SUVARNABHUMI CRISIS

Airport passenger terminal is a firetrap: designer

People could die in an evacuation because of blocked exits: Wanchai

BANGKOK: -- Suvarnabhumi Airport passenger terminal has been rendered a firetrap by construction changes and operational mismanagement, one of its designers warned yesterday.

"In a case of fire, there could be evacuation problems and people could die," he asserted.

ACT Consultants managing director Wanchai Wimuktayon is worried emergency exits are blocked and many can only be opened with security key cards.

He demanded Airports of Thailand (AOT) address his concerns immediately.

It must train staff for emergency evacuations, too.

Wanchai said some fire exits were used for worker access and needed cards for passage.

"From our survey, several fire exits in the passenger terminal are blocked by retail stock, baggage trolleys or cleaning carts. Some exits are locked."

He said airport security personnel did not know how to conduct emergency evacuations.

A state-appointed committee inspecting Suvarnabhumi problems has cited 61 faults and accused the Murphy Jahn/TAMS/ACT design consortium of being responsible for terminal defects.

Wanchai admitted fewer-than-required fire exits and toilets were flaws.

But, he said, the six administrations that ordered changes along the drawn-out design-and-construction phase should take responsibility, too.

The design took 12 years to complete because 24 changes were ordered. Each of those was redesigned, too, he said.

The overall structure remains true to the original design in order to meet Japan Bank for International Cooperation lending criteria. But many details have been changed.

There were too few toilets because space originally earmarked for toilets was taken over by "other things".

"I have to admit, too, there are violations of the Building Control Act due to problems with fire exits and a shortage of toilets. When the design was drawn, the government told us there would be a ministerial regulation to accommodate the changes," Wanchai said.

"However, that government went out of power and subsequent administrations did not make the amendments.

"It is the AOT which has to

correct them to comply with the law."

Aside from passenger terminal problems, Suvarnabhumi suffers from cracks on its landing area.

Deputy Transport Minister Sansern Wongcha-um yesterday assigned AOT director Tortrakul Yomnak to head another airport committee.

Tortrakul investigated damage to runways.

His new committee will recruit local and international engineers to re-evaluate and solve problems.

Parts of the airport landing field have been closed to accommodate repair work and some flights will have to be diverted to Bangkok International Airport at Don Muang. It reopens on March 21.

AOT next week finalises terms of reference for private companies to bid for Don Muang concessions, including transport, communications and information systems.

-- The Nation 2007-02-21

Classic case of back protection and passing the buck. If it was so worrying to him as a designer why wait until now to highlight it? If he is so publi-spirited why didn't he kick up a fuss before the airport, his airport opened? "I only did what I was told!" Sound familiar?

Yawn, and I'll bet Don Muang had state-of-the-art fire systems too.

The headlines in the paper are getting somewhat troll-ish. I'd like to see some actual investigative journalism than the uninformed pronouncements of rival politicians and executives.

Classic case of back protection and passing the buck. If it was so worrying to him as a designer why wait until now to highlight it? If he is so publi-spirited why didn't he kick up a fuss before the airport, his airport opened? "I only did what I was told!" Sound familiar?

If you go back and read the article again, you'll see that his complaints are not so much about the design as they are about fire exits being blocked or improperly used, nearly all of his concerns come about because of the present way in which the airport is being administered and not the way it was built.

He's neither protecting his back nor passing the buck, he's pointing out that there's poor training and a series of other incompetencies. And he's probably right.

Typically a government thing. You approve a design (12 years ago) , you make changes, this government had all the time ton postpone the opening of the airport, they did not do so. They went along with the design (It is a well known Japanese agency, so there is not much reason to doubt them) than you use the toilet space for smoking rooms, and retail space. You lock the exits (bet they will blame the former government for the locked doors today) and than in the end, you create a panel. The panel contains only ass kissers of the goveernment which will always come with a guilty party, and you guess right. That is ALWAYS a foreign party...

So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable?

not much , but a lot of smoke in there would soon fill the whole building.

So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable?

Just the walls, carpet and ceiling.

Smoke is what normally kills most people in a fire.

So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable?

Just the walls, carpet and ceiling.

Ceiling is glass - no..

Carpet - none that I have seen (yet - been there 15-odd times)

Walls - bare concrete, again, inflammable...

Of course, there is all the booze and perfume in the numerous King Power stores...

Anyone knows smoke can kill you, but the cubic volume of air in there means it would need to be something big to fill it with smoke. A kitchen fire or an electrical panel wouldn't hardly make a dent in that volume.

