Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[W.D.Clinger]

Car parks do not burn down.

Inasmuch as that sentence was posted to the third thread in a series devoted to a particular car park that did indeed burn down, saying that here was like saying conspiracy theorists do not go to insane lengths to promote idiotic conspiracy theories.

You can't possibly believe what you're writing here. No one is that bad at reading comprehension.

Vixen has been making an excellent case for the contrary.

Your reading comprehension has let you down, and it might benefit you to read his post again.

When I read Agatha's sentence, I doubted whether reading his post again would be of any benefit to the person who misread it the first time. Her subsequent posts proved me right.

At least you're consistent in your faulty comprehension of the English language.

Credit where due.

Your persistent claims to have better English language comprehension than myself comes across as insecurity.

When did acknowledgement of gob-smackingly obvious reality become synonymous with insecurity?

No Vixen, people pointing out that your reading comprehension is poor based on what you post is not them being insecure, it is them pointing out that your reading comprehension is poor. That, or you're deliberately twisting what people say, are the only possible reasons for your posts in this thread.

Hanlon's razor would seem to apply here.

It was an aside by Mojo, but you clearly misinterpreted the meaning of it, as you had the statement earlier about the prevalence of fires in cars. It is just more evidence that you appear to be incapable of understanding simple English.

And there's your problem with reading comprehension again.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

There are up to 1,500 vehicles that would be registered on the ANPR at the time, vehicles coming and going all the time. Yes, there is CCTV footage of where the fire likely started. But looking at all of that does not happen within two hours of the fire being extinguished.

The investigation to establish where the fire started does not have to wait until the fire is extinguished, nor must it be Hopkinson personally who undertakes all such investigation work. It's really weird that you keep quoting the time from when the fire was extinguished until the first press statement as if that had some special significance.

It's completely reasonable to suppose that witnesses reported to the emergency services what they knew. It would take little time to establish a car that was driving rather than parked caught fire, and perhaps that it was some kind of Range Rover or Land Rover. Driving narrows it down to a new arrival or a car departing. So either someone who just paid for their stay or someone who just entered. A handful of cars, all identified by their number plates. Number plates give you the make and model (and, if you like, the MOT inspection history) in seconds.

The fire still has hours to burn and you already know if the car that started it failed an inspection any time since 2017. It's not Mission Impossible. Even an armchair detective could solve this.

The fire started circa 20:38 in the evening, was declared a major incident 21:30-ish, the 'critical incident' was stood down three hours later at 12:20am, fire under control and finally extinguished 8:45 am. Press conference 10:00am-ish. Given there were over 100 fire fighters, the top priority is firefighter and public safety. The Fire Brigade and the Police are together responsible for investigate a serious fire.

Is it realistic to believe it possible for Mr. Hopkinson to confirm it was not an electric vehicle of any sort (even though early mild hybrids were still classed by DVLA as 'diesel' or mono-fuelled).

It is obvious to persons with industry experience that the 'diesel' statement was designed to quell public concerns and to reassure the public.

Next thing we knew all the EVangelists piled in turning it into a battle of ideologies.

Hilarious.

All those well meaning industry experts just trying to do their public duty and uncover the evil conspiracy and they get turned on by nasty "EVangelists". Heartbreaking. Though once again I have to say that your slipping into adopting slogans like "EVangelists" does rather make it look like you've been hanging out with a particular sort on social media.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

It comes under the auspices of several departments, Fire, Police and the Secretary of State for transport. When there is an incident at an airport, for example, when some guy crashed his car into Glasgow Airport gates, it is treated as a matter of national security. With flights cancelled and 20,000 passengers stranded, of course the government is notified. Of course the first press release is carefully worded.


The idea that the investigation has opened and closed on day one is ludicrous, yet this is what people here are demanding.

Absolute gibberish that doesn't even remotely begin to answer the question.

Answer the question you were asked Vixen, not the one in your head.

Six steps ahead.

Seriously?

 

[JayUtah]

Six steps ahead.

But in what direction?

 

[JayUtah]

It is just not feasible that this minister would not be directly involved at the outset.

