Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen said:
As I pointed out, this has nothing to do with 'national security'.

Here you can ring up the national population centre and ask for anybody's address. When I worked in insolvency practice we had no problem in finding people and discovering what assets they owned via Land Registry and it was all quite legal.
Click to expand...

Nobody cares. Why do you keep mentioning it when it's totally ******* irrelevant?

You cannot determine an owner's name and address via a car reg. IN THE UK except by written application to DVLA, and they will want a good, well-documented reason and are notoriously slow.
 
Dabop said:
It actually worked out only about 100kg heavier than normal- and in a ute with a 1000kg payload capacity, and a 2400kg tow capacity- that 100kg is practically nothing....

Losing a cast iron diesel block, and a 75L fuel tank makes up almost all the extra battery weight...
And it has a massive improvement in acceleration to boot- he can easily take on V8's with a 0-100 time of about 7 seconds- the stock 3L diesel takes about 15 seconds to to the same thing...
He also gets to run basically for free (only rego and tyres etc) since 2009, where my almost identical ute (except mines 4wd) costs $10 per 100km in fuel alone...

(his house is offgrid, with his solar panels recharging the ute during the day, as well as the house battery bank)
Click to expand...


I mentioned it previously but there is a good tv show all about converting cars to EV. It follows a company in Wales that specialise in it.
Lots of custom engineering of mounts and adapter plates involved.

https://www.vintagevoltage.tv/
 
Vixen said:
AIUI It was one and a half hours to the floor collapsing.
Click to expand...
One and a half hours after what point, and based on what evidence?

When so many cars had been ablaze for so long what made you decide you knew exactly which car from floor 3 was shown falling through a collapsing floor in a video that may well be a camera on the ground floor?

Rhetorical question of course: you just made it up. You made up a story in your head and that became the truth for you and how dare these fools challenge it?

This thread is a low ebb.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
One and a half hours after what point, and based on what evidence?

When so many cars had been ablaze for so long what made you decide you knew exactly which car from floor 3 was shown falling through a collapsing floor in a video that may well be a camera on the ground floor?

Rhetorical question of course: you just made it up. You made up a story in your head and that became the truth for you and how dare these fools challenge it?

This thread is a low ebb.
Click to expand...

Hard to see how it could be anything else. There are entry barriers there and I've only ever seen those at the ground level.
 
I still would like to see their filled in insurance form. "Please list other vehicles involved in the claim", "Please list the damage to the other vehicles involved in the incident".
 
Andy_Ross said:
Why would you rely on a second hand source in a newspaper rather than the fire service themselves?
Click to expand...

Me! Me! Pick me!!

Sophistry.

Google dictionary:


noun sophistry
the use of fallacious arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
a fallacious argument.
specious reasoning the use of fallacious arguments sophism casuistry quibbling equivocation fallaciousness fallacious argument sophism fallacy quibble paralogism
 
Andy_Ross said:
Why would you rely on a second hand source in a newspaper rather than the fire service themselves?
Click to expand...

Because conspiracies abound!!! Official statements are always worded to deceive and cover up vitally important information. Only intrepid reporters (and renowned internet sleuths :D) have the fortitude to ferret out the actual details and report them accurately. Anything written in a newspaper (or blog, etc.) is true by virtue of where it is reported, and cannot be questioned.
 
Vixen said:
His video was used by the worldwide press, including BBC, ITV, APF and Reuters. He confirmed it was his original and he has the copyright. Unlike the guy who claims to have the film from the front of the vehicle and the person who claims to have deciphered the number plate and identified the make and model. Learn to spot fake from authentic.
Click to expand...
You think that online AI can match a scene so well in a video? Maybe a professional job can do well, but a low number of followers suggests he's not a pro troll.

I could be wrong, but your list of discrepancies suggests that you are quick to dismiss evidence that doesn't suit you.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Vixen said:
They are just giving you bland platitudes. Within hours a fire fighter told a journalist it was probably a fuel line leak (just like the one in Liverpool). Learn to differentiate considered speculation from confirmed fact.

It is clear the brand is being protected for now or it would have been named.

It is only speculation it was a Range Rover. Some say it is a Tesla from its outline.
Click to expand...

Again, you are missing the point. They could have said nothing about whether it was vehicle fault, driver fault or intentional. If they're trying to avoid casting attention on the manufacturer, this would be the thing to do. If they're willing to bend the truth, either of the other two causes would serve a purpose.

If the arrest announcement was intended to distract attention away from the vehicle, then they purposely undercut its affect by blaming vehicle fault in the same press conference.

It doesn't matter whether the phrase "vehicle fault" is vague or precise. It has the opposite effect of what you claim they desired.
 
Vixen said:
Learn to spot fake from authentic.
Click to expand...
This thread has given us so many opportunities to learn that skill that we should, by now, be pretty good at distinguishing fake expertise from authentic.

Vixen said:
Learn to differentiate considered speculation from confirmed fact.
Click to expand...
Good idea.

These are confirmed facts:
Andy_Ross said:
It has been confirmed that it was a diesel car. You can read it on the official fire service website.
Click to expand...

Andy_Ross said:
It has been confirmed that it was a diesel car by the fire service.
Click to expand...

Andy_Ross said:
It has been confirmed to be a diesel car by the fire service.
It was confirmed weeks ago.
Click to expand...
 
Vixen said:
The spread of fire is quite predictable. This is why fire prevention and safety measures work. When they go wrong it will be to do with human error.
Click to expand...

So, it is your opinion that if there are two car park fires that began with the same make of vehicle and both lead to a collapse of the car park, then the length of time from ignition of the fire to the collapse will be roughly the same? If it varies by too much, then the two initial vehicles cannot be the same?

We haven't heard whether the two car parks had the same density of vehicles, how many vehicles were close to the initial vehicle and other details of vehicle placement. You and I don't know about differences in construction of the car park, whether the effects of ventilation were similar and I'm sure a million details that I'm just too ignorant to come up with. But no matter. Range Rover? Check. Car park? Check. Eventual collapse? Check. Conclusion: If the three things above are true, the time to collapse will be roughly the same.

Is that how it works?

The expected rate of fire spread might be well known (or maybe it isn't), but it isn't known by you, Vixen.

I don't know how long the fire lasted in Liverpool. The one in Luton took around two hours or so before the collapse. How long in Liverpool?
 
Vixen said:
AIUI It was one and a half hours to the floor collapsing.
Click to expand...

You didn't address anything I asked, or any points I made.

Do you think that video shows a single, electric powered vehicle melting through the floor of the garage?

Why won't you acknowledge the NHTSA report finding that EVs and hybrid fires are no more intense than gasoline and diesel vehicle fires?
 
JayUtah said:
I've only done one motor vehicle conversion. It was a 1917 Ford Model T we bought for use in the theater (Ragtime). We removed the gasoline engine altogether and sold it to a restorer. We then connected a 4 h.p. DC electric motor directly to the drive shaft and powered it with a mess of 12-volt regular car batteries stashed in the (now largely empty) engine compartment. Not strictly street legal, and never caught fire.
Click to expand...
Did you do something to keep the engine noise?
 
Vixen said:
Here we have someone who believes in obviously fake news and has the temerity to claim they have 'drivel' detectors.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
We're still waiting for you to prove the fire started in anything other than a diesel....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom