Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire IV

JayUtah said:
Short answer: most designs use a drive motor to spin up the ICE.

A hybrid drive train that's both efficient and practical is not a simple design. The Toyota HSD is the most well-known example. It uses an ICE and two motor-generators operating through a planetary gearbox that blends the power supplied by each component. In that design, one of the motor-generators can operate in motor mode to spin up the ICE, and then switch to generator mode to provide electricity from ICE power.

A fire fighter prying open the hood of a burned-out hybrid is not going to see much there that would be mistaken for a pure ICE powerplant. And no, the fire won't blur the difference. Electric motors are necessarily made from very robust components that are easily identified even after a fire, especially by an experienced investigator.
Click to expand...

novaphile said:
Mine has a complex GKN gearbox between the engine and the generator (and front wheels). (There's a lovely animation of it working here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rntjceP-XPE )

The engine is started by having power from the traction battery, supplied to the generator, which turns the engine over.

The result is instantaneous, if you touch one of the buttons ('Charge' or 'Save') that manually starts the engine, the engine goes 'vroom' immediately. There's no sound or sensation of cranking or delay. (It happens so fast, you don't even get to remove your finger from the button before the engine starts.)

Similarly, if I'm driving in traffic and accelerate beyond what the battery and drive motors can provide on their own, the engine instantly starts, with no cranking etc.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I suspected that would have been the logical approach, cutting down weight.
 
JayUtah said:
It has been explained from the start why that opinion is irrelevant and almost certainly wrong.



Not credible given the evidence.

At this point you're either accusing the fire services of being incompetent or of being liars. There is no other way to reconcile your hypothesis here with their behavior.



But you want that opinion to be probative over and above better established fact. This is how we know it's about you being the smartest one in the room and not about actually studying the incident. I don't recall the report mentioning anything about flame colors, so there's nothing along those lines for you to rebut. But you keep bringing it up because it's your hypothesis, the product of your allegedly superior knowledge and powers of observation, not because it does a better job of explaining the observed facts. You want credit for being oh-so-clever despite how irrelevant and wrong you are.
Click to expand...

Your epithet, not mine. I haven't mentioned anything about being 'clever' but it seems to be something that rattles you for reasons best known to yourself. ISTM the Report here is more to do with what went wrong with the firefighting, rather than examining forensically the cause and spread of the fire. Compare and contrast to the Liverpool Report. It just assumes it is identical to that fire.

Anyway it is due to be discussed in the Commons soon, to be debated as to whether recommendations must now be taken seriously and sprinklers installed in all new public car parks above a certain size.
 
JayUtah said:
A report is not deficient simply because it fails to specifically address the things about which you ignorantly and speculatively waved your hands for so long. You have an inflated sense of your own importance.
Click to expand...

As my tutors used to tell me the criteria for the examiners passing one's report is the question they ask themselves, "Would I pay for this report?" and if the answer's no, it's a fail.

The Beds F&R Services report is well-written but needs polishing up re presentation and graphics.
 
welshdean said:
I believe Vixen, that you drive a Toyota, a fairly recent one at that - a Yaris perhaps?
If so, you will be well aware that the hybrids make a peculiar, metallic noise when pulling away gently and impossibly fast (for a diesel) when 'putting your foot down' from a standing start. You'd have also noted that the display shows whether you are driving on battery, ICE or regenerative breaking.
It is preposterous to even think that this wouldn't be noticed by anyone sat in the drivers seat or even as a passenger.
And YOU know this, from first-hand experience.
Click to expand...

No, I do not drive a Toyota Yaris. My 2023 car starts by the usual clutch, brake and 'press ignition'. And it also likes revving, as it is a sporty little number. Note, dashboards in cars are manufacturers design and not much to do with what type of car you have. If I didn't know it was a hybrid and written large on the boot and on the receipt I doubt I would be even aware of it. Lots of cars have flash dashboards which are all fur coat and no knickers.

I haven't noticed the display telling me anything, except speed limit of the area I am in, my speed and if I breach white lines. And nanny warnings about needing oil change, low air pressure in tyres. I would have no idea it was a hybrid other than that I know it is as that is what I bought.
 
JayUtah said:
And for no helpful purpose. There are no outstanding legitimate observations, corollaries, or anomalies that need to be addressed. It's a straightforward open-and-shut case, albeit an unfortunate one for Luton and for those who lost their property or were injured.

The color of the smoke and flames? Not anomalous. But Vixen desperately needs validation for her belief that they are, if only for some official to address and refute it and thereby reinforce for her how clever she to have noticed an important point. Maybe the car really did have a large lithium ion battery hidden somewhere completely outside the experience of its owner and completely impervious to inspection from experts. It just has to be possible, so that Vixen can maybe eventually somehow crow about how she was right all along. It can't possibly be that Vixen's expectations of smoke and flame are so naive as to not be worth serious attention.

The propagation of the fire? Not anomalous. But Vixen desperately needs validation of her belief that it is, if only a nod from the experts that this was something she was clever enough to notice and thus requires their laborious attention to explain. Maybe the fire really did propagate suspiciously fast, and maybe this was because there really was a secret lithium ion battery. It just has to be, so that Vixen can feel clever about how the fire is suspicious—and the experts suspiciously omitted it from their report. It can't possibly be because Vixen's expectations of about fire propagation are laughably naive and simplistic and thus not worth serious attention.

The collapse of the structure? Not anomalous. But Vixen desperately needs validation of her belief that it is, if only a nod from the experts that her structural analysis was so very astute and needs laborious attention to explain away. Maybe the structure really did collapse too easily and quickly, and maybe that's because there was a suspiciously intense fire that she can say is probative of a lithium ion battery fire—and maybe the report ignored it because they can't explain it. It can't possibly be because the collapse sequence was unremarkable and Vixen's pretense to expertise needs no serious attention.

