I've been surprised at how young some of the club goers were...I realize the drinking age is 16 & 18 in Switzerland, so how did the younger ones even get in?

All true, now that we know more. Also, the inspectors who failed to inspect the premises every year as they are supposed to and who passed all these things as acceptable.

There was another fire escape, but it must not have been clearly posted.

Two threads merged and tagged for Switzerland

If they were not drinking they would be allowed in, illegal to sell them booze but not illegal for them to be there. Even if they were drinking I doubt the place asked for IDs.
All 40 dead have been identified. 26 of them were 18 or younger.

To Mal
Very young people can legally enter night clubs if they are accompanied by their parents or other relatives.
BTW: Don't forget that at Crans-Montana everyone knows everyone, flat owners form other areas who spend regularly their holidays there included.

When the ceiling began to burn, people didn't realize the danger and tried to extinct the fire (without success) instead of leaving the local immediately.

Thanks for the clarification heti and neckervd. My Yank mindset is showing; we have strict (some might say archaic) laws regarding alcohol and underage kids at clubs here, so I assumed it would be similar, but just a younger drinking age.

A musician who spent his life playing clubs advised when entering any venue, to take just a few seconds and check things out...exits, potential bottlenecks, stairs, alternate exit routes contrary to where the crowd might go in an emergency or stampede. Not always top of mind going to dinner or to a club with friends or on holiday, but very important and especially so in places we are not familiar with. Despite inspections and safety procedures, all it takes is one stupid with a flare gun to burn down the entire casino, or one sparkler to ignite a tragedy.

flamable foam on the ceiling, fireworks indoors, restricted fire exists. Someone has been very lax. Sad people had to die for this. See also Grenfell Tower UK (flamable material on exterior, broken fire zones) Someone was very lax there and still people will not learn. Or the 128 who died in Hong Kong in November from flamable building material on outside of building, blocked escape routes.

I completely agree. WTH were they thinking? It's bad enough to have sparklers at an indoor event, but to have them in a place where people have been drinking for a few hours is incredibly stupid. That, combined with the lack of safe exits, is a recipe for disaster. RIP to the lost souls and a speedy recovery to the injured.

It appears that the club used materials that burst into flames. If it was that egg-carton acoustic foam, that will immediately turn into a roaring fire. At that point it would be a miracle to get out of there alive. It happens within seconds.

Almost all restaurants will put sparklers on birthday cakes and have people drinking. That's not the problem. And fire exits work as long as you are not engulfed in an inferno. Even with proper exits, it still takes time to get out of a burning building.

It is vitally important to only use flame-proof materials.

I worked in a theatre that, as they all must, used flame-proof curtains. One day a 1,000 watt stage light got kicked and was pointing directly into a curtain. The light burned a hole into the curtain at the exact spot it was pointing. It was a clean, precise hole. But no other part of the curtain got damaged. No flames were created. And it wasn't until after the show the hole was noticed.

What a terrible tragedy, such sorrow and grief for so many young people.

Yesterday the NYT ran a photo of the head of the local fire department marching in mourning down a street in C-M, receiving applause from the crowd.

I felt this was really astounding. The bar had had only 3 fire inspections in the last 10 years, according to the owners, while the law mandates an annual inspection. So it seems the fire department, at least for one, failed to do its job, and that was a big factor in the fire and the tragic events. Isn't this guy at least partly responsible? Fire inspections are the law. They weren't done. A tragic fire takes 40 young lives. Then the fire dept takes applause in public? Is anyone else confused? What am I missing?

Does the fire department do site inspections?

Is there not some sort of public building control mechanism?

I really don't know how it works in this Canton, but this subject can affect us all so interested to see what the mechanism is.

We know in the UK and Hong Kong the system failed, the first because of government oversight removal and the second because no risk assessement occured and building control failed in both. In the UK the fire service does do site visits but not frequently and more to review site access rather than material selection.

