I don't know if any of you have seen the film, The Towering Inferno, because its an oldie (60's/70's), but I would defiantly recommend it. I'd seen it several times before, but rented it Thursday night when I again found myself less than excited about what Hollywood has available these days. Anyway, for those who haven't seen it, I'll fill you in on what applies to my UrbanOhio topic.

 

An urban renewal project has produced a 135 story tower in San Francisco. The film takes place the day of its dedication in which a party on the top floor will host many dignitaries and government officials. Before the party, the tower had an electrical equipment problem, sparking a fire that was undiscovered for quite a while. The buildings' architect checked out the situation and concluded the electrical contractor had not followed specs completely and feared problems with all the buildings' systems as the sprinklers and ventilation fans do not work properly. After the party begins, the fire gets out of hand and because of the high-profile guests, the builder does not want to evacuate until mandated by the fire chief, therefore wasting time. As the fire moves from the 81st floor toward the top of the tower, the elevators and stairs become engulfed and unusable, trapping the party quests. Of course there is a bunch of other filler and action, but by exploding large water tanks on the top of the building, the fire is put down and less than 200 lives are lost.

 

Possibly a political statement, the movie brings to attention that the tower was only up to a code that was inadequate for a building of that size. I would assume that modern/real codes would call for numerous systems and preventions for fire.

 

Anyway, one of the first statements by the fire chief criticized the architect as they (architects) know that a fire cannot be fought over the 7th floor, but they (architects) continue to build them higher. Following the fire, he says that thousands will continue to die in towers until architects start asking firemen how to "build 'em." 

 

This movie really started me thinking, due to the understandable difficulty in fighting and rescuing people from a high-rise fire, and in times of terrorism, should we really be building skyscrapers? Is it really worth it? Are we buying our time to the next Triangle Shirtwaste fire? Or do we actually have codes and mandates that are sufficient?

 

Logging on to post my thoughts, I notice Louisville has concern for its new high-rise of fire-fighting, but mainly because of moving stations out of downtown.

 

Anyway, I hope this becomes a hot (no pun intended) discussion, because I'd love to hear my fears are misdirected.

I believe there was a book originally written about this.  I discovered it during my freshman year in high school (fall 2001).  The cover was very odd, a 110 story tower, gray in color, with flames coming out of the windows.  I didn't think of anything at that time, but looking back, it was very odd how that image came to life the next week.

Yeah, I noticed in the credits that it was based on the novels The Tower. I am going to look that up soon.

This called to mind a bleat from Lileks from a while back about the movie, which actually addresses your exact point, after mocking 70's cinema, which is always worthwhile:

 

*****************

About “The Towering Inferno.” Michele took me to task for speaking poorly of the movie, and while I admit it’s the best of the disaster movies, that’s not exactly a field crowded with overachievers. It has its pleasures; William Holden spends the entire movie in a crimson smoking jacket, which has to count for something. (He has his big thick black-rimmed glasses blown off at the end when the water bursts through the ceiling, but manages to have them on his face again at the end, 137 floors below.) Richard Chamberlain has a satisfyingly weasely death, although his character is such an ur-70s male – wafer-thin, ferret-chested, bird-boned – he could have probably opened up his tux and sailed down to earth. It was a pleasure to watch it wide-screen in HD – made it more enjoyable than a crimped & cut-up pan-and-scan that shows up on late-night TV. But it still ends with two segments of typical stupidity. Newman, the architect, is sitting at the foot of the ruined structure with Faye Dunaway. “Maybe they should just leave it as it, as a monument to all the bullshit in the world.” That, friends, was the 70s. One bad guy cuts corners on construction and orders substandard electrical work, a building catches on fire, and somehow this is not only an apt symbol of “all the bullshit” that stalks the globe, but the building should be left as a 137-story indictment whose empty, charred hulk dominates the San Francisco skyline. Have a nice day!

 

The second moment comes immediately afterwards, when Steve McQueen upbraids Newman for building something too tall. “And until you ask us how to build ‘em, we’ll keep eatin’ smoke and pulling the bodies out”, or words to that effect. Whereupon Newman promises to consult with the firemen on his next project. Which presumably will be three stories tall with a hook-and-ladder crew in the basement. And a catapult on the roof to throw people off should the need arise. I think the main problem with the buiding in the Towering Inferno was not the towering part but the inferno segment, which was assisted by a malfunctioning sprinkler system. Just a guess. But it was typical of the era: You and your hoobris, man! You’re bringin’ us all down!  If this attitude had been common in 1929, the headlines would have read “Empire State Building announced; 128 expected to die in construction.”

*****************

that's a hilarious review. i am surprized they did not also mock the very idea of building something like that in earthquake prone sf as well.

Catostrophic skyscraper fires are extremely rare worldwide, and non-existent in this country.  The codes are so strict regarding fire rated construction (all structural members must be rated to withstand 3hrs of fire) and sprinkler systems, that there would need to be failure of several systems for a fire not to be stopped immediately.

 

For example, if an earthquake happened in Ohio, where it is not expected, the sprinkler system may become disabled by borken pipes.  If that happened in a tall building in which someone was illegally storing some explosive materials or in a building that was under renovation, and the fire proofing had been removed, then you may have a large fire that would be hard to stop.

 

 

Philadelphia had a real one about 1991. The fire started high up in the building, and went up the outside by blowing out windows. IIRC, six firefighters died. I took this photo about two days after the fire. I think the building was ultimately razed.

 

Clearly it was just a movie; I see no reason why we shouldn't continue to build scrapers - and build them higher.  Yes, disasters can happen, but they are few and far between, compared to the zillions of skyscrapers that exist in the world.  Even incidents like the Shirtwaist tragedy may have had other factors (some believe that building owners purposely locked the exit doors because they felt many of the sweatshop workers were 'stealing' from the factory).

 

The Towering Inferno is a great film, IMO... 70s cinema at its best!  :)

Yes, a reality