None of Vixen's post-report desperation is seeking to address any actual outstanding anomaly. They address things she insists must be anomalies on no better authority than her uninformed, thoroughly-debunked opinion peppered with a lie here and there. Trying to rebrand tacitly-premised assertions of fact as mere "opinions" doesn't mask her evident desire that they still be taken seriously—if not as evidence of her correctness then at least as evidence of her cleverness. She's okay with being corrected; that's a form of validation—if the nominal experts think her points are astute enough to be specifically addressed and refuted, then that's flattering. What Vixen can't stand is to be ignored. "Maybe the car was still a hybrid and no one knew it," is just the most recently and comically absurd attempt to insist that her beliefs are still on par with if not better than the deliberate findings of the experts and that she's still the smartest person in the room for noticing all these "anomalies" that the experts either missed or ominously can't or won't explain.

And all of Vixen's, "I would have liked to see..." are simply manifestations of that same "I know best" mentality. She evidently can't read this report through any lens beyond her own self-importance. Her post-report rhetoric is not being driven by correcting flaws in the report or noting legitimate omissions or defects. It's still about one person trying to buttress delusions of grandeur in the face of increasingly contravening fact.
Click to expand...

Here we go with the usual personal attack.
 
EHocking said:
No it is not.

It is registered as an “electric / petrol car” for determining vehicle tax by Traficom*.

This is the very definition of “hybrid”.

ETA : * link to Traficom.fi advisory of car categories for vehicle tax calculations
Click to expand...

I haven't checked the website but my recent statement from Traficom requesting road tax (based on CO2 emissions) simply said 'petrol'. The car was registered with them via the car dealers so they will know exactly what it is in their more detailed records.
 
Andy_Ross said:
Hydrants are connected to the water mains. That's where the fire brigade get the water from to pump in to the dry risers.
In the UK they are below the surface under a manhole cover.
Click to expand...

JayUtah said:
You attach hoses to a dry riser to put water into them. You attach hoses to a hydrant to take water out of them.

U.S. hydrants are still mostly above ground. I have one in my front yard. If U.K. hydrants are below ground, how do dogs pee on them?
Click to expand...
Ah, thank you. My fire training only covered the immediate stuff, like extinguishers.
 
novaphile said:
Meanwhile, here in Oz.

Our 'hydrants' are typically (but not always) set below the road surface.

We used to have white posts, with a red metal cap, that had the following text moulded into it:

"F.P. 4FT" (The 4 FT explains that the metal lid, like a tiny manhole cover, is four feet away.)

I have no idea if the 'F.P.' referred to 'Fire Point' or 'Fire Plug' but distinctly remember children earnestly telling people that it meant:

"Fat Policeman, Four Foot Tall."

:D
Click to expand...
Yeah, ours are under manhole covers.
 
Vixen said:
As I said from the start, it is my opinion that the nature of the fire looks to me to be a lithium one. Given that some early 2014 Range Rover Sport diesel did have a lithium battery, which was on the passenger side (UK), I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was a hybrid without the owner realising it, especially if bought secondhand.

People seem not to know the difference between opinion and fact. It was always my OPINION, I never claimed it was a fact.

Whilst I'm here re Rolfe claiming 'statistics', it is irrelevant here whether 'most car fires are...[whatever]...', as here we are dealing with just one vehicle, and thus probability doesn't come into it.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
You were wrong,you continue to be wrong and no doubt will be wrong in the future.
 
Vixen said:
No, I do not drive a Toyota Yaris. My 2023 car starts by the usual clutch, brake and 'press ignition'. And it also likes revving, as it is a sporty little number. Note, dashboards in cars are manufacturers design and not much to do with what type of car you have. If I didn't know it was a hybrid and written large on the boot and on the receipt I doubt I would be even aware of it. Lots of cars have flash dashboards which are all fur coat and no knickers.
.
I haven't noticed the display telling me anything, except speed limit of the area I am in, my speed and if I breach white lines. And nanny warnings about needing oil change, low air pressure in tyres. I would have no idea it was a hybrid other than that I know it is as that is what I bought.
Click to expand...

What model is it?

There should be a battery condition and charge display
 
Vixen said:
Stop lying. I have never once claimed the fire services were lying.
Click to expand...

Mojo said:
You have carefully avoided using the word "lying", but have repeatedly and consistently implied that they were not telling the truth.
Click to expand...

It's one of the funniest and most bizarre aspects of Vixen's performance, yet it's obviously the case that she's doing it. Vixen has claimed over and over that the fire service have published as true information which she believes to be false, but for no discernible reason she absolutely refuses to call that "lying".

I'm genuinely puzzled that she thinks that an indisputable accusation of officials lying is somehow made harmless by not using the "L" word.

I'd invite her again to explain but it would be futile as always.
 
Vixen said:
As I said from the start, it is my opinion that the nature of the fire looks to me to be a lithium one. Given that some early 2014 Range Rover Sport diesel did have a lithium battery, which was on the passenger side (UK), I wouldn't be at all surprised if it was a hybrid without the owner realising it, especially if bought secondhand.

People seem not to know the difference between opinion and fact. It was always my OPINION, I never claimed it was a fact.

Whilst I'm here re Rolfe claiming 'statistics', it is irrelevant here whether 'most car fires are...[whatever]...', as here we are dealing with just one vehicle, and thus probability doesn't come into it.
Click to expand...

And there's another one we can add to the 'list of lies'- you not only claimed it as a fact, but the 'authorities' were indulging in a coverup...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom