Wow, the graphics and photos that accompany the NY Times story are spectacular and really help explain the sad story. Thank you so much, Tom_MN.
Thanks Tim that times article is especially interesting and helpful !
Excellent info!
Heartbreaking how human error made it impossible to nip this when it might have been halted -- such a well known risk and then so carelessly managed. The firefighters are real heroes; so glad none of them died. Without their courage the Cathedral would have been lost.
I have the suspicion that it was the French penchant for smoking that was the culprit, and that one of the workers on the spire rehab threw a lit butt.
Fascinating read.
During and immediately after the fire, I found myself wondering how the structure didn't have a sophisticated fire detection system (such an important, historical structure with so much wood inside). Didn't realize it actually did have such a system - it just wasn't used properly.
Great read, thank you, Tom. Complacency strikes again! Technology is indeed moving faster than the average person can absorb it. The designers of the fire system had to have felt they'd done their work well-unfortunately it relied on lay persons to implement action. A very sad story and I feel terrible for the people involved, in particular the new employee.
It is surprising there wasn't some sort of foam or sprinkler system installed in what was basically a campfire set to be lit. Even with a timely response they might not have nipped it -- and everyone knew it was a tinderbox.
And during construction I am surprised there were not people stationed in the attic 24/7 -- fires during construction happen frequently on this old buildings. And yeah -- there were people smoking up there, certainly possible it was the trigger, although with such kindling, any source of ignition would have done it.
The NYT article is one of the best explanations of the fire and the reasons why it wasn't caught sooner, and how close the cathedral came to being lost (the day of the fire everyone seemed to think is was lost, I kept trying to explain to people it was not).
As someone who works in architectural conservation, the system devised for the attic was idiotic. Any fire prevention expert can tell you that smoke/fire detection does very little if there isn't fire protection included. By the time the fire department arrives and is in position to fight the fire, the building is likely lost. Especially in a roof fire. That this roof was made of timbers hundreds of years old, hundreds of feet in the air and only accessed by narrow winding stairs...
So while people will focus on the mistaken location initially, which lost 30 minutes, the fire would likely still have been devastating even if the system had worked smoothly. It is possible the extra 30 minutes would have saved some of the roof attic, but very possible it would not. But they did cut it VERY close on saving the north tower, which would have been catastrophic if it had burned through.
Also on exhibit in the article, the skill and bravery of the firefighters. THEY were heroes that night.
