• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have explained it on numerous occasions as the web page simply being a précis of what Mr. Hopkinson said in his one and only press conference.

No. You have Vixensplained as much, meaning that you have merely made that up. You continue to insist that the Oct. 11 verbal announcement to the press should some how be the only authoritative statement, and that any subsequent press releases or official statements should be disregarded. Your critics have no obligation to respect your delusion on this matter.
 
Exactly. When I was a kid we called '****' dog's muck or bird's muck.

Now think of the word 'brass'. How did money come to be its slang, bearing in mind coins haven't always been available for the common people who use common terms such as 'muck'.


Again, it's unclear how any of this nonsense relates to your misquoting of the expression, or the implication that it's about corruption.
 
I have explained it on numerous occasions as the web page simply being a précis of what Mr. Hopkinson said in his one and only press conference.

Just today you called it an update. An update is not a reiteration.

Furthermore, you damn well know that it goes beyond what Hopkinson said in the first hours after the fire.
 
What is your evidence that this organization determined or should have determined how the Luton car park was obliged by code to have been built?

https://www.nfpa.org/news-blogs-and-articles/blogs/2022/11/28/evs-and-parking-structures

List of them here on p 55 of the Liverpool King's Dock report:

1. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Fire safety:
Approved Document B, Building Regulations 2010
2. BRE, Fire spread in car parks BD2552, December 2010
3. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005
4. British Parking Association website, accessed 26/01/18
5. The Institution of Civil Engineers, Recommendations for the Inspection,
Maintenance and Management of Car Park Structures, 2002
6. The Institution of Structural Engineers, Design recommendations for multistorey and underground car parks, Fourth Edition, March 2011
7. Structural-Safety, SCOSS Topic Paper, Fires in Multi-Storey Car Parks,
February 2018
8. Ministry of Technology and Fire Offices’ Committee Joint Research
Organisation, Fire and Car Park Buildings, Fire Note 10, E.G. Butcher, G.J.
Langdon-Thomas and G.K. Bedford 1968
9. Municipal Engineering in Australia, BHP Fire Tests Prove the Value of
Sprinkler Systems, Volume 14, Issue 4 pp.3-13, Thomas, I., Bennetts, I.,
September 1987
10.UNECE Regulation 34 Technical Prescriptions for Wheeled Vehicles
11.PC-Tigris Data Sheet GKD UK
https://www.bafsa.org.uk/wp-content...er/2018/12/Merseyside-FRS-Car-Park-Report.pdf
 
Given your English comprehension is so much better than mine, perhaps you'll agree that 'muck' is not a verb?

The OED confirms that "muck" is a verb. It means to spread manure upon something. And as long as we're indulging this side show, at least as far as Colonial English was concerned, "manure" is a combination of soil, feces, and other compostable or biodegradable material. "Manure" only thereafter came to mean feces alone.
 

This link confirms that they are not a code-issuing organization. They are an advisory body.


That is a list of advisory bodies who contributed in some way (actively or passively) to the report. Where is your evidence that the body you identify had any sort of regulatory authority over how the Luton car park was or should have been built?
 
Given your English comprehension is so much better than mine, perhaps you'll agree that 'muck' is not a verb? What do you perceive to be 'muck': do you equate it with work?


Nobody has suggested that the word "muck" in the expression "where there's muck there's brass" is a verb; but the expression has come to mean that hard graft will make you money. That in no way implies that "muck" is being used as a verb.
 
I have explained it on numerous occasions as the web page simply being a précis of what Mr. Hopkinson said in his one and only press conference.
Indeed you have. It's absolutely hilarious at first but the joke has long since worn thin. Maybe find a better way to cope with being wrong than pretending reality does not exist.

Just as the PM is supposed to announce his policies to the House of Commons for them to be official, likewise, it really matters not a jot what some webpage might write if it doesn't come straight from the PM's mouth. All else is just noise.

The BF&RS is not parliament and there is no arcane procedure involving medieval town criers or whatever for them to issue an official statement. They publish their official press releases on their own website. Your silly excuses about "it's not official because... oh squirrel!" are hopeless.
 
The National Fire Protection Association is really an International organisation. Right...


The question, anyway, was whether its requirements apply to the UK. Can you show that they do?

To be fair the NFPA is a (now) international organisation but it releases consensus codes which while they may form the basis of standards & regulations won't themselves have the force of law. I'm sure Jay is better acquainted with them and can confirm or correct this.
 
Exactly. When I was a kid we called '****' dog's muck or bird's muck.

Now think of the word 'brass'. How did money come to be its slang, bearing in mind coins haven't always been available for the common people who use common terms such as 'muck'.
You think coins weren't common by the 16th century, which is when the phrase "where there's muck there's brass" originated? Neither muck nor brass are being used as verbs in the phrase; both are being used as nouns.

It's on page 1473 of the 20th Edition of Brewer's Phrase and Fable, if you want to check that you originally wrote the phrase incorrectly. You don't seem to understand its meaning; it's not about corruption, it's about wealth coming from hard dirty work. ETA to be clear, dirty meaning soil, coal, waste etc, not dirty in the sense of illegal.
 
Last edited:
It's one of those foibles.

Elaborate.

In my global business operations, I'm required to compliant with a flurry of international and national standards. I'm well acquainted with whether compliance with any of them is required, advisory, or jurisdiction-dependent.

The organization you cite is specifically American (ETA: except as corrected by others below) and claims no jurisdiction either in the U.S. overseas. The organization you cite is an advisory body, not a regulatory body. Explain how its recommendations under those auspices have any binding authority on a UK construction firm.

You have a history of failing to understand regulations and regulatory frameworks, so I do not accept you as an authority on this question.
 
Last edited:
The National Fire Protection Association is really an International organisation. Right...


The question, anyway, was whether its requirements apply to the UK. Can you show that they do?

The NFPA most assuredly has branches in countries other than the USA. And their comprehensive fire codes are referenced, either directly or through interconnected organizations such as UL (Underwriter's Laboratories) ANSI, etc. as requirements of the building codes in many countries. So, their name not withstanding, they really are internationally recognized. As a Canadian who worked extensively with building codes for over 40 years I frequently was required to design to NFPA standards as referenced in Canadian building codes.
 
To be fair the NFPA is a (now) international organisation but it releases consensus codes which while they may form the basis of standards & regulations won't themselves have the force of law. I'm sure Jay is better acquainted with them and can confirm or correct this.

They are an advisory body, one of several in this field and one of many worldwide on many subjects. They stand both in contrast to and alongside ad hoc investigative bodies. The regulatory agencies of individual countries or trade groups may look to their recommendations as model codes. Any regulatory or compliance issue is adjudicated by the regulatory agency in the appropriate jurisdiction, not by the advisory body.
 
The fire was almost certainly caused by a thermal runaway and certainly caused by a Tata JLR vehicle and true to his nature the brand is being protected as that is where some of his fortune lies as well has his social contacts with Tata.
Utter, stupid, puerile, nonsensical, conspiratorial drivel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom