Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

getty.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#31

Post by jjulius »

KennyBlanken wrote: post #20
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also relevant because the Getty Center has been rather smug about how awesome their fire protection is. I think your "smug" comment is unwarranted. They put a ton of solid engineering thought, money and planning into protecting the center from fire. Nothing is 100% but I think their confidence is warranted. Related, the Getty Villa right in the middle of the Palisades also put a lot of thought, planning and mo…

They are being really smug, talking about designs and systems that mean nothing when you've got temperatures outside the building hot enough to melt aluminum engine blocks, infrared radiation intense enough to set fire to things hundreds of feet away - as well as very low oxygen and very high CO/CO2 levels along with dozens of different toxic gasses - all of which HEPA filtration won't do squat about. A "stone facade…

>They are being really smug...

Just out of sheer curiosity, I would be tremendously curious to understand what kind of personal/professional background/experience you have that would qualify you to certify their emergency systems as functionally ineffective and their messaging "smug".

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#32

Post by Projectiboga »

Curious that an oil barron set aside resources to protect his own loot from his oil profits. Yes having these holdings availible to the public is cool and helps us. I was fond of their brand as they had a large presence in South Jersey. Getty had affordable gas that seemed to burn well in my college car in the late 1980's.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#34

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #27
KennyBlanken wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are being really smug, talking about designs and systems that mean nothing when you've got temperatures outside the building hot enough to melt aluminum engine blocks, infrared radiation intense enough to set fire to things hundreds of feet away - as well as very low oxygen and very high CO/CO2 levels along with dozens of different toxic gasses - all of which HEPA filtration won't do squat about. A "stone facade…

Yes, wildfires get incredibly hot. But the fires essentially always travel by embers or direct contact with fire - your comments about IR radiation seem to imply that IR alone will cause ignition, which is rarely if ever the case. Here is a story about a bunch of people who survived the Camp fire in Paradise, CA, surrounded by the raging inferno, by staying in the middle of a parking lot: https://www.firehouse.com/op…

It is rarely the case, indeed.

However, in incidents like e.g. the Fort McMurray fire (Alberta, 2016), this is precisely what happens. One property with a heavy fuel load fanned by strong winds (i.e. plentiful O2 supply) gets hot enough that it causes ignition in a neighboring exposure.

In Ft. McMurray, there were documented cases of an entire 4+ bedroom house being reduced to ash in roughly 5 minutes. The heat generated by that process is easily sufficient to cause ignition in buildings apart.

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#35

Post by pwarner »

marze wrote: post #18
KennyBlanken wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it's been inside the evacuation area for a while: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0876669,-118.5930521,12z/dat... It's also relevant because the Getty Center has been rather smug about how awesome their fire protection is.

Everyone with a fire-hardened house should be feeling good. If all Pacific Palisades houses were fire-hardened, the fire would have burned vegetation but few houses. Even modest fire hardening would help. If a wood-frame house burns, it is a danger to all nearby houses. Hardening reduces the chain reaction potential.

There's just not enough talk about this. This is the actual failure of government, not focusing enough on surviving fires

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#37

Post by mmooss »

pwarner wrote: post #35
marze wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone with a fire-hardened house should be feeling good. If all Pacific Palisades houses were fire-hardened, the fire would have burned vegetation but few houses. Even modest fire hardening would help. If a wood-frame house burns, it is a danger to all nearby houses. Hardening reduces the chain reaction potential.

There's just not enough talk about this. This is the actual failure of government, not focusing enough on surviving fires

How is it a failure of government? The people of these areas reasonably have not wanted spend large amounts of their money to prevent unusual disasters like this one. Do you spend that in your community?

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#38

Post by mmooss »

marze wrote: post #18
KennyBlanken wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it's been inside the evacuation area for a while: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0876669,-118.5930521,12z/dat... It's also relevant because the Getty Center has been rather smug about how awesome their fire protection is.

Everyone with a fire-hardened house should be feeling good. If all Pacific Palisades houses were fire-hardened, the fire would have burned vegetation but few houses. Even modest fire hardening would help. If a wood-frame house burns, it is a danger to all nearby houses. Hardening reduces the chain reaction potential.

How effective is fire-hardening in these conditions? And how much would it cost? And finally, does anyone know how fire-hardened structures have actually performed?

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#39

Post by varelse »

sbuttgereit wrote: post #6
mycentstoo wrote: post #3

Additional Context: The Getty Villa which is on the border of Malibu and Pacific Palisades was the structure that was threatened by fire directly. This article is about the Getty Center which lies in Brentwood and fires did not reach it. Center: 1200 Getty Center Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90049 Villa: 17985 Pacific Coast Highway, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

The reason this article is likely appearing now is because the Getty Center proper is currently in a zone which is under evacuation orders: "The Getty Center, situated in Brentwood, draws 1.8 million visitors annually and houses hundreds of centuries-old art pieces from renowned artists such as Van Gogh, Rembrandt and Monet. But even though as of Saturday, the center was included in a mandatory evacuation zone as a r…

[dead]

Re: Why the Getty Center Is the Safest Place for Art During a Fire (2019)

#40

Post by lambda »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #23
axlee wrote: post #2

Note: while this is a 2019 article, the Getty Center has not burned during the 2025 Palisades fire.

The Getty Villa was far more threatened by the Palisades Fire than the center.

The fire is still burning, is only partially contained, has gotten close to the Center, and the winds are forecast to pick up again tomorrow. So there's still a chance it will be at risk.

Now, they've had days to prepare for this, and apparently have plenty of contingencies in place, but this is still relevant the fire could get there.

Post reply on HN