Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

[Vixen]

Exactly. We've already discussed this, at length. I provides energy estimates, which Vixen (of course) ignored in favour of gibbering about conspiracies and electric vehicles.

The fire started in a diesel vehicle, we even know the type, and spread probably because of liquid fuel carrying the flames.

You have to explain how that spread to Vehicle #1 and then #2 and #3, etc.

In the case of the Liverpool Fire on New Years Eve 2018, the car had already been smouldering for some while. The press immediately identified the make and model. In fact, the cause of the fire in that Vehicle Zero was a 'modified engine'. This was revealed by 24 Jan 2019.

Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson has revealed what caused the ECHO arena car park fire.

Almost 1400 cars were destroyed on New Year’s Eve when the multi-storey car park burst into flames after a 16-year-old car caught fire on the third floor.

At tonight’s full council meeting Mayor Joe said that the car that started the blaze had been converted to a “different fuel arrangement“.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/mayor-joe-reveals-what-caused-14199555


So for some mysterious reason, details of the Luton Airport Fire are closely guarded. No doubt, to protect the reputation of Tata's Jaguar Land Rover brand. IMV that is a misuse of confidentiality when the public has a right to know, as it is a public area of public interest, as well as the Fire Brigade and Police being funded by the UK taxpayer. How incredibly patronizing to adopt the attitude that such information cannot be given to the lowly plebs because the bastards gossip and spread anti-EV fearmongering on social media, seems to be the ethos and reasoning behind the highhanded stance..

 

[Vixen]

That article says the allocation of supermarket shelf space could be done more optimally by employing operations research, but explicitly says current practice is generally not so scientific:



As for what that tells us about the Luton Airport Car Park Fire, it says only that a person who has spent months failing to understand simple English sentences confirming the fire began in a diesel vehicle is such an unreliable source that she has cited an article disproving her contention that accountants use scientific methods when calculating shelf space in supermarkets.

Supermarket shelves are a tiny part of it. It was one example.

A notable example of a chartered accountant (assuming she still has her membership) with a science ackground is Thérèse Coffey, who served in the cabinet positions of Environment Secretary, Health Secretary and Work and Pensions Secretary. A member of the Conservative Party.

She had a PhD in Chemistry before transferring her skills to professional accountancy. https://www.theresecoffey.co.uk/about-therese

Would you claim she is 'not a scientist' because she is now a politician? If not, why not?

There is no reason why someone with an arts background couldn't do the same but they might well not get the exemptions from the certificate level.

 

[Vixen]

Based on what?

As of the time of the Liverpool ECHO Fire Report 2019:

Although there were no cases of structural collapse of a car park due to fire in
the UK, there have been cases in Europe. Notably, Gretzenbach in
Switzerland, where an underground car park collapsed, resulting in the death
of 7 firefighters (BD2552 Fire Resistance p.98).

Yet the Luton Airport Car Park collapsed! Despite the lessons learned from Liverpool.

Likewise, fire is not supposed to spread between parked cars in a car park of that type:

In 1968, The Ministry of Technology and Fire Offices’ Committee Joint Fire Research
Organisation produced Fire Note No.10, “Fire and Car-Park Buildings”. This document
was the result of a research experiment, exploring the likelihood of fire spread from
one vehicle to another, which would, in turn, determine the fire resistance
requirements of the structures. The structures were classed as ‘light storage’ and had,
up until then, been mainly constructed from reinforced concrete, which was the
cheapest construction material that would comply with fire resistance of 1 hour under
the Building Regulations 1965.
However, the document noted that if fire resistance requirements were removed, then
a steel frame construction would be cheaper. It states in its summary, “The
experimental work carried out…..confirms the fact that an outbreak of fire,
within a single parked car, is unlikely to result in uncontrollable fire spread in
the car park or in serious damage to the structure of the building.”

https://www.bafsa.org.uk/wp-content...er/2018/12/Merseyside-FRS-Car-Park-Report.pdf

Stop pretending the Luton car park fire was quite normal.

 

[JayUtah]

Supermarket shelves are a tiny part of it.

None of that discussion makes you the mathematician and the scientist you claimed to be. You are demonstrably incompetent at science.

 

[JayUtah]

As of the time of the Liverpool ECHO Fire Report 2019...

Which of your "Master's degree equivalents" trained you to compare and contrast the results of a forensic engineering investigation in a meaningful way?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Again Vixen, what makes you think you're competent to argue that the two fires should have been comparable and that the Luton fire was extraordinary?

Your say so doesn't cut it unless you prove we should listen to you with experience or expertise. 'It just looks funny dunnit?' Isn't acceptable.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Conflating 'fuel lines' with 'running fuel fires' is pretty funny.

 

[JayUtah]

A notable example of a chartered accountant ... with a science background is Thérèse Coffey...

She had a PhD in Chemistry before transferring her skills to professional accountancy.

No, she acquired additional skills in accountancy. Just as I had to acquire additional skills in business. I didn't "transfer" my scientific and engineering skills. They're still there, doing what they have always done. Her science skills are still there. They didn't somehow transmogrify into accounting skills.

Your undergraduate degree in which you dabbled in science topics doesn't make you a scientist. You trying to portray your vocational accountant's training as some kind of scientific credential doesn't make you a scientist.

Would you claim she is 'not a scientist' because she is now a politician?