Begging the question.

 

[JayUtah]

He reads out a ready prepared statement that the lawyers have passed through the junior minister that is responsible for the fire brigade, likewise the bods at the police.

Literally all of that is stuff you made up.

Do you really believe he wrote all of that on the back of an envelope and ad libbed his way through?

Begging the question.

 

[JayUtah]

Car parks do not burn down.

Until they do.

Therefore, it follows ipso facto, that there was something extraordinary about the Luton one and is not the common or garden car fire that 'SmartCooky' tried to brush us all off with.

Every structure fire is, to a certain extent, unique. That doesn't mean whatever you imagine to be nefarious in some case is that unique factor.

Begging the question.

 

[JayUtah]

Be that as it may but we haven't been given any information about the driver at all.

Begs the question that there is a need to.

 

[JayUtah]

Oh dear, you really have no awareness that Mr. Hopkinson is simply an employee.

That doesn't unbeg your question. Hopkinson made the statement because he is the relevant competent authority. You have presented zero evidence that he was directed to lie by higher authority, or in fact directed by higher authority to do or not do anything.

Your fertile imagination is why armchair detectives are worse than useless.

 

[Wudang]

A handful of cars, all identified by their number plates. Number plates give you the make and model (and, if you like, the MOT inspection history) in seconds.

Glaringly obvious to anyone who has ever tried to buy car tyres, wiper blades etc. Given the number plate almost any shop will identify your car make and model in a second and offer appropriate parts. Halfords, GEF, HomeTyres etc all do this.

 

[JayUtah]

There are up to 1,500 vehicles that would be registered on the ANPR at the time, vehicles coming and going all the time. Yes, there is CCTV footage of where the fire likely started. But looking at all of that does not happen within two hours of the fire being extinguished. The fire started circa 20:38 in the evening, was declared a major incident 21:30-ish, the 'critical incident' was stood down three hours later at 12:20am, fire under control and finally extinguished 8:45 am. Press conference 10:00am-ish. Given there were over 100 fire fighters, the top priority is firefighter and public safety. The Fire Brigade and the Police are together responsible for investigate a serious fire.

All of this pretends you have any sort of experience managing an ongoing emergency and determining its cause.

You have none.

Not only do you have none, you have repeatedly demonstrated just how ignorant you are of how it's all done. Like every other conspiracy theorist, you just imagine that whatever little knowledge you have is the yardstick by which the actions of your betters should be judged. The investigation of the cause of an incident begins the moment the incident begins to unfold, because the preservation of evidence is an exigent concern. Some are doing that from a position of safety while others are in harm's way mitigating the effects. Contrary to the view from your armchair, people will often have some evidence pointing to cause almost immediately.

Keep Vixensplaining my profession to me. It's highly amusing, and many net you another chapter.

Is it realistic to believe it possible for Mr. Hopkinson to confirm it was not an electric vehicle of any sort (even though early mild hybrids were still classed by DVLA as 'diesel' or mono-fuelled).

Yes.

It is obvious to persons with industry experience that the 'diesel' statement was designed to quell public concerns and to reassure the public.

No. You don't have any industry experience. You're just making stuff up.

Next thing we knew all the EVangelists piled in turning it into a battle of ideologies.

Next thing we knew, the conspiracy theorists jumped on this because that's what they do regardless of evidence or personal expertise.

 

[Foster Zygote]

You are completely clueless if you believe car parks are burnt down 19,000 times a year, and totally ill-informed.

He didn't say that car parks catch fire 19,000 times per annum in Britain. He said cars catch fire 19,000 times (on average) a year in Britain. How could you fail to understand that?

 

[Foster Zygote]

So in other words, the Liverpool car park fire took one and a half hours to permeate the floor about blah blah blah...

How does any of this address your failure to establish that the fire started on the roof?

 

[Foster Zygote]

So in other words, the Liverpool car park fire took one and a half hours to permeate the floor about, helped by a drainage system that accumulated petrochemicals. Luton was built post-Liverpool and presumably did not have the same drainage issue (we shall have to await the report to find out whether or not this is so). The Luton Fire reached the highest floor within twenty minutes, despite the fire brigade having turned up within eight minutes of it being reported, i.e., before it spread upwards.

