Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jack by the hedge said:
... is a secondary source. The Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service is a primary source for what the Befordshire Fire and Rescue Service says.

There is no aspect of this trivial concept you can honestly fail to grasp. What conclusion do you think people should draw from your continuing rejection of what they say on their own website?
Click to expand...

Primary research is original source. Secondary research is people quoting what they thought guy no. 1 said and opinion (as in market research).
 
LondonJohn said:
As I suspect has already been pointed out on this interminable (and interminably ignorant & ill-informed, on the part of one poster) thread:

It would have taken even an inexpert eye (eg I could have done it myself) no more than a couple of minutes - once the car had cooled down enough to be examined properly - to ascertain with total certainty that

1) there was a sizeable engine under the bonnet (hood) which was clearly the powerplant;

2) the topology of the engine showed clearly that it was a diesel engine rather than a petrol (gasoline) engine; and

3) there was the total absence of either an electric motor or any form of Li-Ion battery cell structure anywhere in the vehicle.

Therefore, it was indeed possible for the Fire Service to be 100% certain, once they'd removed the vehicle to their premises and conducted a proper visual examination as outlined above, that this was a vehicle powered solely by a conventional diesel engine. And that, of course, is precisely what the Fire Service explicitly stated on its own website.

Anything else is either ignorance or obfuscation or both. I suspect both.
Click to expand...


Nope, most of the cars are still ensconced in the building and may never be recovered. We don't know if said Car Zero has been recovered (if it has, must have been done in secrecy or it would have featured in the news!). If you are claiming you have seen a picture of this 'sizeable engine under the bonnet' - and let's not forget half of the chassis is pure styling (cf the BMW: a big car with a small engine); so you can't tell by looking at a vehicle as to its roadworthiness, engine size or even what is under the bonnet - perhaps you can provide us with the picture.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Primary research is original source.
Click to expand...

Reading newspaper is not primary research.

The point stands that you're dismissing what the primary source says, preferring to quibble over what secondary sources say, purely so you can keep your game of pointless contrarianism rolling along.
 
Vixen said:
We don't know if said Car Zero has been recovered (if it has, must have been done in secrecy or it would have featured in the news!).
Click to expand...

Do you imagine journalists waiting around the car park, pencils poised over their shorthand notepads, champing at the bit to break the news the world is holding its breath for?

Good grief. Your notion of 'evidence' that the burnt out car hasn't been examined is that other stories have pushed Luton off the news pages therefore it didn't happen.

I can't help thinking this is just the sort of stuff to which you would retort "So you only believe what the newspapers tell you then?".
 
Vixen said:
Nope, most of the cars are still ensconced in the building and may never be recovered. We don't know if said Car Zero has been recovered (if it has, must have been done in secrecy or it would have featured in the news!). If you are claiming you have seen a picture of this 'sizeable engine under the bonnet' - and let's not forget half of the chassis is pure styling (cf the BMW: a big car with a small engine); so you can't tell by looking at a vehicle as to its roadworthiness, engine size or even what is under the bonnet - perhaps you can provide us with the picture.
Click to expand...


Completely missing the point. Again.

The point I was (very obviously) making was that it will have been extremely simple for the fire service to determine the powertrain type of "Car Zero" by visual inspection alone. Obviously that wouldn't have been possible while the cars in question were still very hot and while the structural integrity of the car park was uncertain (hence the initial "believed to be a diesel vehicle" statement). But once it became possible to conduct even a cursory visual examination of the car, it would have been almost childishly simple to ascertain that the powertrain was a conventional diesel engine (and that there were no electric motors or large battery cell packs within the car). Which is exactly why the Fire Service was able to state with certainty, a few days after the fire, that "Car Zero" was a conventional diesel vehicle.

Ceteris paribus, in loco parentis, primus inter pares, sine qua non.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Do you imagine journalists waiting around the car park, pencils poised over their shorthand notepads, champing at the bit to break the news the world is holding its breath for?

Good grief. Your notion of 'evidence' that the burnt out car hasn't been examined is that other stories have pushed Luton off the news pages therefore it didn't happen.

I can't help thinking this is just the sort of stuff to which you would retort "So you only believe what the newspapers tell you then?".
Click to expand...


Ah, Vixen's critical thinking and analysis faculties are on a higher plane than ours. She demonstrates through her posts that she's not going to be hoodwinked like the rest of us. Would that I could attain those levels.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Reading newspaper is not primary research.

The point stands that you're dismissing what the primary source says, preferring to quibble over what secondary sources say, purely so you can keep your game of pointless contrarianism rolling along.
Click to expand...

Nice attempt at reversing places. Original source: verbatim quote from Beds Fire Chief Andrew Hopkinson. Secondary source subeditors and people like yourself looking for a pithy soundbite, disguised as 'information'.

I will await the report when the investigation has concluded and not before.

A good judge and jury does not come to a verdict until he or she has heard ALL of the evidence placed before the court, in this case an investigation.
 
Vixen said:
Nice attempt at reversing places. Original source: verbatim quote from Beds Fire Chief Andrew Hopkinson. Secondary source subeditors and people like yourself looking for a pithy soundbite, disguised as 'information'.

