• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Luton Airport Car Park Fire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixen has already introduced her backup position - that the car was an unregistered hybrid conversion. This will be brought back to the fight when it turns out the car in question was registered as a vanilla diesel.
 
Vixen said:
There you go. Now you know why the model and make is not being given out. Legal reasons.
Click to expand...

Handwaving.

Exactly what legal reason can you think of that this information would be kept secret? The particular model of a registered car is not a secret. Which is why the internet has been telling itself all along what model the car is registered as.
 
Vixen said:
...And why do ships run on diesel fuel and not petrol...? Anything to do with its low propensity to burst into flame?
Click to expand...

No, it's to do with huge engines designed to power ships being diesel engines.

Engine fuel tends to be low on the list of risks on a warship packed with explosives.

Plus diesel burns just fine when it gets going, just like jet fuel.

Ships I served on weren't powered by diesel, they were powered by steam and gas turbines. A gas turbine being a jet engine adapted for marine use. There were auxiliary diesel gen sets and emergency pumps. Plus, we had a helicopter with it's fuel.

Mainly fire risk was from domestic fittings, electronics and wiring plus the magazines full of shells, propellants and missiles.
 
GlennB said:
Vixen has already introduced her backup position - that the car was an unregistered hybrid conversion. This will be brought back to the fight when it turns out the car in question was registered as a vanilla diesel.
Click to expand...

But surely the public has a right to know that dodgy unregistered hybrid conversion bodge jobs might not be a safe as regular cars? What if you innocently bought one thinking <shrug> sparks a bit but it's probably fine? Why are they keeping that fact secret? And how can they possbly know that fact without at least ten weeks forensic scrutiny? But why are they keeping that fact a secret when the public demand to know?
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Because Diesel is easier to refine and cheaper, and ships don't run on low sulfur Road Diesel but on the Lower grade oil.

Secondly it's not q Lithium Metal fire at over 1000C, it's a wind propelled Hydrocarbon Diesel fire not even hot enough to cause the insulation on the tail lights to Melt.

Definitely a Diesel fire obeying the physics of directed oxidation.

Diesel will burn spontaneously in air at temperatures around 600C.

Ad to that the Diesel of that year had a recall because of a fuel return line catching fire, and it pretty easy to tell the Conspiracy theorists are wrong.
Click to expand...

All RN ships, both diesel and steam ran on diesel fuel. It was more expensive to burn in boilers than traditional bunker oil but the simplified logistics and replenishment at sea made it worthwhile.
 
Vixen said:
You and Full Fact don't realise that you are merely paraphrasing what Mr. Hopkinson said in his press release. This translated into the admin staff who précis statements for Twitter/X into condensing the Fire Chief's words into "the initial vehicle involved in the fire was a diesel, not a hybrid", based on a fear that a bunch of Brexiteer anti-ULEZ gammons will stir up a fear campaign against EV's and hybrids for their own political ends. Full Fact, you and others cannot see that Full Fact themselves have fallen into the trap of taking a position, which you cannot possibly know is the correct one as of this stage.
Click to expand...
Lying again.
 
Andy_Ross said:
All RN ships, both diesel and steam ran on diesel fuel. It was more expensive to burn in boilers than traditional bunker oil but the simplified logistics and replenishment at sea made it worthwhile.
Click to expand...

Yes I know bunker oil was always cheaper but was mostly used in lower grade turbines.
 
First, let me call attention to your complete failure to identify any example of me having engaged in a strawman fallacy.


Vixen said:
How can they know on day one, when the CCTV cameras likely melted very quickly and they'd have to await forensic experts to pinpoint the exact cause.
Click to expand...
Even ignoring the ridiculousness of of wondering how a CCTV could record the start of an event that would take considerable time to then destroy the camera, we aren't talking about the cause of the fire. We are talking about the vehicle type in which said cause occurred.

Hold that thought and let's see whether a lithium battery is involved or not when confirmation comes through.
Click to expand...
Confirmation has come through. You just don't like that it didn't support the paranoid conspiracy theory that you are not ;);) endorsing.
 
Andy_Ross said:
All RN ships, both diesel and steam ran on diesel fuel. It was more expensive to burn in boilers than traditional bunker oil but the simplified logistics and replenishment at sea made it worthwhile.
Click to expand...

