# Notre Dame on fire **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [April 15, 2019, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584 "2019-04-15T17:24:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/141 "2019-04-16T04:56:16Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > What could it have been due to? Ashtray? Tightly coiled power cable? Heater? The problem is with the spire. It was added on in the 19th century and creates a chimney in the center of the structure. If it catches fire it becomes a heat engine and draws air up through the interior roof which is literally a forest of trees. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/142 "2019-04-16T05:06:00Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Al Aqsa mosque also burnt today. Wondering if that gives you the same shivers. > Doubt it, :rolleyes: Bit of a difference between > [@](#): > > "The fire broke out in the guard’s room outside the roof of the Marwani prayer room, Antar al-Hazmawi, a guard of the al-Aqsa mosque confirmed to the The New Arab. > > The fire brigade of the Islamic Waqf department in Jerusalem managed to control the blaze, while the area is currently closed to examine the cause of the fire, which is currently unclear." [Al-Aqsa mosque catches fire as Notre-Dame cathedral burns](https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2019/4/15/al-aqsa-mosque-catches-fire-as-notre-dame-cathedral-burns) And The Entire Fucking Cathedral Burning Down. See, e.g., this nighttime drone picture from the fire. [https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2019/04/16/imagev105bb41f585874e05321978743ea1d671-8dwwb7xusdde2wy15s2\_ct460x258.jpg](https://media.apnarm.net.au/media/images/2019/04/16/imagev105bb41f585874e05321978743ea1d671-8dwwb7xusdde2wy15s2_ct460x258.jpg) When the Dome of the Rock, which is how many people here probably first think of that particular mosque, suffers that kind of damage, I will lower my head in along with you in remorse. Edit: Remorse is probably wrong. I didn’t start the fire, after all. Call it sadness and grief instead. Until then, take your rolled eyes, and attempt to shame posters with some sense of inadequate cultural sensitivity, and take it to another thread. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/143 "2019-04-16T05:13:38Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Because you can calculate the dispersion rate at different heights and thus the loads created. And how do you know how great a load of water is safe to drop? What you’ve got there is a centuries-old stone building that has probably never been modeled (much less tested) for withstanding that kind of massive impact, currently undergoing unprecedented structural strains due to a catastrophic fire. All you’ve got for estimating an appropriate load is guesswork. And if you guess wrong and drop too much water, congratulations, you’ve just collapsed Notre Dame. Why on earth would you think that your idea is a more sensible way to approach the problem than _“let’s fight the fire as best we can without knocking the building flat”_? > [@Magiver](#): > > Ultimately, I’m questioning who made the decision and what were the calculations used. “Nuh uh, water’s heavy” is not a calculation. “Sure, stone buildings are plenty strong!” is not a calculation either. In the case of a medieval building whose original structure and construction aren’t fully known even now, and which is being weakened every minute by a devastating fire in ways that you don’t have the luxury of observing and modeling in detail, why should anyone naively assume that “calculations” are guaranteed to provide a reliable answer? > [@Magiver](#): > > The math and physics involved in these calculations are many magnitudes less than what went into designing the plane itself. I think you have no idea what would actually be involved in the calculations of how much water it’s safe to dump on a burning Notre Dame from a plane without knocking the whole building down, nor how imperfectly known the data are that would be required to even attempt such calculations. > [@Magiver](#): > > Here’s a video of the same plane discussed putting out a truck fire on a highway. A very precise strike. That could have been Notre Dame. :rolleyes: No matter how many videos you drag in of planes dumping masses of water **on pieces of ground that cannot collapse** , covered with burning trucks or trees that are past saving anyway, they will not add up to an argument in favor of planes dumping masses of water on a burning medieval building **whose capacity to stand up to masses of water dumped on it is very poorly understood, _and which it is really quite important not to cause to collapse_**. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/144 "2019-04-16T05:24:10Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > And how do you know how great a load of water is safe to drop? Because you can calculate mass times velocity. At some point in altitude the water is coming down like rain as it disperses. But if you’re worried about the load on the walls consider that the flying buttresses are designed to counter the weight above that is pushing the walls out. All of the roof and part of ceiling is now on the floor yet the counter force of the buttresses are still in place. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/145 "2019-04-16T05:49:26Z")
> [@nearwildheaven](#): > > I’m sure the building and grounds are insured. Right. Because that’s the main concern. > [@](#): > > Old buildings are great to look at, but modern fire codes exist for a reason. This is more than just an “old building”. Jesus fucking Christ. ---
