Author Topic: BS5588-1/BS9999  (Read 12366 times)

Offline Hi Tower

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • Hitower
BS5588-1/BS9999
« on: December 22, 2011, 06:15:10 PM »
I'm struggling chaps - can you help.

BS5588-1 now superceded by BS9999.  BS5588-1 refers to 'Escape routes from dwellings with balcony or deck approach'.  I can find no reference to this subject in BS9999 other than within atriums, which does not apply to my situation.  Have I missed something?

Thank you in anticipation

HT

Offline colin todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
  • Civilianize enforcement -you know it makes sense.
    • http://www.cstodd.co.uk
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #1 on: December 27, 2011, 06:08:38 PM »
BS 5588-1 is most certainly NOT superseded by BS 9999, so no wonder you cant find what you are looking for.  BS 5588-1 will, any day now, be superseded by BS 9991, which is, if it is at all possible, much worse than BS 9999 and will result in a potential lowering of standards of fire safety in dwellings, which is where most people die. But never mind, cos BSI will make lots of money, various vested interests will be satisfied and the so-called experts that BSI claim were responsible for the code will think they have done a fantastic job.
Colin Todd, C S Todd & Associates

Offline kurnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
    • http://www.peakland-fire-safety.co.uk
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2011, 11:58:00 AM »
I agree with Colins summary of the soon to be published BS9991 and fear for the consequences in a few years time.

I am rather surprised that other organisations including CFOA, IFE, IFSM and  CLG Building Regulations Division have not used their influence in respect of some of the ill conceived proposals in the draft which represent a significant variation from other published guidance benchmarks.

Offline colin todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
  • Civilianize enforcement -you know it makes sense.
    • http://www.cstodd.co.uk
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2011, 01:47:10 PM »
Kurnal, you are assuming that:

1. They care.
2. They have competence in domestic fire safety
3. They have time to be bothered.
4. They are properly represented.
5. Those responsible for this dreadful code would give a jot for their views.
Colin Todd, C S Todd & Associates

Offline Hi Tower

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • Hitower
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2012, 09:59:19 AM »
Colin
Thank you for your answer.  I'm puzzled that when I go onto the BSI website to view details of BS5588-1 it says that it is 'withdrawn/superceded' ????


Offline jokar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1472
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2012, 10:34:11 AM »
BS 9991 was issued on 31 December 2011 and superseded BS 5588 part 1.  Whilst it is a new document the ADB still references BS 5588 part 1 and is therefore still a usable document.  Back to BSI to get a copy if you haven't one already.  I believe there was a bit of an issue with the issue of 9991 and it came ot as an amendment to 9999 on some sites.

Offline Hi Tower

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • Hitower
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2012, 07:33:24 PM »
Thank you Jokar
(I'll take 2 stars for that!!)

Offline thebuildinginspector

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: BS5588-1/BS9999
« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2012, 07:00:23 AM »
BS 5588-1 is most certainly NOT superseded by BS 9999, so no wonder you cant find what you are looking for.  BS 5588-1 will, any day now, be superseded by BS 9991, which is, if it is at all possible, much worse than BS 9999 and will result in a potential lowering of standards of fire safety in dwellings, which is where most people die. But never mind, cos BSI will make lots of money, various vested interests will be satisfied and the so-called experts that BSI claim were responsible for the code will think they have done a fantastic job.

To the uninitiated - in a nutshell - what's wrong with it?  And no, I've not read it.
It goes without saying that all spurious judgements & fatuous opinons on here are my own and don't represent anyone else. No one would want them anyway.