Jack by the hedge said:
But surely the public has a right to know that dodgy unregistered hybrid conversion bodge jobs might not be a safe as regular cars? What if you innocently bought one thinking <shrug> sparks a bit but it's probably fine? Why are they keeping that fact secret? And how can they possbly know that fact without at least ten weeks forensic scrutiny? But why are they keeping that fact a secret when the public demand to know?
Click to expand...

Didn't the registration plate already come back to a 2014 Diesel Sport?
 
Vixen said:
It points to a police investigation, does it not?
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. But even if it did, A police investigation of an accident does not automatically imply that anything criminal has taken place.

And if there was a police investigation, in the context that you imply, does that mean that they're in on the cover up as well? Are they working with the fire fighters and the media to cover up for Big Battery?
 
Vixen said:
A belief in authoritarianism is fine for those who have no faith in their own critical abilities. I totally get that.
Click to expand...

Vixen, you've repeatedly demonstrated that you have no critical thinking abilities at all.
 
Agatha said:
What do the words "[Beds Fire and Rescue Service] confirmed to Full Fact that the initial vehicle involved in the fire was a diesel, not a hybrid" convey to you?

Do you think it means that Full Fact merely relied on a previous statement from Mr Hopkinson, or do you think it means that Full Fact sought (and received) separate confirmation from Beds Fire & Rescue?
Click to expand...

It seems clear to me that Full Fact is fact checking what has been reported in the press. It correctly quotes Andrew Hopkinson's original press statement but in its 'OUR VERDICT' header, it is doing what its mission sets out to do and provided the reader with what facts they have gleaned from their 'fact-checking'. This is an essential skill of a sub-editor. It is called précis.

précis
noun [ C ]
UK /ˈpreɪ.si/ US /ˈpreɪ.si/
Add to word list

a short form of a text that gives only the important parts:

You have all been given a précis of the report.
Click to expand...
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/precis

Some posters have taken this to mean, 'This has been definitively confirmed. Not subject to any further investigation. Final conclusion.'

So when the meteorology department of a news outlet states, 'There is a 70% chance of precipitation in northwesterly areas', a tabloid might well state that as 'RAIN ON THE WAY'. The unwary may then be perplexed if there is no rain.

Likewise, Full Fact and the X/Twitter account has précis-ed what Mr. Hopkinson said in his ONE press conference.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
No. Wrong yet again.

Full Fact did not paraphrase Hopkinson. They asked the fire brigade, who confirmed to Full Fact the car was not a hybrid.

Your mule-headed obduracy in sticking to your initial reading comprehension failure is not a good look. Nobody else doesn't get this. Nobody is persuaded you are anything but flat out wrong and incapable of admitting it.
Click to expand...

I have provided the facts of a similar car park fire in Cork. Whilst the type of car was known it was not know what caused the fire and it took TEN WEEKS before anyone could say for sure that it was a defective Opel with an electrical fault. You cannot rule out what type of fire it was just by saying, 'it is registered as a diesel'.

People who claim this are flat out wrong.
 
Vixen said:
It seems clear to me that Full Fact is fact checking what has been reported in the press. It correctly quotes Andrew Hopkinson's original press statement but in its 'OUR VERDICT' header, it is doing what its mission sets out to do and provided the reader with what facts they have gleaned from their 'fact-checking'. This is an essential skill of a sub-editor. It is called précis.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/precis

Some posters have taken this to mean, 'This has been definitively confirmed. Not subject to any further investigation. Final conclusion.'

So when the meteorology department of a news outlet states, 'There is a 70% chance of precipitation in northwesterly areas', a tabloid might well state that as 'RAIN ON THE WAY'. The unwary may then be perplexed if there is no rain.

Likewise, Full Fact and the X/Twitter account has précis-ed what Mr. Hopkinson said in his ONE press conference.
Click to expand...
You think that Full Fact are lying when they say that they have confirmed directly with the fire service? What evidence do you have for that?
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Didn't the registration plate already come back to a 2014 Diesel Sport?
Click to expand...

Allegedly yes it did, so long as whoever ID'd it managed to read the number plate accurately from the blurry CCTV.

Plus of course those who are actually tasked with investigating IRL rather than watching it happen on their laptop have direct access to the driver of the car, and to airport CCTV and eventually to the remains of the car itself.

There isn't any remaining reasonable doubt the car was a diesel. But that still leaves room for unreasonable doubt, as demonstrated here.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Because Diesel is easier to refine and cheaper, and ships don't run on low sulfur Road Diesel but on the Lower grade oil.

