, to see if your kids would wake up and follow the plan?

The advice is, if you can get out safely, do so. If not, ie you open your door and the stairs are blocked or smoke logged, we would say go back in seal doors, open windows. Tell us where you are in the building and we will come to you. Grenfell was exceptional and certainly I think some errors were made, not necessarily by operational crews, but by those higher up, on the fire ground and in control.

Actually, only two options, but four scenarios.

I've already considered this and decided I would leave, if it weren't too chaotic to do so.

But like Jellie said - it's 50/50...
Would need to assess a bit more, in the actual situation.

Yes, one of the reasons they tell you to stay, is to not get in the way of first responders, to not hinder their efforts. But... depends on the actual moment, I suppose.
I hope I never have to find out.

Tenants still arent being listened to. Ive put loads of links about what is happening in different parts of the country on the Grenfell thread on the News board.

The Barne Barton fire.

www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/barne-barton-fire-flats-investigation-2006900

Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Thu 20-Sep-18 20:18:55

www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/barne-barton-flats-fire-latest-2022844

twitter.com/CassieMonroe19/status/1039193689275420677
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Thu 20-Sep-18 20:20:34

Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Thu 20-Sep-18 20:24:39

www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2018-09-12/homeless-families-in-limbo-after-plymouth-tower-block-fire/
Add message | Report | Message poster
HelenaDove Thu 20-Sep-18 20:28:46

twitter.com/CassieMonroe19/status/1039193689275420677

twitter.com/CassieMonroe19/status/1039193689275420677

I think I agree with you. I would chance it too but mainly because of the terror and pure adrenaline to 'do' rather than to 'wait'. That said, there is a tendency to 'follow' orders of those whom are in charge in emergency situations but as other posters have pointed out - in a fire/emergency drill at work everything goes smoothly but should I ever find myself in the heat of the moment then I'd be breaking windows and running as fast as I could through doors. Am reminded of a young woman who died in a fire because she tried to gather as many of her belongings as she could but the time it took made her exit impossible.

Towers blocks are compartmentalised and stay put is your evacuation plan. Surely your evaluation plan is what you’d follow, no matter what it is?

A tower block really is a different kettle of fish. Even if you can see your escape route you don’t know how clear it is anothe rfloor down, or 10 floors down. And by then you’ve lost your compartmentalised friend protection, AND the fact that the whole point is “stay put” means the fire brigade immediately start rescuing residents from Inside their flats.

No it didn’t work at grendell, because the flats weren’t compartmentalised. It should’ve been abandoned earlier. But stay put has been a standard policy since blocks were built. It usually works.

Graphista stay out advice isn’t about stampeding or the risk of crushing on the stair wells. It’s because the flats are compartmentalised so under normal circumstances you are far safer in them than out of them.

I wouldn't stay. I was working in a 33storey office block 10yrs ago: fire was reported & we were told stay put. After 5mins, I was in my bosses office & 12ft high flames shot past the window from floor beneath. He took one look & said 'time to leave'. He also called across to teams by us whose bosses were out that day. We all left then & there, no one panicked. Luckily it was contained quickly & no one hurt. It impressed me that it took maybe 10mins max for a calm mass evacuation: no one else stayed put either, they'd all seen flames too.

The senior Grenfell fire officer on the stand a few days ago also said he believes 'stay put' needs to change. That says it all really.

You should always rely on yourself, know your location and be prepared to get out. I would always plan my own escape.

Glintandglide it's one of the reasons yes

"Elfyn Edwards, a fire safety expert and former firefighter, says the stay put policy is designed to stop residents in flats unaffected by fire from unnecessarily evacuating the building and blocking the stairways."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40273715

"The firefighter hit back with a valid point: "And what if everyone else in the building is thinking the same thing, someone trips, the stairs get congested, you all get stuck...""

There are many reasons why the Grenfell fire was as tragic as it was, the fire service following what was then the accepted wisdom in such an event is the least of it!

My understanding is (and I'm no expert) that the contributing factors were mainly the cladding and poor general construction.

I also wonder why in a supposedly developed country we still have residential buildings without sprinkler systems, external fire escapes (at least on the lower floors), without properly constructed exterior walls designer to limit the spread of fire... And it is NOT because we don't have the money!

I live in Dubai where there have been a few tower block fires which have made headlines, but the advice here is always to evacuate the whole tower. This can sometimes take a good 30 minutes due to the heights of the towers, but everyone knows the procedures and makes their way outside. Office blocks have full evacuation practices once a year, and building management have details of which floors have anyone working in them who who need special assistance etc.

It makes sense for everyone to practice and be used to being able to evacuate the tower in 30 minutes and then the path is clear for emergency services to get in.

In Dubai tower blocks are new. Grenfell was built in the 60s. It’s always been accepted that these blocks wouldn’t be built today.

It’s ok for a firefighter to muse on the consequences of mass evacuation but that is not why stay put policies are in place- and it is the building owners, not the fire services, responsibility to set their fire policy. It has come out in the grenfell enquiry that the local fire service hadn’t visited or reviewed the building for many years.

Exterior walls in towers (concrete) are designed to contain fire. The problem at grenfell was the cladding on top of the wall. The reason we don’t have sprinklers is: whilst “we” do have the money, in a tower the residents themselves would have to pay for them, and in places they do exist they have often been incredibly unpopular because when they do go off by accident they destroy the homeowners belongings. I’ve worked on buildings were residents will refuse to pay for fire alarms in the communal areas, let alone anything more advanced.

I don’t think residents should have to pay I think the freeholder should pay.

That’s generally what’s happening now post grenfell in similarly clad buildings but legally and usually the resident pays. Obviously if they are renting it comes out of their rental payment.

I think I’m a real emergency people just lose their minds though. I worked in a shop and got my ass handed to me by a customer after a fire drill because it was so dangerous evacuating and she had to ask customers to help her carry her buggy down the stairs and it was all ridiculous and dangerous. She started roaring at me for putting everyone on the stairs at risk of her buggy. I was like take your child and go? Leave the buggy? The alarm was going off and the building could have been on fire?

*not a fire drill- an evacuation, it wasn’t planned, at the time no one had a clue why the alarm went off