**Author:** ![Spoons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spoons/32/3141_2.png) [@Spoons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoons)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/146 "2019-04-16T05:55:55Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Apparently someone has faked a video supposedly depicting Muslims celebrating at the scene. I took a look at a RWNJ message board that I follow (but do not post on) from time to time. They’re all convinced that the fire was caused by Muslim terrorists. A few have gone a little farther, and stated that the fire was caused (by Muslim terrorists, naturally) in order to destroy a Christian landmark, so Muslims could build a mosque on the site. Combine this with (in the same thread I looked at) “This is what open borders gets you,” and “President Trump is right; the French have no clue how to fight this, water bombers are needed,” and of course, “This won’t happen in America, as long as we can keep the Muslims out.” Nobody knows, at this point what caused the fire, but some Americans are absolutely convinced, without any evidence, that it’s Muslim terrorism, and the French are too stupid to figure out how to put out a fire. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/147 "2019-04-16T06:11:15Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The problem is with the spire. It was added on in the 19th century and creates a chimney in the center of the structure. If it catches fire it becomes a heat engine and draws air up through the interior roof which is literally a forest of trees. Interesting. Thanks ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/148 "2019-04-16T06:12:28Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Ultimately, I’m questioning who made the decision and what were the calculations used. “Nuh uh, water’s heavy” is not a calculation. [Here’s a video of the same plane discussed](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZkV64GJihA) putting out a truck fire on a highway. A very precise strike. That could have been Notre Dame. IF Notre Dame de Paris were a smoldering truck in the middle of a highway, I would agree. That method would have worked. A wall of water of that mass and force could have caused serious damage to the stone walls. Multiple professional engineering types have been saying such on TV for hours. On pretty much every network. The fact it appears you don’t understand this makes me sad for you. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/149 "2019-04-16T06:35:22Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Um… [I believe this is an image of the North Rose](https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/photo/2019/04/photos-notre-dame-cathedral-burns-p/n12_RTX6RSCY/main_1500.jpg?1555353824) No, the North Rose Window is the[much bigger one](https://i1.wp.com/topstyletoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/notre-dame-rose-windows.jpg?resize=696%2C392&ssl=1). That’s one of the roof roses. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/150 "2019-04-16T06:40:26Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Al Aqsa mosque also burnt today. Wondering if that gives you the same shivers. > Doubt it, :rolleyes: Fortunately, buildings aren’t that flammable in this part of the world. Very little wooden construction, you see. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/151 "2019-04-16T06:43:30Z")
> [@Lantern](#): > > Ken Follett was on the BBC, and of course he has written long novels on cathedral construction. From what I understood, the roofs are made of wood and when they burn they collapse, creating a huge amount of flammable debris everywhere. The roofs and pretty much every movable item; that includes the majority of the art, the pews, confession booths, chorus, walkways… And stuff such as fire-suppression systems are being added to old monuments. Sometimes. Slowly. You can’t just stick a few sprinklers up in the ceiling: for starters, the ceiling is really high up. Old, historic buildings don’t magically grow toilets and smoke detectors when those become the norm. Note also that this isn’t the first time a restoration ends up causing irreparable damage: for example, Ken Follett’s cathedrals books were inspired by the Old Cathedral in Vitoria, which is currently inaccesible except as an archeological site due in part to misguided restoration during the 19th century. > [@Morgyn](#): > > I think I understand about the rose windows. They weren’t talking about the glass, but the structure or the frame that the glass is set into. That’s often lead. The windows can be rebuilt or new ones put in place (it was done throughout a lot of Europe after the wars of the 20th century): which option is taken isn’t so much a matter of feasability as of deciding what do you want to do, erase the damage as much as possible or have the new windows precisely as a mark of remembrance. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/152 "2019-04-16T07:09:46Z")