I will await the report when the investigation has concluded and not before.

A good judge and jury does not come to a verdict until he or she has heard ALL of the evidence placed before the court, in this case an investigation.
Click to expand...

You're lying again.
 
LondonJohn said:
Completely missing the point. Again.

The point I was (very obviously) making was that it will have been extremely simple for the fire service to determine the powertrain type of "Car Zero" by visual inspection alone. Obviously that wouldn't have been possible while the cars in question were still very hot and while the structural integrity of the car park was uncertain (hence the initial "believed to be a diesel vehicle" statement). But once it became possible to conduct even a cursory visual examination of the car, it would have been almost childishly simple to ascertain that the powertrain was a conventional diesel engine (and that there were no electric motors or large battery cell packs within the car). Which is exactly why the Fire Service was able to state with certainty, a few days after the fire, that "Car Zero" was a conventional diesel vehicle.

Ceteris paribus, in loco parentis, primus inter pares, sine qua non.
Click to expand...


But don't you see, you are not believing your own eyes. The CCTV image clearly depicts what looks like a classic lithium fire (orange, red flames shooting out with grey smoke) and not a diesel one (thick billowing black clouds). In addition, were the car a completely conventional derv it would not self combust like that. Even if it was an unexpected electrical fault (which to be fair would not be surprising in a Range Rover model, if that is what it was, given its recent history of recall), the Fire Brigade, which arrived in eight minutes (verified fact) should have had no problem in putting it out, even if it had spread to one or more other cars. So definitely more probably a mild hybrid for it to become so intense and uncontrollable within minutes, two empty fire extinguishers as evidence of this.

Hopkinson's statement was obviously one of 'reassuring the public' (i.e., let's not panic about EV's, arson or terrorism) and reassure the public that 'we do not believe it was an EV. It is believed to be accidental and a diesel at this stage, subject to verification'.

Note the gag in naming the model and make or even the driver.
 
Vixen said:
... the Fire Brigade, which arrived in eight minutes (verified fact) should have had no problem in putting it out, even if it had spread to one or more other cars.
...
Click to expand...

Vast sack of bollocks. It was on the 3rd level and close to many other cars.

We've already established that a fire engine couldn't drive in there, leaving the only routes to the fire being up staircases or via a 'cherry-picker' type platform from the outside. How long do you think that kind of operation takes to set up, even if it enables good access to the fire?

Once again, please do review that video of an American fire crew attending a car fire in the open air, in daytime, with very easy access. It takes several minutes to get in position and deploy hoses before beginning the actual fire fighting.

Do stop talking crap.

Caveat emptor
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
...the Fire Brigade, which arrived in eight minutes (verified fact) should have had no problem in putting it out...
Click to expand...

This is silly. Fires are not nearly so predictable. When I was on my township's rescue squad, we saw everything from sustained burning for a half hour to sudden explosions when there was no evident fire. You just don't know. Eight to fifteen minutes for containment are average times, not some kind of absolute.

Vixen said:
...I will await the report when the investigation has concluded and not before...
Click to expand...

Good suggestion, but this thread would not exist if you heeded it.
 
Vixen said:
The CCTV image clearly depicts what looks like a classic lithium fire (orange, red flames shooting out with grey smoke) and not a diesel one (thick billowing black clouds).
Click to expand...

I reject your simplistic and completely inexpert diagnosis.
 
Vixen said:
But don't you see, you are not believing your own eyes. The CCTV image clearly depicts what looks like a classic lithium fire (orange, red flames shooting out with grey smoke) and not a diesel one (thick billowing black clouds). In addition, were the car a completely conventional derv it would not self combust like that. Even if it was an unexpected electrical fault (which to be fair would not be surprising in a Range Rover model, if that is what it was, given its recent history of recall), the Fire Brigade, which arrived in eight minutes (verified fact) should have had no problem in putting it out, even if it had spread to one or more other cars. So definitely more probably a mild hybrid for it to become so intense and uncontrollable within minutes, two empty fire extinguishers as evidence of this.

Hopkinson's statement was obviously one of 'reassuring the public' (i.e., let's not panic about EV's, arson or terrorism) and reassure the public that 'we do not believe it was an EV. It is believed to be accidental and a diesel at this stage, subject to verification'.

Note the gag in naming the model and make or even the driver.
Click to expand...

What in your accountant training allows you to make these declarative statements? I notice you never offered proof of battery location in a Land Rover hybrid, but I never really expected that.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Speaking of which, VIXEN. Do you have an example of a diesel to hybrid conversion? Your two previous attempts to show that it was possible and done were both abysmal failures because they were nothing like what was asked. Will the third time be lucky?
Click to expand...

Well vixen?
 
Vixen said:
Nice attempt at reversing places. Original source: verbatim quote from Beds Fire Chief Andrew Hopkinson. Secondary source subeditors and people like yourself looking for a pithy soundbite, disguised as 'information'.

I will await the report when the investigation has concluded and not before.

A good judge and jury does not come to a verdict until he or she has heard ALL of the evidence placed before the court, in this case an investigation.
Click to expand...

Also the official Fire Service website is a primary source.
It has confirmed several weeks ago that the car was a diesel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom