Why Not Use Fire Suppression in Dropping Loads of Orange Fire Retardant on Notre Dame Cathedral?

When the fires broke out at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, one question that inevitably came to mind was, Why didn't they drop loads of orange fire retardant like is used on forest fires to help save some of it? The answer to this question lies in several practical and logistical issues.

Reasons vs. Practical Considerations

There are two main possibilities regarding the use of fire retardant: 1. They didn’t think of that initially. However, seeing the question posed, it implies that someone did think about using it, but then there were reasons to rule it out. 2. They did consider it but decided against it. Given that they didn't, it's likely they realized the drawbacks of such a method.

The current consensus is that there are ample reasons not to use such a method, and the approach they ultimately decided on was the safest and most effective.

Challenges in Implementing Fire Suppression

There are several practical reasons why dropping loads of orange fire retardant was not a viable option:

Target Size and Speed: The target is too small and the aircraft moving at high speeds makes it nearly impossible to hit the specific area where the fire was. Consider the following: Aircraft fly at 125–175 mph and try hitting a target smaller than a football field from 3–400 feet. The Canadair type of water bomber used in Europe carries 6 metric tonnes of water, to be released from 30 meters above a 69-meter tall Notre Dame Cathedral. The water would need to be released with precision, but even a precise pilot would struggle to direct the water jet accurately given the aircraft's speed and the height of the cathedral. Structural Integrity: The weight of the water would likely collapse the walls. For example, the French Water Tanker with 13,000 pounds of water, if released on Notre Dame, would risk causing irreparable damage. Urban Environment: Notre Dame is located in a densely populated area with ancient and significant structures. The Cathedral is situated on an islet in the Seine River, with nearby buildings, hospitals, the city hall, and medieval structures. Waterbombers need clear airspace, and the presence of buildings and roads would pose significant challenges. Fire Size: While the fire was not large, it was too small to justify the use of water bombers. Precision is key in such operations, and releasing the load without hitting the fire would also release precious resources that could have been better used elsewhere.

Logistical and Safety Concerns

Additional considerations include:

The area is heavily urbanized and populated. Water bombers can't operate when there are buildings or roads in the vicinity. Bridges and significant structures would be at risk. Not only Notre Dame, but also hospitals, city halls, and medieval structures. A shower of water and fire retardant could cause severe damage. Several residents and workers on site might be at risk. For example, a mother feeding her baby in a hospital could be hit by a shower of water and glass shards if the windows were to explode.

Given all these factors, the decision to use organized and localized water pumping methods with big pumpers is the more practical and safer approach. This method allows for better control and precision, reducing the risk of collateral damage and preserving the city's heritage.

Conclusion

In summary, while the idea of using fire suppression by dropping loads of orange fire retardant on Notre Dame Cathedral seems appealing, the practical and logistical challenges make it an impractical solution. The safety and preservation of the city and its structures were paramount, leading to the decision to use more controlled and effective methods.