She is a scientist because she has an actual credential and experience in science. You don't. That she later went on also to acquire expertise in accounting doesn't somehow make one discipline the other.

There is no reason why someone with an arts background couldn't do the same but they might well not get the exemptions from the certificate level.

You aren't a scientist. We say this because when we watch you try to do science, you are especially inept at it. You can't demonstrate basic scientific literacy, which casts considerable doubt on all the claims you've made on the basis of your own supposed scientific understanding. Posturing your irrelevant credentials doesn't make you less inept. Pointing out how others have succeeded where you've failed does not make you less inept.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

For an explanation...

No explanation is required thanks. I was referring to your previous confusion where you conflated a reference to cars' fuel lines with fuel flowing across a floor.

 

[LondonJohn]

Uncontrollable lithium-ion fire, obvs.

But:

1) It's now been made explicitly and unequivocally clear by Beds Fire & Rescue Service that the car in which the fire started was a traditional diesel vehicle and not a hybrid of any variety.

Therefore:

2) The car did not have a lithium ion battery.

And:

3) You stated that you didn't consider Beds Fire & Rescue Service to have lied in its latest communication.

So:

How do you reconcile all of the above with your continued (nonsensical and thoroughly farcical at this point) belief that what happened here was an "uncontrollable lithium-ion fire, obvs"?

 

[LondonJohn]

No explanation is required thanks. I was referring to your previous confusion where you conflated a reference to cars' fuel lines with fuel flowing across a floor.

She actually did the very same thing again in that "explanatory" post you're replying to here:

According to BRE experiments, that in such a situation it would take roughly twenty minutes for cars parked next to each other to ignite from such a line.

 

[zooterkin]

Uncontrollable lithium-ion fire, obvs.

In a diesel car?



And why, then, is your previous post wittering about fuel fires?

 

[catsmate]

Only so long as we have sufficient ragamuffins who can be prevailed upon to run the missives from the Postal Offices to their final destination on promise of a shiney sixpence. Good thing the little rascals can't read eh, or what knows what mischief they might get up to with the information contained there in!

Sixpence? SIXPENCE???
What are you? Some sort of socialist? Good god sir a penny is more than sufficient....

 

[catsmate]

You have to explain how that spread to Vehicle #1 and then #2 and #3, etc.

Already answered, numerous times. Leaking liquid fuel.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Sixpence? SIXPENCE???
What are you? Some sort of socialist? Good god sir a penny is more than sufficient....

Ops. Don't tell my club I said that, they'll have me radished!

 

[LondonJohn]

Only so long as we have sufficient ragamuffins who can be prevailed upon to run the missives from the Postal Offices to their final destination on promise of a shiney sixpence. Good thing the little rascals can't read eh, or what knows what mischief they might get up to with the information contained there in!

Closer to the truth than you might have thought!

Many years ago I wrote a paper on the disruptive effects/consequences of certain new technologies, and how often reactionary voices had failed - initially at least - to understand the power and the paradigm-shifting qualities of these new technologies (it was around the time that Bill Gates, probably through a combination of initial short-sightedness and protection of his own physical software business model, had publicly come out against the spread and utility of the internet).

Anyhow, in researching other older technologies, I came across a quote from the 1870s from the then chief engineer of the British Post Office, who had this to say about the telephone:

"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

 

[LondonJohn]

(Now back to your scheduled programming, obviously!)

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Closer to the truth than you might have thought!

Many years ago I wrote a paper on the disruptive effects/consequences of certain new technologies, and how often reactionary voices had failed - initially at least - to understand the power and the paradigm-shifting qualities of these new technologies (it was around the time that Bill Gates, probably through a combination of initial short-sightedness and protection of his own physical software business model, had publicly come out against the spread and utility of the internet).

Anyhow, in researching other older technologies, I came across a quote from the 1870s from the then chief engineer of the British Post Office, who had this to say about the telephone:

"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys."



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17510101

Actually that was the quote I was thinking of when I wrote it, although I'll admit I didn't remember it word for.word.

 

[Vixen]

But:

1) It's now been made explicitly and unequivocally clear by Beds Fire & Rescue Service that the car in which the fire started was a traditional diesel vehicle and not a hybrid of any variety.

Therefore:

2) The car did not have a lithium ion battery.

And:

3) You stated that you didn't consider Beds Fire & Rescue Service to have lied in its latest communication.

So:

How do you reconcile all of the above with your continued (nonsensical and thoroughly farcical at this point) belief that what happened here was an "uncontrollable lithium-ion fire, obvs"?

Consider this: Car Zero is a diesel car. Not parked in a bay. It has an electrical fault. Since Liverpool, multi-storey open car parks are now designed to obviate fuel fire lines along the ground, i.e., any such spillage drains away properly and not onto lower floors.

Car #1: a petrol-hybrid (ha!) is the car that goes into thermal runaway, as petrol ignites very easily and Car #1 or #2 or #3 is the real cause of the uncontrollable fire with intense levels of heat that cause the steel rebars to deform by bending causing the concrete to collapse and literally melt in places.

Question: was Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service being 100% honest when it hammered the public over the head that the fire was not caused by any kind of electric vehicle?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

 

[JayUtah]

Consider this:

Are you qualified as a forensic investigator? A simple yes or no will suffice.