george Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arandora Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qualtrough Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Yawn, and I'll bet Don Muang had state-of-the-art fire systems too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjallittle Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxexile Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 not much , but a lot of smoke in there would soon fill the whole building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsetBkk Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 So before everyone panics, how much of the interior of the airport is actually flamable? Just the walls, carpet and ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Smoke is what normally kills most people in a fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkandrew Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yankeechief Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturbuc Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) 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, 2007 by Sturbuc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faranggl Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryHacker Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TukTukDriver Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robenroute Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robenroute Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) 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, 2007 by cdnvic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuchok Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Steel burns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crossy Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepe' Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I'm sure it's no problem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikster Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grover Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Steel burns. steel melts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robenroute Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuchok Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) Steel burns. steel melts steel burns. Try touching white hot steel.... Edited February 21, 2007 by chuchok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robenroute Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 (edited) Steel burns. steel melts steel burns. Try touching white hot steel.... even red hot would suffice.... Edited February 21, 2007 by robenroute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now