As usual in any disaster, the Daily Mail has the best photos by far. It may be a right-wing tabloid, but they certainly understand visual coverage of a disaster. [Inside the cathedral](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6926257/ROBERT-HARDMAN-witnesses-inside-ravaged-Notre-Dame.html) and first photos this morning. It looks like a lot of the stone ceiling survived, so the damage to the interior isn’t as bad as it could have been. The wooden roof, which burned so quickly, covers a stone vault over the interior. The photos show that sections of the stone vault fell, but there is still a lot intact, which protected a lot of the interior. In fact stone vaults were introduced as a fire-safety measure in the original medieval construction. See [How Catastrophic Is the Notre-Dame Cathedral Fire?](https://www.citylab.com/design/2019/04/notre-dame-cathedral-fire-paris-gothic-architecture-history/587191/) tl;dr It may not be as bad as it looked at first. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/153 "2019-04-16T07:19:27Z")
Still [looks like there’s glass](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/04/16/07/12330808-6926257-image-a-55_1555396950480.jpg) in the North Rose Window… ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/154 "2019-04-16T10:33:19Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Have they said why there wasn’t a fire suppression system in place? Dry chemicals might have been an option instead of water in areas with valuable artifacts. > > Isn’t that part of building code in most modern countries? > [Fire suppression system - Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_suppression_system) I think the fact that the cathedral was built between 1163 and 1345 has a lot to do a lack of “fire suppression system”. The technology didn’t exist yet, and certainly wasn’t a building code requirement at the time. Like a lot of old buildings, I suspect it was “grandfathered” when the new requirements were written. I also expect that modern fire systems will be incorporated into the rebuilding, rather like when London recreated the Globe Theater they installed modern fire suppression tech, from using fire retardant on the thatch itself to a sprinkler system on top of the roof. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 10:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/155 "2019-04-16T10:40:43Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Still [looks like there’s glass](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/04/16/07/12330808-6926257-image-a-55_1555396950480.jpg) in the North Rose Window… Or possibly the South, I can’t tell which side that’s taken from. ---
**Author:** ![Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b487fb/32.png) [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walken_After_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/156 "2019-04-16T11:42:16Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > The wooden roof, which burned so quickly, covers a stone vault over the interior. The photos show that sections of the stone vault fell, but there is still a lot intact, which protected a lot of the interior. In fact stone vaults were introduced as a fire-safety measure in the original medieval construction. [Here’s](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/c2/61/cbc261d7b2e7cd5b2fd451fcb05d290c.jpg) a 3D diagram of the cathedral showing the stone vault. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/157 "2019-04-16T11:44:10Z")
Possibly both the north and south windows have survived, but reports seem to be conflicting. There are also reports that the great organ is intact, but has possibly suffered water damage. Here’s a professional video of the last Vespers service in the cathedral before the fire: [Vêpres du 15 avril 2019 à Notre-Dame de Paris](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLBF0Zb8Bs4) It was recorded yesterday evening, shortly before the fire broke out. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/158 "2019-04-16T12:00:32Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Or possibly the South, I can’t tell which side that’s taken from. It’s the south side. ---
**Author:** ![Morgyn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/morgyn/32/3041_2.png) [@Morgyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgyn)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/159 "2019-04-16T12:13:27Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Still [looks like there’s glass](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/04/16/07/12330808-6926257-image-a-55_1555396950480.jpg) in the North Rose Window… Oh, hurray! I’ve always loved pictures of that window, and I’m so glad it survived. NB: When I was talking about the frames, I meant the stonework separating the sections where glass was set.) ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2019, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584/160 "2019-04-16T12:15:32Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > Possibly both the north and south windows have survived, but reports seem to be conflicting. It’s clear some windows were completely destroyed, but the status of the largest Rose Windows is unclear. The West Rose is intact. The other two, based on pictures this morning, are at least partially intact. I expect they have all suffered from soot and cleaning them is going to be a tedious bitch. > [@](#): > > There are also reports that the great organ is intact, but has possibly suffered water damage. Yeah, smoke and water is bad for musical instruments. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/notre-dame-on-fire/832584.md?page=9)