An early Friday morning fire at aircraft covering manufacturer Poly-Fiber, Inc., has dented the company's operations... but not nearly as badly as one might first assume. Poly-Fiber's Jon Goldenbaum assures ANN that "...we'll be up and operating in a matter of days and since our distributors are fully stocked, we see little reason to think that orders will be delayed much, if at all."

The fire destroyed one of Poly-Fiber's buildings, housing some warehouse space, fabric stock, and office facilities. Most effected was a stock of aircraft fabric, but orders have already been placed with vendors and PF expects to be fully restocked shortly.

Goldenbaum was the first on the scene and was surprised to find that the damage would not affect them all that badly, "it'll be pretty much business as normal within a few days and the long-term effects are not likely to be noticeable. We're insured for the rest."

The fire, said to be electrical in nature, was allowed to burn down by the local fire department because of concerns over the nature of the materials in the building. Located on the fringes of the FlaBob airport, Poly-Fiber is a major force in sport and general aviation covering technologies (Poly-Fiber, Stits and Ceconite technologies, among others) and responsible for the "skins" applied to most of the fabric covered aircraft in the world. The fire did not impinge on their actual manufacturing operations, and the 15 person workforce was not endangered since the fire occurred before they showed up to work that day.

Local fire officials estimated that the loss of the 6300 square foot building and its contents at about 2 million dollars. The fire reportedly started at 0700 local time. Fire crews arriving on the scene found "large black plumes of smoke billowing into the air." The decision to let the fire burn out was made in order to avoid the "danger of forcing dangerous chemicals into a nearby flood control channel," according to Becky Luther, fire prevention specialist for the Riverside County Fire Department. "Putting water on the chemically-induced fire would have caused a toxic runoff into the channel located behind the business... We allowed the fire to burn because it was less hazardous than if we had been putting water on it and (engaging) in active fire fighting."

The fire was said to be contained at 0945 and threatened no other structures in the area.

FMI: www.polyfiber.com