Posted by Peter H on May 22, 2007 at 18:32:25 from 86.147.153.67 user Peter_H.
In Reply to: Re: The Cutty Sark - The ship that died of shame. posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett on May 22, 2007 at 17:46:46:
I take Andy Clayton’s point about the need for authenticity, but if you do take that route you get brownie points but you end up with a huge fire risk on your hands. You then have to go all-out for fire prevention, possibly including 24 hour monitoring, extensive sensor systems etc. The National Trust has had to face this dilemma, particularly in relation to its old timbered houses like Ightham Mote and Little Moreton Hall. The Trust learned its lesson with Uppark.
However, there is an additional factor. The risk of fire is always much greater when a building or ship is under repair. It is then that flammable tools and materials are brought on site, eg blowlamps (remember Windsor Castle) and electrical equipment, which can be carelessly used or stored by sub-contractors. It is also a time when intruders may find it easier to gain access. And since I last posted, I have read that there was a sprinkler system on the Cutty Sark, but apparently it was disconnected during the repairs. For me, that says it all. It was a disaster waiting to happen.