Notre Dame on fire now in Paris

[Bill Dufour]

Sad to see that old wooden roof and spire go up in flames. It was being repaired. I would hate to be the worker who accidentally caused that fire.
Built 1160-1260 with changes over the centuries
Bill D

[James Cheever]

The video is so hard to watch. It is heartbreaking!

[Jim Koepke]

A sad day in human history.

jtk

[Rod Sheridan]

My daughter sent me the link, we have it up on the big monitor in the Tech room.

Heartbreaking to watch.............Rod.

[Steve Reich]

I visited there in 1981 and returned there with my wife in 2006 for our 15th anniversary. Stunning and shocking to see how something that took centuries to build could collapse in the course of an evening. It had fallen into quite a state of disrepair and they finally raised enough money to begin serious renovations.

[Tom M King]

Temperature to change limestone into lime is a little less than 1700 F. That looks like a pretty hot fire. It's hard to raise money for renovation, but I expect it will come pouring in for reconstruction. Hopefully, and surely, any new plans will call for better fire prevention, and fighting facilities.

I wonder how much of the details have been scanned. I'm sure everything is well covered with photographs.

[Matt Day]

I think it was a fire marshal that said that Noter Dame cathedral was “made to burn”, in their words all super dry wood.

Sad to see for sure.

[Pat Barry]

Anyone else thinking terrorist act?

[Malcolm Schweizer]

Anyone else thinking terrorist act?

Actually, I was thinking Boiled Linseed Oil on a rag tossed into a bucket.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

It's truly a tragic loss to France and the world.


it's a little early IMO to speculate that it's an act of terror.

[Lisa Starr]

So very, very sad for all of humanity. I visited Paris and of course, Notre Dame, in 1978 as a teenager. As an adult, I came to believe I would see it again someday, from a more mature perspective. Unfortunately, I waited too long.

[Jim Becker]

There's an interesting article on CNN.com that details the wood structures that were completely lost...originally built from something like 13,000 trees that were already 300-400 years old when harvested. Oak. There was a lead roof which was "fire proof" but unfortunately the whole structure supporting it was that wood. sad.

[Frederick Skelly]

Heartbreaking. Just heartbreaking. A World heritage site.
I find myself terribly saddened.
Fred

[John K Jordan]

So very, very sad for all of humanity. I visited Paris and of course, Notre Dame, in 1978 as a teenager. As an adult, I came to believe I would see it again someday, from a more mature perspective. Unfortunately, I waited too long.

So sad. I was fortunate to see it a few years ago, for the 850 year celebration. It looked so solid, I imagined it would be there "forever."

408041 408042

JKJ

[Pat Barry]

It's truly a tragic loss to France and the world.


it's a little early IMO to speculate that it's an act of terror.

Today also 6yrs to the day since Boston marathon bombing.

[Frederick Skelly]

Today also 6yrs to the day since Boston marathon bombing.

IMO, it still seems just a little to soon to speculate on the cause of this fire. France wont leave many stones unturned on something this terrible.

[Rick Potter]

My thought is plumber sweating pipe or roofer with tar pot.

[Frank Pratt]

My thought at this point is that it was an unfortunate event that started a fire.

This is a tragic loss.

[Edwin Santos]

It's truly a tragic loss to France and the world.


it's a little early IMO to speculate that it's an act of terror.

Yes, much more likely that it's a simple (but tragic) act of carelessness.

I'm sure some forensic fire investigators will declare the cause of it before long.

[Rod Sheridan]

Anyone else thinking terrorist act?

What I've heard is that it was probably caused by one of the workers involved in restoration............Rod.

[Tom Bender]

It will be next to impossible to find engineers who will consider rebuilding without structural steel.

[Tom M King]

There is no good reason to rebuild the structural part of the roof out of wood. There will be purists who call for it to be rebuilt exactly as it was, but as long as it looks exactly like it did, there would be no good reason to rebuild the roof structure out of wood. It would be hard to design something to burn any better than those wooden spires.

I do Historic Preservation rebuilding for a living. You are preserving the history if every detail looks just like it always has. It's rare that we rebuild something, and not have to improve on the original structural details that have already proven to fail.

You only are doing wrong if you change the way some historic structure looks to suit your own personal taste, and that includes the smallest of visible details. At that point, it simply becomes remodeling, and not Historic Preservation, although many like to convince themselves that it is.

[Al Launier]

My wife, daughter & I were fortunate to have visited the Notre Dame a few years back. It was such a beautiful Catholic icon known throughout the world and such an inspiration for so many. So many lost invaluable treasures never to be replaced.

For it to be rebuilt is wonderful, but will be a challenge if it's to be built only from wood. Wood these days used for construction are no longer available of the centuries old varieties. I agree with Tom, a difficult undertaking at best.

A great loss indeed!

[John K Jordan]

...
I do Historic Preservation rebuilding for a living. You are preserving the history if every detail looks just like it always has. It's rare that we rebuild something, and not have to improve on the original structural details that have already proven to fail.

You only are doing wrong if you change the way some historic structure looks to suit your own personal taste, and that includes the smallest of visible details. At that point, it simply becomes remodeling, and not Historic Preservation, although many like to convince themselves that it is.

The question this subject always brings to mind is what is the "original" restore point target? Many old structures have been modified over time. In the case of the cathedral, should the building be restored at the time of the fire? Should it be as originally "completed" in the 13th centuries? Or perhaps as it has appeared during the lifetime of the oldest person living today?

This entertaining debate is endless - some preservationists push to remove any recent remodeling which on the surface seems noble. But how recent is "recent"?

I read somewhere that the big spire was added during a restoration/remodeling project sometime in the mid 1800s.


408070 408072

JKJ

[Tom M King]

I'll leave that discussion up to the French. It's an easy choice in my work, when the target is only a couple of hundred years back.

I'm good either way on the spire. It's nice that it can be seen from a long ways away, but in my opinion, not necessary at all.

I'm also good with any improvement in structural integrity, longevity, and safety, as long as it appears unchanged to the best eye.

[Bill Dufour]

I read the spire was taken off several hundred years ago because it moved around too much in the wind. It was rebuilt about 200 years ago. The removal was also helped along by bribes from scrap dealers.
It was supposed to have spires on top of the two main towers that they have never been built. No reason to suppose the structure would actually be able to support the extra weight. These structures were not really designed but rather built by rules of thumb as to how much c stone could support. Not unknown for them to collapse during or shortly after construction.
Ever wondered why that older Egyptian pyramid changes to a shallower slope halfway up? They noticed the angle was too steep and it would not support itself.
Bill D.

[Jim Becker]

My thought is plumber sweating pipe or roofer with tar pot.
They were apparently working on the lead roof in the area where the fire was suspected of starting. Working with lead likely required working with fire, I would think... darn.

[Jim Becker]

The question this subject always brings to mind is what is the "original" restore point target? Many old structures have been modified over time. In the case of the cathedral, should the building be restored at the time of the fire? Should it be as originally "completed" in the 13th centuries? Or perhaps as it has appeared during the lifetime of the oldest person living today?

This entertaining debate is endless - some preservationists push to remove any recent remodeling which on the surface seems noble. But how recent is "recent"?

I read somewhere that the big spire was added during a restoration/remodeling project sometime in the mid 1800s.


408070 408072

JKJ

This extends to what materials they use for the restoration at this point. I think I mentioned earlier that supposedly something like 13,000 300-400 year old oak trees were used for the original wooden structures. I'm doubtful that they would replace like for like at this time, both for conservation reasons and for current safety considerations. I'm going to hazard a guess that things will go toward current code/materials but made to look like wood where wood was visible, either via faux means or by veneering. That alone would likely insure many, many, many centuries of life into the future for the restored site.

[Edwin Santos]

This extends to what materials they use for the restoration at this point. I think I mentioned earlier that supposedly something like 13,000 300-400 year old oak trees were used for the original wooden structures. I'm doubtful that they would replace like for like at this time, both for conservation reasons and for current safety considerations. I'm going to hazard a guess that things will go toward current code/materials but made to look like wood where wood was visible, either via faux means or by veneering. That alone would likely insure many, many, many centuries of life into the future for the restored site.

I learned today that Notre Dame is owned by the French State, but operated by the Catholic church. Both will have a voice in the restoration plans. It's safe to say that nobody in the world possesses more expertise in church restoration than the Vatican.
I just heard on the news that the French authorities have evacuated several adjacent buildings due to the instability of the north end of the cathedral and potential collapse. I think they are erring to the side of caution, but still it gives you an idea of the extensive damage.

Also heard that over $600MM has been pledged for restoration already by French corporations and billionaires. It doesn't look like access to resources will be a limitation on the restoration.

[Ole Anderson]

Also heard that over $600MM has been pledged for restoration already by French corporations and billionaires. It doesn't look like access to resources will be a limitation on the restoration.

France gave us the iconic Statue of Liberty, so a generous donation from our government to help rebuild would seem appropriate, but it seems the restoration costs are already covered? Good news is that the restoration should be able to bring fire safety up to more modern standards. In fact, when they are done, I suspect it will be one of the more fire resistant churches ever.

BTW, speaking from a civil engineering prospective, those flying buttresses are incredible, both from an engineering requirement and an aesthetic viewpoint. And for those interested in building of the old cathedrals, a must read is Ken Follet's Pillars of the Earth.

[Frank Pratt]

And for those interested in building of the old cathedrals, a must read is Ken Follet's Pillars of the Earth.

That's a wonderful book. Makes you feel as though you are taking part in the building of the cathedral. Its sequel, World Without End is also excellent.

[John K Jordan]

That's a wonderful book. Makes you feel as though you are taking part in the building of the cathedral. Its sequel, World Without End is also excellent.

Have you visited the National Cathedral in DC? At one time they had a wonderful exhibit on the 5th or 6th floor about the construction, complete with some of the cut stone blocks. Last time I was there, though, that exhibit had been replaced with one about repairing the earthquake damage from 2011.

Even kids love to visit, especially when we look for the Darth Vader gargoyle way up high. :)

JKJ

[Mel Fulks]

Money will pour in and it will get done. A LOT will come from USA. There might be some statues with new faces. Snap,Crackle ,and Pop.....Tony Tiger.
Even with all the wonderful things Europe has, travelers often come back here reporting how old fashioned ,to put it kindly,
some things are. A neighbor told me that when she visited the Louvre they had the windows open.

[Pat Barry]

I find it curious that there weren't any functioning sprinklers inside the building. Or were they, and just ineffective?

[Edwin Santos]

Even with all the wonderful things Europe has, travelers often come back here reporting how old fashioned ,to put it kindly,
some things are. A neighbor told me that when she visited the Louvre they had the windows open.

That's a scream. In other words are you saying you know people who have come back from a trip to Europe complaining that it was too.... European?

[Jim Becker]

I find it curious that there weren't any functioning sprinklers inside the building. Or were they, and just ineffective?
I suspect it would be extremely rare for a historical structure like this to have modern things like sprinklers...but also suspect that however they decide to do the restoration, such modern things will come into play going forward.

[Frank Pratt]

I don't recall seeing any sprinklers in the Florence Duomo either. Retrofitting a building like that would be so invasive and overt that I can see that as justification for not doing it.

[Pat Barry]

I don't recall seeing any sprinklers in the Florence Duomo either. Retrofitting a building like that would be so invasive and overt that I can see that as justification for not doing it.

I hope they rethink that after what just happened.

[Edwin Santos]

I don't recall seeing any sprinklers in the Florence Duomo either. Retrofitting a building like that would be so invasive and overt that I can see that as justification for not doing it.

The Florence Duomo is a structure worthy of being called miraculous, even by today's standards. Thankfully it is constructed completely from stone, masonry and clay tiles. To my way of thinking this would make it a non-combustible structure for the most part. Some of the contents may be combustible, such as the pews and other furniture, but in relation to the overall space I do not think they would be considered significant.

I think many historical structures of the sort we are discussing are constructed primarily from stone and forms of masonry. Even ancient structures like the Pyramids, Angkor Wat, Taj Mahal, Pantheon, Acropolis, Hagia Sophia, and the Colosseum don't seem to have much if any wood in them as far as I recall.

I think of what happened at Notre Dame as a tragic accident more than a design failure or negligence for not retrofitting a massive structure like that with sprinklers.

