• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

IRC Hearings

Re: IRC Hearings

Don't do that, my nose hurts from the fizz of my soft drink exiting my nostrils (At least you didn't hve mold damage...)
 
Re: IRC Hearings

Sorry again. I just could't pass, (there I go again) it was just too easy. Sorry to conarb. Didn't mean to minimize the intent of your post. Just couldn't help myself. It comes with age. Darn, there I go again.
 
Re: IRC Hearings

conarb said:
All is not bad, some AHJs will adopt in in tact, others will adopt it amending sprinklers out, within a few years large statistical data can be amassed, lives saved, inadvertent release, mold damage claims, insurance company rates with and without, etc. The truth will then come out. In the meantime inadvertent release statistics are going to have to be obtained, the NFPA stopped collecting that data 15 or 20 years ago, somebody is going to have to pick up the slack.
Click to expand...
What truth is going to come out?
 
Re: IRC Hearings

TJ, Good question. By the time that happens we all will have solved the Great Mystery. If the fire service is so intent that they think sprinklers and sprinklers alone solves all the problems they are mistaken. See prior posts. It is a combination. Wow! A dumb butt like me coming up with that? Not to minimise this but in the built enviroment is just a bit more complicated than just one issue. But not so much that it could not be over come by common sense.

Crap! Fell off the soapbox and turned a ankle! :D
 
Re: IRC Hearings

As we all know the NAHB only put up token opposition, all they care about is making money, so as long as the trade-offs made them whole, they didn't give a damn. The unintended consequences will be that many AHJs will amend the sprinklers out, the trade-offs will stay in, many of the trade-offs have to do with fire safety, both for the occupants and first responders. With the sprinklers out there will be more injuries and deaths unless the AHJs are intelligent enough to amend the trade-offs back in when they amend the sprinklers out. Best to just not adopt the newer code and stay with the older code without the trade-offs. Somebody ought to catalog the trade-offs so the officials here know how to deal with amending them back in.

My guess is, assuming new homes are actually built again, that sprinklers will be somewhat effective in states at the top of this list, but the inadvertent releases will overwhelm the damages in the states at the bottom of the list, again we now need to keep accurate statistics, and the fire service cannot be trusted to keep those statistics, witness their discontinuance of keeping inadvertent release statistics. This should increase insurance rates in some states, and reduce them in others, casualty insurers do not insure lives, life insurers do, there are a few who insure both, notably State Farm. One of the first things you are going to see is your simple 13D is going by the boards, already State Farm is requiring full coverage for their 10% discount, it's going to end up either full coverage or increased rates.
 
Re: IRC Hearings

Statistics can be manipulated to make them tell whatever story you want them to tell. Heres what I want to know from the statistics from the past and as we go forward.

1). In each of the last 20 years how many fire fatalities ocurred in single family homes? That one should be easy.

2). In a year by year analysis of the above 20 years how many deaths ocurred in each of the following: A). Homes 0-5 years old

B). Homes 6-10 years old

C). Homes 11-15 years old

D). Homes 16-20 years old

E). Homes older than 20 years old

3). What was the cause of the fire?

4). How many deaths occurred in sprinkled homes?
 
Re: IRC Hearings

Incognito:

We also need to know who many inadvertent releases occurred, and how many sprinklers failed to actuate in sprinkled homes in the event of fire. The statistics need to be kept by some agency completely unrelated to the fire industry, and we need statistics showing the total cost of sprinkler systems in various areas, including meter charges. We need to compare these numbers in sprinkled areas to similarly situated homes in non-sprinkled areas.
 
Re: IRC Hearings

OK FOLKS IF THIS IS GOING TO CARRY ON AS A (RFS) v. TRADE-OFFS DISCUSSION, PLEASE GO TO THE NEW THREAD ON THE TOPIC IN "RESIDENTIAL FIRE CODES"

THIS THREAD IS FOR COMMENTS ON THE ICC HEARINGS SO LETS STAY ON TOPIC AND NOT TURN IT INTO A (RFS) RELATED TOPIC.....THANKS!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top