News   Mar 28, 2024
 1K     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 568     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 868     0 

Notre-Dame Cathedral (Paris) Fire

The fire started somewhere in the attic area, near the spire, it would seem.

Picture below from the NYT:

2-attic.jpg


I don't know about anyone else.............but what stands out to me.............no sign of a fire or smoke detection system, and no sign of a fire suppression system.

In an area of the building that is not in any way public, where such a system could be mounted non-obtrusively, to protect a zone of material that is highly flammable, in an 800 year old structure of great value..........

It would rather have seemed a good idea.......to me.

I can understand why it wasn't done when they have just barely gotten around to exterior repairs - and any intervention of that sort will by default requires years of design work.

AoD
 
Perhaps some massive stand of Oak will be found to replace the lost timbers of Notre Dame, but as @Northern Light 's post illustrates, this cannot and should not be restored to what it was. That's just inviting the same cataclysm to recur. Thought should be given to *respecting* the original form, but repeating it in a much less vulnerable way. And that might very well be other joist wood species, and/or modern laminated ones that far exceed the safety of what they replace.
I'm sure this will come up as a topic of heated debate...pun not intended.

It need not be a either/or debate - I am sure there is will be discussions around incorporating modern fire detection and control systems into any restoration and that by default should limit the risk of future fires. Availability of large timber aside, personally I am not sure if going with laminated wood is a particularly good idea for permanence reasons (we have no idea how the epoxy will degrade in the ultra-long term typical of this building type).

AoD
 
Availability of large timber aside, personally I am not sure if going with laminated wood is a particularly good idea for permanence reasons (we have no idea how the epoxy will degrade in the ultra-long term typical of this building type).

AoD
This will of course have to be assessed in the bigger picture, but it seems it's already underway:
Bertrand de Feydeau, vice-president of Fondation du Patrimoine, said the cathedral’s roof cannot be rebuilt exactly as it was before the fire because “we don’t, at the moment, have trees on our territory of the size that were cut in the 13th century.”

He said the restoration work will have to use new technologies to rebuild the roof.
https://nationalpost.com/news/world...-is-its-800-year-old-roof-known-as-the-forest

The 'new world' holds an easy answer there with Redwoods and Sequoia. Now that I read more, China also hosts a sub-species:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae
 
I can understand why it wasn't done when they have just barely gotten around to exterior repairs - and any intervention of that sort will by default requires years of design work.

AoD

You are more 'understanding' than I.

Clearly by the donations pledged from the State, the Church, Corporations etc. the money for such works was always findable.

This is hardly new tech we're talking about. While its been refined and improved in recent years, variations were available decades back.

Its not as if this outcome wasn't foreseeable; or that there wasn't heightened risk with construction ongoing at the site.
 
The 'new world' holds an easy answer there with Redwoods and Sequoia. Now that I read more, China also hosts a sub-species:

Perhaps more than you know.

Redwood is one of the most fire-resistant woods out there.

Its also insect and rot resistant.

 
You are more 'understanding' than I.

Clearly by the donations pledged from the State, the Church, Corporations etc. the money for such works was always findable.

This is hardly new tech we're talking about. While its been refined and improved in recent years, variations were available decades back.

Its not as if this outcome wasn't foreseeable; or that there wasn't heightened risk with construction ongoing at the site.

In a perverse way. these funds are almost always "unlocked" only by disasters - otherwise it just happens in drips. If you want another ticking timebomb, look at Hagia Sophia - and I quote from the linked article:

Daunting work must be done for Hagia Sophia to survive for future centuries. "This is the premier monument of Byzantine civilization," says Ousterhout. "Old buildings like Hagia Sophia are ignored until there's an emergency. They're put back together and then forgotten about until the next emergency. Meanwhile, there is a continual deterioration."

AoD
 
Last edited:
Perhaps more than you know.

Redwood is one of the most fire-resistant woods out there.

Its also insect and rot resistant.