Plus it was the roof that caught fire. Let's say the whole interior was sprinklered. How would the sprinklers have extinguished a fire occurring overhead? Not to say there was not a lot of damage below, but at best fire sprinklers might have mitigated some of the ground level damage but I question whether they could have prevented this fire.

[Rick Potter]

Wonder if Notre Dame was insured?

[Frank Pratt]

Wonder if Notre Dame was insured?

My guess would be that it was self-insured.

[Frank Pratt]

The Florence Duomo is a structure worthy of being called miraculous, even by today's standards. Thankfully it is constructed completely from stone, masonry and clay tiles. To my way of thinking this would make it a non-combustible structure for the most part. Some of the contents may be combustible, such as the pews and other furniture, but in relation to the overall space I do not think they would be considered significant.

I think many historical structures of the sort we are discussing are constructed primarily from stone and forms of masonry. Even ancient structures like the Pyramids, Angkor Wat, Taj Mahal, Pantheon, Acropolis, Hagia Sophia, and the Colosseum don't seem to have much if any wood in them as far as I recall.

I think of what happened at Notre Dame as a tragic accident more than a design failure or negligence for not retrofitting a massive structure like that with sprinklers.

Plus it was the roof that caught fire. Let's say the whole interior was sprinklered. How would the sprinklers have extinguished a fire occurring overhead? Not to say there was not a lot of damage below, but at best fire sprinklers might have mitigated some of the ground level damage but I question whether they could have prevented this fire.

There is a wooden chain around the base of the dome, as well as iron chain(s). I'm pretty sure the structure supporting the tile roof above the stone vaults above nave & aisle is also wood. A quick search didn't confirm or deny this, but that was a very common practice.

As for sprinklers, I am surprised there were no sprinklers installed in the roof structures above the stone vaults.

The Duomo is a miraculous structure. I count the visit there as one of my most profound travel experiences. Anyone traveling to Florence really should visit the Duomo and if physically able, make the climb up through the inside of the dome to the lantern on top.

I am sad that I never got to see Notre Dame.

[Jon Nuckles]

I find it curious that there weren't any functioning sprinklers inside the building. Or were they, and just ineffective?

From the New York Times:

Much remains to be learned. But already it is emerging that Notre-Dame, irreplaceable as it is to France’s heritage, lacked the fundamental fire-prevention safeguards that are required in more modern structures and have been grafted onto other ancient cathedrals elsewhere in Europe.

Some of those elements, like firewalls or a sprinkler system, were absent by choice — so as not to alter the landmark’s design or to introduce electrical wiring deemed a greater risk amid the timbers that supported Notre-Dame’s ornate lead roof.

“There had been a systematic refusal to install anything electrical” within “the forest” because of the risk, said Pierre Housieaux, president of the Paris Historical Association. “Everyone knew that the attic was the most fragile part.”

Inevitably, some of those decisions are being called into question in the aftermath of a calamity that scarred a jewel of Gothic architecture precious to all the world, and left a gaping wound in the heart of Paris.

[Jim Becker]

It was mentioned on a news article this morning that it will be essentially impossible to replace the roof structure with like for like as there just are no trees left, more or less, that are large enough. It's expected that more modern materials will be used, both for practicality and because they want a very fast restoration time frame.

[Tom M King]

The questions I get asked the most, which also immediately alerts me to the fact that these people aren't worth taking much time talking to, are, "How much is it going to cost, and when will it be finished?" No lie. These are the number one (since they are always asked together) most asked questions I get when discussing resurrecting some Historic house from partial ruin, by visitors, when I'm at some stage into the process. These aren't the people I work for.

Setting the highest priority on the list at getting it done in five years is just plain stupid.

[Larry Frank]

It is interesting to note that there have been a number of fires in churches undergoing restoration. I wonder if fire protection was even considered for Notre Dame restoration. I would think that such planning should be integral to any restoration.

A church in Philadelphia tested its roof sprinkler system yesterday ahead of it renovations.

[Tom Bender]

Sprinklers could definitely protect the roof and done with care could be pretty well concealed.

Intrinsically safe electrical devices should be safe enough for things like smoke detectors and minimal lighting in the attic.

There may not be trees of the same species and old growth available in Europe but it can definitely be rebuilt in wood with similar details and dimensions. If necessary, composite beams can be fabricated in any size and quantity.