What airport in the world is carpeted?

Just the CYA that they are renowned for so when somebody takes the fall, which will never happen. They will know which way to point fingers.

Classic case of back protection and passing the buck. If it was so worrying to him as a designer why wait until now to highlight it? If he is so publi-spirited why didn't he kick up a fuss before the airport, his airport opened? "I only did what I was told!" Sound familiar?

Well, to me it sound like another case of "keepng the face" - after anouncing that Don Muang might not be reopened this could be another hint to prepare a different decision. And: differences in construction might have been seen before, such in operations not. Think....

Edited February 21, 200719 yr by Sturbuc

It seems the mechanism is already in place to simply change whatever laws and codes are being offended by the airport to bring it into compliance. Coin operated turnstile type fire exits instead of card locks would make possible an occaisional revenue squirt also. Keeping a currency exchange booth close by would assure smooth and orderly exits in the event of an emergecy.

Again, we are going to have people passing stupid comments who know fcukall and have never even used the airport thus far.

.... give me a break.

Anyone knows smoke can kill you, but the cubic volume of air in there means it would need to be something big to fill it with smoke. A kitchen fire or an electrical panel wouldn't hardly make a dent in that volume.

What airport in the world is carpeted?

Phuket has carpet. The stains always made me think it wasn't such a good idea.

So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable?

Just the walls, carpet and ceiling.

Ceiling is glass - no..

Carpet - none that I have seen (yet - been there 15-odd times)

Walls - bare concrete, again, inflammable...

Of course, there is all the booze and perfume in the numerous King Power stores...

Mate of mine (civil engineer) once told me that concrete burns rather well! It needs a bit of a fire to get started, but it does burn....

Mate of mine (civil engineer) once told me that concrete burns rather well! It needs a bit of a fire to get started, but it does burn....

Um... no

Mate of mine (civil engineer) once told me that concrete burns rather well! It needs a bit of a fire to get started, but it does burn....

Um... no

Just got confirmation from the same person. However, he reckons it would take a blazing kerosine fire to get it lit....

I guess it's reasonably safe to rule that out (unless some halfwit pilot decides to crash land his plane into the terminal).

Look at phots of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Concrete will blow apart, but it will not burn. Pour fuel on it and the fuel will burn and when it is used up the concrete will remain.

Concrete doesn't burn. End of story.

Is this the engineer that designed the runways? Maybe he neglected to install proper drainage for fire safety reasons.

Edited February 21, 200719 yr by cdnvic

Steel burns.

Anyone knows smoke can kill you, but the cubic volume of air in there means it would need to be something big to fill it with smoke. A kitchen fire or an electrical panel wouldn't hardly make a dent in that volume.

What airport in the world is carpeted?

Phuket has carpet. The stains always made me think it wasn't such a good idea.

Hong Kong has a lot of carpet but only in the 'executive' areas.

The retail outlets in BKK seem to be somewhat temporary structures, most likely on a timber frame. Timber as we all know burns quite well. Add to that the observation that these structures are in front of the fire exits and we could have an issue.

I'm sure it's no problem...

Look at phots of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Concrete will blow apart, but it will not burn. Pour fuel on it and the fuel will burn and when it is used up the concrete will remain.

Concrete doesn't burn. End of story.

Is this the engineer that designed the runways? Maybe he neglected to install proper drainage for fire safety reasons.

Concrete isn't flammable but can be damaged by fire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete#Fire

But if the concrete is wet and the temperature is high enough - eg gasoline fires - it can explode!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireproofing#...el_fireproofing

Steel burns.

steel melts

Look at phots of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Concrete will blow apart, but it will not burn. Pour fuel on it and the fuel will burn and when it is used up the concrete will remain.

Concrete doesn't burn. End of story.

Is this the engineer that designed the runways? Maybe he neglected to install proper drainage for fire safety reasons.

I've just been googling about and haven't found any burnt concrete cases; it certainly looks like the end of that story. Perhaps this chap, the one who told me, ought to get his college money back

Steel burns.

steel melts

steel burns. Try touching white hot steel....

Edited February 21, 200719 yr by chuchok

This is all pretty academic as the melting point (not even at the fire stage yet) of aluminum is 1225 F, at which time emergency exits become rather useless.

Steel burns.

steel melts

steel burns. Try touching white hot steel....

even red hot would suffice....

Edited February 21, 200719 yr by robenroute