Can you explain how you got 1½ hours?

And even if the fire service arrived in eight minutes, "on scene" doesn't mean "dousing the fire with copious amounts of water". You still refuse to understand that. And eight minutes is a long time where a car fire is concerned, as you know from the videos you've seen of cars becoming fully engulfed in flames within a fee minutes.

How long from the actual start of the fire to the fire service being called? We've heard that CCTV cameras show the car was already smoking when in drove into the garage. The driver drove up some way before realizing that weird smell was coming from his car and stopping. Then at least a couple of people ran for fire extinguishers and attempted to douse the fire. So how long did that take before the Bedford Fire Service received a call?

Liverpool was caused by a diesel car, Luton from the images, intensity and jetting out of lithium-ion-like flames and enough heat to collapse one half of the entire structure within two hours of it being called a 'critical incident', almost certainly was not an innocuous diesel fire caused by an electrical fault in the engine bay, as quoted by an AA boff on day one as one of the most common causes of car fire.

There's so much utter ******** here. Remember when you posted that video of different color flames from different materials, and everyone asked you why the lithium fire wasn't the same color as the fire in the images and you ignored them?

Diesel fires are not innocuous. Of the three - diesel, gasoline and EV - diesel is actually the worst, because it has the most stored energy. But you ignore that too because it doesn't fit your CT fantasy of being the smartest person in the room.

 

[Foster Zygote]

The 'fact' of it supposedly being an identifiable RR Sport 2014, depends solely on that video which claims the numberplate is readable, and hence, cross-referenceable to DVLA.

I'm not relying on that number plate from the video, and I'm sure the fire investigators aren't either.

Question: how come the numberplate you reckon is authentic looks a completely different length from the one at the back and how come only Bitcoin Bertie and co. can even read it?

Even if you could get an accurate measurement from those videos, UK number plates aren't of a universal size.

"The industry standard size front number plate is 520 mm × 111 mm (20½" × 4⅜"). Rear plates are either the same size, or 285 mm × 203 mm (approx 11"x8") or 533 mm × 152 mm (approx 21"x6"). There is no specified legal size other than an absolute minimum margin of 11mm..."

 

[Foster Zygote]

Why did you frame it that way except to try to convey it was an everyday occurrence for 'The fire spreads so other vehicles and ultimately burns the whole car park down', together with the figure of 19,000 to make out it was normal for this to happen? I simply pointed out, citing an official Fire Report dated 2019, that a structural collapse of a car park had never happened in the UK as of that date.

Not an everyday occurrence after all, then.

You really don't get it. Your reading comprehension really is that bad.

 

[Foster Zygote]

But if an EV is harmless...

Strawman. No one has claimed EVs are "harmless". Like any automobile, they are complex machines with a huge amount of stored energy. But they also aren't the threat to human civilization that you and the rest of the EV conspiracy theory crowd believes them to be in your technological ignorance.

 

[zooterkin]

Strawman. No one has claimed EVs are "harmless". Like any automobile, they are complex machines with a huge amount of stored energy. But they also aren't the threat to human civilization that you and the rest of the EV conspiracy theory crowd believes them to be in your technological ignorance.

And even if they were a threat, it wasn't an EV that started the Luton airport car park fire.

 

[zooterkin]

What's really daft is that it may be possible to make a case that the fire was worse because there were EVs involved (I don't know if that is the case, but it seems a reasonable possibility worth investigating, which I'm sure the report will be doing), but Vixen is hung up on the vehicle that started it.

 

[Mojo]

What's really daft is that it may be possible to make a case that the fire was worse because there were EVs involved (I don't know if that is the case, but it seems a reasonable possibility worth investigating, which I'm sure the report will be doing), but Vixen is hung up on the vehicle that started it.

Because (to Vixen) that's what determines the character of the fire. A fire that starts in a diesel vehicle will be different to a fire that starts in an EV. Even when it has spread to other vehicles.