Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
catsmate said:
Did you do something to keep the engine noise?
Click to expand...

We just had the actor playing Colehouse go "Pbpbpbpbpbp..." with his lips.

All seriousness aside, we experimented with a sound module and speakers, but in the end we had engine noises in the sound mix. This was back in the early 2000s and we didn't have a reliable way to operate the sound module remotely.
 
I heard about a house that burned down from a lit cigarette. Cover up sheeple! We all know that cigarettes don't burn hot enough to gut an entire house. Maybe it was an eCigarette and the government's suppressing it?
 
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...

The Fire Brigade called major incident 21:38 as the time the fire could not be contained. The date and time-stamped CCTV video of the floor collapsing was reported by reporters as being 'about 23:30'. But see Mr. O'Reardon's authenticated video, which he tweeted at 23:15 10 October time-stamped by X/Twitter, so it was even earlier than that. That makes it closer to one and a half hours than two hours. The initial fire was first reported 20:47. 10 October.

Take a moment to think about how incredibly fast all of this was, when Liverpool ECHO Fire took two hours before it was declared uncontrollable.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Take a moment to think about how incredibly fast all of this was, when Liverpool ECHO Fire took two hours before it was declared uncontrollable.
Click to expand...

I've taken several decades to consider such things. You are not the teacher. You're frantically waving your ignorant hands trying to make enough hay to get attention. Armchair detectives are worse than useless.
 
Darat said:
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".
Click to expand...

If the urban myth turns out to be true and the owner is a toff who could afford a £100,000 personalized number plate and who expected airport staff to deal with his smouldering car whilst he raced off to his flight for his 'urgent meeting', then think of his face when he is hit with the bill for 1,400 cars, his insurers covering the first £2m Public cover maximum. As I recall, the Cork fire bill came to claims of over €30m and that was only 60 vehicles destroyed, plus damage to a shopping centre. Add up the Luton fire and we are seeing £20m building costs (built by Buckinghamshire Construction, which went bust a couple of years ago) plus, plus, plus +++. This urban myth guy, if he is wealthy won't be wealthy for much longer. If he is on benefits, he could pay it off at £1 a week by arrangement with his creditors and DWP Universal Credit.
 
phiwum said:
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
Click to expand...

No media has used it AFAIAA, whilst the back view has been published extensively, including the BBC.
 
Vixen said:
Read the captions which DAILY TELEGRAPH itself notated over the video.
Click to expand...

"Video footage has emerged apparently showing the moment a multi-storey car park at Luton Airport partially collapsed after a diesel car caught fire before spreading to other vehicles.

CCTV captured from inside the terminal car park appears to show the ceiling crashing to the ground after one car caught alight on Tuesday night.

The Telegraph has spoken to multiple airport workers who say the footage, which is dated on Tuesday, is accurate."

link (The Global Herald, stating it's The Telegraph's original words)

Is that what you mean?
 
phiwum said:
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.
Click to expand...

'Vehicle fault' is just a platitudinous variation of 'it appears accidental, at this stage'.


This means from what witnesses have reported this is what it appears to be at first sight. The Fire Brigade still have to investigate properly and bring out a Fire Report into the blaze, this time based on solid fact and not initial speculation.
 
phiwum said:
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?
Click to expand...

If anything, the Liverpool ECHO fire should have been far faster ceteris paribus as despite being classed as an open-sided car park, its sheer floor area gave it the effect of being semi-closed (thus having a detrimental effect on the speed of fire spreading) as is explained in the Merseyside Fire Brigade's report. Fire chiefs said this was the worst car park fire they had seen.

The Luton car park fire spread twice as fast (51 minutes from first alarm to major incident) as the Liverpool one (almost two hours before firemen had to retreat from the building, when it spread to the next floor up).
 
Last edited:
Foster Zygote said:
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?
Click to expand...

I was quoting the DAILY TELEGRAPH.

Not true. Lithium battery fires burn at a much higher temperature than petrol or diesel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom