I appreciate the thoughts.
thank you very much.

There was quite a leeway in ATCT design...but FP design seems to be
converging in the last 10 years.  FAA had a strong hand in writing
some guidelines at 29 CFR 1960.20.  But in it really, is nothing we did not
know.

What would help, is the client saying what their performance objectives are.
You said that as much yourselves.  So, while I had done I bit of research
before,
upon prompting from this forum, I went back to the chore.

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/order/occ_safety/order3900/media/ch24.pdf

not the most helpful read, as it is a politicized document.  nonetheless,
it does states what the primary object is:  continuity of business operation
such that
all air traffic control is transferred prior to untenability.  from that we
can infer a
heirarchy:

1. maintain guidance equipment and operations
2. get ATCT staff out.

although their wording couches both in the same breath.


Then the question of "how to get the job done..."
becomes for me,  a bit more interestin'


the above doc is
1. big on pre-planning and operations management, which is
    an effective strategy in this highly regimented and controlled
    environment.  They give their tower supervisors a good bit
    of leeway too, which makes use of common sense, if the
    supervisors have common sense.  I can't see managing
    people whom juggle 7 airplanes in their brains, as a
    place where an absent-minded type would Peter Principal.
2. big on extinguishers, which makes sense too
3. given the mission critical function, I choose to tone
    down the fire alarm notification signal (something i favor
    in many non-sleeping occupancies) so as allow them
    to better focus on delivering the primary goal, "getting
    the planes down or redirected."
4. sprinklers are a shall, which makes sense for high fuel load
    areas underneath the Visual Control Room, but in mission
    critical rooms, I am still not convinced--unless that mirror-site
    takes the baton pass like a champion.  And on that I just
    don't know squat.  But where I am squeemish of mixing
    sprinkler water over ATC computer equipment, I am even less
    comfortable with pre-action.  "Will it work?" is one question.
    "When will it fail from corrosion?" is another.

5. VESDA, is a winnah.
6. hand extinguishers? sure
7. I think they should have a tampered butterfly control valve in the VCR,
   just on the random-case of an unwanted discharge or if the
   fire is kaboshed.
8. standpipe hose connections WITH hose at each level.


I know some VCRs that use Novec and leave out the water.
I know some VCR's that use pre-action sprinkler and no other.
I know some designers that won't talk specifics,
  which begs the question
  in the direction
  of do we really
  have a fire problem if we are
  not sharing information?

Rather make a mistake here, than
   up there.

thanks again for ALL
the ideas,


scot deal
excelsior fire engineering
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected]

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Reply via email to