Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[Vixen]

You think the builders going bust five years after building the car park is a reason for the fire service not to state the fire started in a diesel car?

That may be the biggest non-sequitur so far.

How does the quality of construction of the car park affect the fuel type of the car that began the fire?

You will note, we have had all of these 'updates', but then Mojo (inadvertently) showed that all of the updates are simply reiterations of what Mr. Hopkinson already said on 11 October 2023. For example, what he said about sprinklers, reappearing [in 'where's-kate'?-style] six months later. Very clever ploy that, as if it is a genuine update.

I don't believe for a minute that it was 'a diesel fulled car' probably with an electrical fault. This is simply a rehash of what AA's Greg Carter said at the time:

The most common cause of car fires is an electrical fault with the 12-volt battery system, according to AA technical expert Greg Carter. He added that diesel is 'much less flammable' than petrol, and in a car it takes 'intense pressure or sustained flame' to ignite diesel.

Old wine in new bottles.


Absolute scandal.

 

[JayUtah]

We cannot get the information from the usual national press, that's for sure.

Your supply of information is objectively less reliable.

 

[JayUtah]

...it is feasible a government in power will argue it might undermine confidence in a government policy...

This the part you made up.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

It illustrates well that there is a news embargo on reporting EV fires in public places.

Only in your fevered imagination.

 

[Vixen]

If it turned out to be a model of car you owned, what would you do with that information?

'Get it checked' presumably. But it gets checked every time it gets serviced, so what new thing would you ask the garage to look for? What is the value of knowing a similar ten year old car caught fire for some not yet identified reason?

It could be said, the refusal to name the make and model means they have plausible deniability. So for example, should they say it was an RR Evoque or Sport diesel-only, then if it turns out to be untrue then they no longer have plausible deniability and cannot claim it was just 'speculation at an early stage': it becomes straight out lying to the tax-paying public. So we have a vague statement instead designed to fob off interest. They know what car it is so they should be transparent and make it public.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Vixen, are you going to acknowledge me yet? You made a request of me and I responded in two posts.

 

[JayUtah]

The fact it could not pay its tax bill and/or other creditors, such as suppliers, does give rise to the suspicion of skimping on materials or labour.

No. How many engineering or manufacturing companies have you run? Give me a number, please.

I do not know the specific circumstance of this particular case, but you can read about it here:

You don't know the specific circumstances, and you don't know the general principles. You're just making stuff up.

So the lack of sprinklers, following on from the Merseyside Fire Brigade report could have been a cost-saving decision...

Speculation from a position of ignorance.

...they are quite expensive to install

How many have you installed or supervised the installation of?

and the suspicion must arise of poor quality materials being used and safety measures skimped due to a lack of cash flow.

Speculation fom a position of ignorance.

Thus, IMV, it is quite wrong for the Beds Fire & Rescue Service to say, 'Move along nothing to see here, it was just a simple electrical fault in a diesel car*',

They are in a position to know the facts. You are not. You're speculating from a position of ignorance and setting that up as an expectation to which real life is meant to comply. This is how conspiracy theories work.

Yet they refuse to let us know what vehicle it was, together with the careful avoidance of mentioning EV's or Jaguar Land Rover, when they are obviously a factor, together with the sprinkler system not just being an oversight.

Ad hoc expectations you just made up.

 

[Vixen]

Tell us the fuel type of the Liverpool car and how it caught fire. Other owners of cars which have had their fuel system modified in some way will obviously want to get their cars checked. Why won't you tell us?

There is no sign of a fuel leak along the ground behind the vehicle in the CCTV clip, as was the cause of fire hypothesized in the Liverpool fire, and which had been smouldering for a while with no-one present.

 

[JayUtah]

There is no sign of a fuel leak along the ground behind the vehicle in the CCTV clip, as was the cause of fire hypothesized in the Liverpool fire, and which had been smouldering for a while with no-one present.

How many previous structure fires have you professionally investigated?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It illustrates well that there is a news embargo on reporting EV fires in public places.

The statistics I posted long ago showing how many thousands of car fires happen every year demonstrate that it's not a news blackout, it's just not news.

