Huge fire at apartment building on Sathorn, Bangkok, one confirmed dead

[huangnon]

Apparently the fire was started by people burning candles or whatever on the 3rd floor to celebrate Chinese New Year..

Well, it is the 'year of the Monkey' so a bit of a fait accompli then.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Typical of how things go here, the BKK Post has a crappy report on the fire, filed online early today, that fails to make any mention at all of fire sprinklers, whether the building had any or did not.

Instead, their report said the BMA approved construction of the building in 2006 and quotes a City Clerk as saying the building was "legal," though we have no idea what exactly that's supposed to mean.

You'd think, in a high rise fire that basically burns out of control and people are killed, one of the immediate questions that any journalist should be asking is "did the building have fire sprinklers" and reporting whatever info or responses are available on that. But, this is Bangkok and Thailand, so apparently here, that common sense doesn't apply.

The same report also mentions a police helicopter supported firefighters by helping people in the building -- which seems contrary to other media reports yesterday that the police helicopter was unable to rescue residents who had escaped to the roof because of the heavy smoke. Of course, "helping people in the building" is a kind of vague reference that doesn't say or not say the helicopter actually rescued anyone.

The same Post report also noted there were conflicting reports on the status of the building's fire exits, with some saying it only has exits on the first and second floors.

Ahh...but curiously, The Nation's report does answer that important question, and well as providing some other details:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Desperate-scene-as-elderly-woman-dies-in-highrise--30278664.html

Saranuchit Ngarmwilai, who was among the first batch of firemen to reach the scene, said the building apparently did not have a sprinkler system or any other fire-prevention system.

The Nation report also focuses on one of the other important details of the fire, noting that:

A 65-YEAR-OLD woman begged for help for nearly 20 minutes on the small balcony of her fire-engulfed high-rise home in the heart of Bangkok yesterday morning but could not be saved
................

When Angkana appeared on the balcony on the sixth floor, her relatives loudly cried for help. Firefighters, however, had difficulty containing the blaze due to its height.
.................

By the time a fire truck with a rescue basket reached the scene it was too late to save Angkana.

It sounds like the fatality was the mother of the building's owner, said to be a former senator from Rayong.

Edited February 6, 2016 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Fookhaht]

Well, there goes

my theory that concrete buildings don't burn.

Used to feel safe in my masonry house.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Fookhaht

[EyesWideOpen]

Typical of how things go here, the BKK Post has a crappy report on the fire, filed online early today, that fails to make any mention at all of fire sprinklers, whether the building had any or did not.

Instead, their report said the BMA approved construction of the building in 2006 and quotes a City Clerk as saying the building was "legal," though we have no idea what exactly that's supposed to mean.

You'd think, in a high rise fire that basically burns out of control and people are killed, one of the immediate questions that any journalist should be asking is "did the building have fire sprinklers" and reporting whatever info or responses are available on that. But, this is Bangkok and Thailand, so apparently here, that common sense doesn't apply.

The same report also mentions a police helicopter supported firefighters by helping people in the building -- which seems contrary to other media reports yesterday that the police helicopter was unable to rescue residents who had escaped to the roof because of the heavy smoke. Of course, "helping people in the building" is a kind of vague reference that doesn't say or not say the helicopter actually rescued anyone.

The same Post report also noted there were conflicting reports on the status of the building's fire exits, with some saying it only has exits on the first and second floors.

Ahh...but curiously, The Nation's report does answer that important question, and well as providing some other details:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Desperate-scene-as-elderly-woman-dies-in-highrise--30278664.html

Saranuchit Ngarmwilai, who was among the first batch of firemen to reach the scene, said the building apparently did not have a sprinkler system or any other fire-prevention system.

The Nation report also focuses on one of the other important details of the fire, noting that:

A 65-YEAR-OLD woman begged for help for nearly 20 minutes on the small balcony of her fire-engulfed high-rise home in the heart of Bangkok yesterday morning but could not be saved

.

...............

When Angkana appeared on the balcony on the sixth floor, her relatives loudly cried for help. Firefighters, however, had difficulty containing the blaze due to its height.

.................

By the time a fire truck with a rescue basket reached the scene it was too late to save Angkana.

It sounds like the fatality was the mother of the building's owner, said to be a former senator from Rayong.

Quote:

"Saranuchit Ngarmwilai, who was among the first batch of firemen to reach the scene, said the building apparently did not have a sprinkler system or any other fire-prevention system."