Yes, that's something I'm interested in, and will see what happens and what we learn with the investigation. Is the local fire dept the one responsible for the inspections? A Cantonal fire dept? Another government office? Maybe one of our Swiss posters here can let us know how it works there. I would really think, though, that a fire dept would be involved somehow -- scheduling or inspecting or escorting ... somehow involved.

I agree - to an extent. MY FIL wis a retired fire station chief an throughout his career and dealt with countless major incidents involving loss of life. Fire services can only ever act on the rules set by others, central of local government. If they failed on implementing the set procedures and checks then of course they are responsible, at least in part. I did find it rather crass to see the firefighters attending the scene so soon after the event to join in with the grieving parents. However, as in most situations like this the responsibility rarely lies solely in one place. The management of the club for one, building inspectors, the legislators who allow kids in nightclubs etc etc. The parents of the young people killed and injured are I am sure, blaming themselves for allow their kids to go there in the first place.

What struck me was the news footage of video taken by those at the club showing people videoing the ceiling on fire at the same time as people continuing to party and dance around them. Surely the Insta generation at its worst.

I drive past Grenfell Tower once a week and that is testament to the fact that , in the UK fire safety is still not taken that seriously years after that tragedy.

When Weisserr Tee and me posted about the Crans-Montana fire on January 1st, nobody in this forum read the posts or was interested in.
I wasn't particularly surprised as for most people in this forum, Switzerland consists only of Zurich, Lucerne, Interlaken, Wengen, Grindelwald, Muerren and Gimmelwald.
Four days later, everybody here is an expert.
Most of the questions and hypotheses mentioned above have already been answerd by local authorities or other specialists, either in press conferences (the next one will take place in 27 hrs) or in interviews with Radio and TV journalists.
There is no doubt that a lot of mistakes have been made in the last years (but not necessarily those mentioned by some posters above)..
But it doesn't make much sense to speculate before the official investigation report will be published.
In Switzerland a person is considered as unguilty as tong as there is not proofed that she is guilty.
Uncorrect condemnations in advance of trial in the networks can have dramatic consequences not only for the persons concerned but for whole families.

Oh gosh, neckervd, you have no idea what I read or am interested in, or when I became interested. I rarely post here, so my posts here are no indication.

I posted this time because I was curious about what government office at what level of government is responsible for the fire inspections that, reportedly, didn't happen. My curiosity came out of that photo published by the NYT showing the fire official receiving applause from the folks on the street. I though it was quite brazen because it is possible that official or that office might be involved in the lapsed inspections ... in some way. It's also obviously possible he or that office are not at all involved. I'm not speculating. I'm wondering.

s

neckervd, sorry if I have offended you, just trying to understand the mechanisms

I didn't mean you, swandav, who BTW lives in the mountains too
Bilboburgler, nobody offended me, don^t worry.

If one wants to understand the whole thing, one must know how Switzerland is organized.
Switzerland has grown dufring centuries as a not much consolidated Union of indipendent Republics called canton, 3 at th beginning, 13 from 1513 until 1798 and actually 26.
Until 1798, each canton was fully indipendent and the only common thing was the miliatary defenc agaionst aggressors.
Since 1848, we have all he same National Laws, the same currency, a unique post, a unique army and a Central Government.
Since then, the country got more and more centralized but never in the same manner as oour neighbours.
Still now, the Cantons are small republics with own Constitutions and cantonal laws which must just not be in opposition with National law.
And in some Cantons, even the communes/cities/villagers have a large autonomy.
In the present case, fire protection regulations are national law, but each canton decides how to fulfil them,
In some Cantons, the fulfilment is even delegated to the cities.
And that can cause problems at small places where eveeryone knows everyone.
In fact, this bottom up prctice of Switzerland can lead to situations where locals control more or less themselfs,.......

Whew. Glad it wasn't me, too!

s

We had a minute of silence at our school here in Switzerland. I teach students between 15 and 18. Not all the students had heard about this tragedy and none had ever experienced a moment of silence before.

My heart goes out to the victims and families.