As you're not in the UK you may be unaware that the current fluster is over electric bike and scooter batteries catching fire while on charge. Alarm at recent cases of this has caused my employer to issue an edict banning any charging of bike or scooter batteries in any of our buildings and we're about to spend a fortune on fireproof steel cabinets to house the battery chargers for all equipment that uses lithium ion batteries. (Except phones and laptops.)

If you want to convince us EV fires are a greater risk or have worse consequences than people realise, bring statistics, not crank claims by biased YouTubers.

 

[Vixen]

How does any of that relate to the identity of the car?

It most certianly relates to how the car owner was unable to put out the fire with a simple fire extinguisher as soon as he became aware his vehicle was on fire. It takes time for a vehicle to reach a sufficient temperature to radiate enough heat to cause nearby vehicles to ignite.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I don't believe for a minute that it was 'a diesel fulled car' probably with an electrical fault.

Well you're wrong. Impasse.

 

[zooterkin]

I don't believe for a minute that it was 'a diesel fulled car' probably with an electrical fault.

So, you do believe that the Bedfordshire Fire Service are lying to the public?

 

[zooterkin]

There is no sign of a fuel leak along the ground behind the vehicle in the CCTV clip, as was the cause of fire hypothesized in the Liverpool fire, and which had been smouldering for a while with no-one present.

You do love to make things up, don't you? Where on earth are you getting this nonsense from?



Who said there should be a visible fuel leak behind the vehicle?

 

[zooterkin]

It most certianly relates to how the car owner was unable to put out the fire with a simple fire extinguisher as soon as he became aware his vehicle was on fire. It takes time for a vehicle to reach a sufficient temperature to radiate enough heat to cause nearby vehicles to ignite.

Do try to focus on the topic. This thread is about how the fire started. It started in a diesel vehicle, your flights of fantasy nothwithstanding.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen, are you going to acknowledge me yet? You made a request of me and I responded in two posts.

That issue has been dealt with. 'Electrical fault' is the second most common cause of car fire and more often than not it is to do with poor maintenance and people messing about with their engines. My post merely pointed out any number of reasons it could have caught fire.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It could be said, the refusal to name the make and model means they have plausible deniability.

It could be said, but only by someone who wasn't paying attention. They stated unequivocally it was a diesel. 'Plausible deniability' does not exist.

 

[JayUtah]

It most certianly relates to how the car owner was unable to put out the fire with a simple fire extinguisher as soon as he became aware his vehicle was on fire.

How do you know of that relationship? How many car fires have you put out? How many car fires have you personally investigated?

It takes time for a vehicle to reach a sufficient temperature to radiate enough heat to cause nearby vehicles to ignite.

How much time? How do you know that? We know you are incompetent at physics, so tell us how this general statement makes your theory more viable than the prevailing narrative.

 

[Vixen]

The statistics I posted long ago showing how many thousands of car fires happen every year demonstrate that it's not a news blackout, it's just not news.

As you're not in the UK you may be unaware that the current fluster is over electric bike and scooter batteries catching fire while on charge. Alarm at recent cases of this has caused my employer to issue an edict banning any charging of bike or scooter batteries in any of our buildings and we're about to spend a fortune on fireproof steel cabinets to house the battery chargers for all equipment that uses lithium ion batteries. (Except phones and laptops.)

If you want to convince us EV fires are a greater risk or have worse consequences than people realise, bring statistics, not crank claims by biased YouTubers.

It is nonsense to say the Gatwick North Terminal car park fire is 'just not news' as it was national news at the time. See here, for example: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1876888/gatwick-airport-fire-live-car-park

Yes, the dangers of e-bikes are well-known. That is to do with how they are recharged. The recharging points at car parks tend to be in a select area. The problem here is general car parks and the public are entitled to the information, especially given how close the Luton one was to the airport, railway station and main motorway.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

There is no sign of a fuel leak along the ground behind the vehicle in the CCTV clip, as was the cause of fire hypothesized in the Liverpool fire, and which had been smouldering for a while with no-one present.

Was there a sign of a fuel leak in CCTV from Liverpool? I think there was not. So not seeing that would not appear to prove anything.

What type of fuel was hypothesized to have leaked on the ground at Liverpool and hypothesized by whom please?