So looks like GeriatricKid nailed the no sprinkler system. So instead of

being a Thai basher as one poster stated, he now appears to be astute

in the ways of Thailand......

[MockingJay]

And of course the building collapsed freefall less than an hour afterwards, because the steel structure was being weakened...

[seedy]

off topic post removed

[Thongkorn]

Puts a lot of confidence in People staying in high rise Hotels and living apartments,

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.

[petedk]

And of course the building collapsed freefall less than an hour afterwards, because the steel structure was being weakened...

Where did you get that information from?

If you read the Bangkok Post today, the building was declared safe.

When this building was built, some 30 years ago, the laws about height were very relaxed and the building was quite legal.

As far as I know the building was built to standards at that time. No one thought about fire engines not being able to enter the small sois.

The laws have slowly been changed and nowadays if the road is less than 10 metres wide, the building can be about 6 - 8 stories high.

Edited February 9, 2016 by petedk

[petedk]

Typical of how things go here, the BKK Post has a crappy report on the fire, filed online early today, that fails to make any mention at all of fire sprinklers, whether the building had any or did not.

Instead, their report said the BMA approved construction of the building in 2006 and quotes a City Clerk as saying the building was "legal," though we have no idea what exactly that's supposed to mean.

You'd think, in a high rise fire that basically burns out of control and people are killed, one of the immediate questions that any journalist should be asking is "did the building have fire sprinklers" and reporting whatever info or responses are available on that. But, this is Bangkok and Thailand, so apparently here, that common sense doesn't apply.

The same report also mentions a police helicopter supported firefighters by helping people in the building -- which seems contrary to other media reports yesterday that the police helicopter was unable to rescue residents who had escaped to the roof because of the heavy smoke. Of course, "helping people in the building" is a kind of vague reference that doesn't say or not say the helicopter actually rescued anyone.

The same Post report also noted there were conflicting reports on the status of the building's fire exits, with some saying it only has exits on the first and second floors.

Ahh...but curiously, The Nation's report does answer that important question, and well as providing some other details:

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Desperate-scene-as-elderly-woman-dies-in-highrise--30278664.html

Saranuchit Ngarmwilai, who was among the first batch of firemen to reach the scene, said the building apparently did not have a sprinkler system or any other fire-prevention system.

The Nation report also focuses on one of the other important details of the fire, noting that:

A 65-YEAR-OLD woman begged for help for nearly 20 minutes on the small balcony of her fire-engulfed high-rise home in the heart of Bangkok yesterday morning but could not be saved

.

...............

When Angkana appeared on the balcony on the sixth floor, her relatives loudly cried for help. Firefighters, however, had difficulty containing the blaze due to its height.

.................

By the time a fire truck with a rescue basket reached the scene it was too late to save Angkana.

It sounds like the fatality was the mother of the building's owner, said to be a former senator from Rayong.

Quote:

"Saranuchit Ngarmwilai, who was among the first batch of firemen to reach the scene, said the building apparently did not have a sprinkler system or any other fire-prevention system."

So looks like GeriatricKid nailed the no sprinkler system. So instead of

being a Thai basher as one poster stated, he now appears to be astute

in the ways of Thailand......

How many buildings have sprinkler systems?

As I said in an earlier post, we are in the process of building a block of family condos ( 6 stories high).

One of the points raised was whether we should have sprinklers or not. Personally, I said No.

I have worked in an office where the sprinklers have gone off 2 or 3 times without reason and caused a lot of damage.

I said we should have smoke detectors and a very good fire escape. Hopefully, we will never need to use them, but I think that should be adequate.

I think in this case that if they had had a good fire escape then maybe a life could have been saved despite having no sprinklers.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

AFAIK, in Bangkok at least, sprinklers are now required in all new-built high-rise/taller buildings, as a result of a law/code change some years back. In Bangkok, I don't think high-rise developers have any option on that these days.

But what the BMA did not do, when they changed the law, presumably after yet another past high-rise fire, was require all older buildings to be retrofitted, unless and until (as best as I can recall) there would be any future major modifications done to the building.

I'm just guessing on this, but... the way city government and building codes are handled here, there probably hasn't been much of a push by the code authorities to require sprinkler retrofits in older buildings, even when they do have major modifications. The owners probably don't want to spend the money, and the city authorities probably manage (or can be persuaded) to look the other way.

Edited February 9, 2016 by TallGuyJohninBKK