It and Sequoia also have magnificent tensile properties. I was just researching this last night on rebuilding Mosquito and other all wooden aircraft. Even the primitive plywood in the Mosquito had qualities unmatched at the time in metal or frame and fabric.
Wood for Wings: Building with nature's composite
By Mike DiFrisco (originally published in EAA Sport Aviation, May 2000)
When people who are not in the know hear that airplanes have wooden components, their first mental image is of a really old airplane. This is an unfair image. Although wood isn’t used much in today’s production airplanes, it’s still a common building material in many modern-and not-so-modern-homebuilts.
You can find wood structures in homebuilts from the ubiquitous Pietenpol Air Camper to the Fisher Flying Products fleet and the geodetic construction of the Loehle replicas. Even some composite airplanes-and many tube and rag designs-use wood for wing ribs and fuselage structures.
Lest you think that airplanes made of wood are only of the low and slow variety, picture the super-sleek, all-wood Sequoia Falco or the equally pleasing lines of the fast Osprey Aircraft GP-4. These wooden wonders boast performance figures that rival the latest composite speedsters.
So what makes wood so wonderful? Often called nature’s composite, wood may just be the perfect aircraft building material. It’s strong. Pound for pound, wood has twice the tensile strength of aluminum. You can form wood into complex shapes because it becomes pliable after applying copious amounts of hot water. Wood is easy to cut, which means you can build an airplane with common hand tools-saws, chisels, drills, and sandpaper -that most people already have in their shops. Wood is safe, because unlike composite materials, it’s nontoxic. Heck, wood even smells good, is aesthetic in its own right, and is satisfying to work with.
But like everything in this world, wood also has its drawbacks. Because it’s a natural material, stringent manufacturing tolerances do not exist. We have to take it as it comes. Aircraft-grade lumber must meet certain requirements to be categorized as such, but hidden flaws-pitch pockets, knots, and other vagaries of nature-might be waiting to bite the unsuspecting builder. And wood rots. Without proper protection from extreme temperature and humidity, wood will disintegrate. Finally, Sitka spruce, the most common aircraft-grade lumber, is becoming harder and more expensive to get. Most Sitka spruce comes from trees in British Columbia and Alaska that are a half-century old or more. As finding and felling these trees becomes more difficult, the price of aircraft-grade Sitka spruce increases (it’s doubled in the past five years). [...]
https://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/aircraft...uilding/building-articles/wood/wood-for-wings
 
Macron in the press now saying (gist) "We will rebuild Notre Dame in five years". He's dreaming, and I can relate to the passion, but as a leader, as THE leader of France, he's going to have to keep a rational frame of mind. Ten years at the very least, closer to a generation, is needed to get anywhere close to restoring this.

The trades alone have to be retrained. And dare I say it? (It is said in wartime) The nation's GDP will rise as a result of this. Massive numbers of unemployed and underemployed in the Greater Paris area will find positions as apprentices and journeymen doing what will be, compared to the alternative, very interesting work. And be part of the Nation again doing it, just as the Revolution threw out the Church, and made the property theirs. Close to a $B has been pledged already for this, multiply its worth by giving disenfranchised youth a reason to care. Have them help rebuild.

This can't be rushed, and it shouldn't be. I hope Macron gets good counsel to clarify the timeline.
 
Last edited:
Macron in the press now saying (gist) "We will rebuild Notre Dame in five years". He's dreaming, and I can relate to the passion, but as a leader, as THE leader of France, he's going to have to keep a rational frame of mind. Ten years at the very least, closer to a generation, is needed to get anywhere close to restoring this.

The trades alone have to be retrained. And dare I say it? (It is said in wartime) The nation's GDP will rise as a result of this. Massive numbers of unemployed and underemployed in the Greater Paris area will find positions as apprentices and journeymen doing what will be, compared to the alternative, very interesting work. And be part of the Nation again doing it, just as the Revolution threw out the Church, and made the property theirs. Close to a $B has been pledged already for this, multiply its worth by giving disenfranchised youth a reason to care. Have them help rebuild.

This can't be rushed, and it shouldn't be. I hope Macron gets good counsel to clarify the timeline.

President Macron could always ask Doug Ford how to speed up construction. (Don't.)
 
They would like the church to pay, since it's a church and all. https://www.joe.ie/life-style/notre-dame-feature-665670

Except the state owns it - and it is arguably that the "state" benefits most from it (even more than RCC). Most of the tourists going there aren't likely going there to pray - and personally I think it is fair for the state to pay for what as arguably became a public (not just religious) symbol.

AoD
 

Back
Top