Secondly it's not q Lithium Metal fire at over 1000C, it's a wind propelled Hydrocarbon Diesel fire not even hot enough to cause the insulation on the tail lights to Melt.

Definitely a Diesel fire obeying the physics of directed oxidation.

Diesel will burn spontaneously in air at temperatures around 600C.

Ad to that the Diesel of that year had a recall because of a fuel return line catching fire, and it pretty easy to tell the Conspiracy theorists are wrong.
Click to expand...

What is your opinion about this same diesel fire being able to burn away the concrete floor?
 
The words that Full Fact used were "confirmed to Full Fact". There is no way to read that as a précis of Mr Hopkinson's statement; indeed, a quick read of Full Fact's website shows clearly that they independently fact check by obtaining confirmation from the relevant source rather than rely on press releases.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Who is 'they' in this nonsense? Do you imagine the video which circulated on social media was recovered from melted CCTV cameras? Do you imagine CCTV pictures are stored inside the cameras until somebody collects them?
Click to expand...
To me, that's what she seemed to be saying at first, too. But I generously went with her trying to argue that the camera would have been destroyed too soon to show the source of the fire, because, frankly, the implication that the recorded images would be destroyed along with the camera in the fire is such a monumentally stupid argument that it boggles the mind. But the more I read that sentence, the more I wonder.

And that's not to say that the former interpretation is anything but ridiculous, but the latter... Hoo boy!
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Maybe your sources aren't as dependable as you would like to imagine.

I just found a couple of 2014 Range Rover Sport Diesel Hybrids for sale on Autotrader. (One owner, under 60k miles, £27,495 if you're interested.)
Click to expand...

So they are all hastily up for sale now, before the prices crash ;)?


No thanks, I just bought a brand new 2023 car at that price zero mileage.
 
Vixen said:
I have provided the facts of a similar car park fire in Cork. Whilst the type of car was known it was not know what caused the fire and it took TEN WEEKS before anyone could say for sure that it was a defective Opel with an electrical fault. You cannot rule out what type of fire it was just by saying, 'it is registered as a diesel'.

People who claim this are flat out wrong.
Click to expand...

There you go again. Please stop lying.

The issue you raised in the OP was what type of car the fire started in. That has been answered. The cause of the fire is a different issue (though it clearly can't be due to the lithium battery of an EV or hybrid, since the car in question is a diesel)
 
Vixen said:
So they are all hastily up for sale now, before the prices crash ;)?


No thanks, I just bought a brand new 2023 car at that price zero mileage.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I can't find the part where you say, "Oops, I was wrong, there were hybrid versions available then". Did you accidentally delete it?
 
Vixen said:
It seems clear to me that Full Fact is fact checking what has been reported in the press.
Click to expand...

You imagine that fact-checking consists of reading the same press release everyone has already seen and then paraphrasing it back to us. That says a lot about your attitude to research.

Meanwhile in the real world you are obviously wrong.
 
Foster Zygote said:
No, it doesn't. But even if it did, A police investigation of an accident does not automatically imply that anything criminal has taken place.

And if there was a police investigation, in the context that you imply, does that mean that they're in on the cover up as well? Are they working with the fire fighters and the media to cover up for Big Battery?
Click to expand...

If your brand new Merc, parked at Luton Airport whilst you went on holiday, went up in flames because of a possible act of negligence or faulty wiring by another car/driver, your insurers would want to ensure the right person/company is responsible for the costs of the write-off, and likewise, if it is a fault with the model, it could cause huge reputational damage to the manufacturers concerned, plus the car showrooms that sold it (cf the Cork car park fire).

So yeah, the Fire Chief was given 'legal advice' to only say the bare minimum that cannot prejudice any future court case, criminal or civil.
 
Vixen said:
Full Fact and the X/Twitter account has précis-ed what Mr. Hopkinson said in his ONE press conference.
Click to expand...

That is very clearly not what Full Fact said. In claiming that is what they did you are accusing them of deceit. What justification do you have for this? Is it a conspiracy theory?
 
zooterkin said:
You think that Full Fact are lying when they say that they have confirmed directly with the fire service? What evidence do you have for that?
Click to expand...

Lying means a deliberate attempt to deceive. I don't think Full Fact are lying but in their determination to gag the anti-ULEZ swivel-eyed loonies' disinformation of EV's, they themselves have taken a position, which is rather contrary to their claim of being 100% factual and unbiased. Or it is even possible that like yourself, they misunderstood Mr. Hopkinson's statement as being definitive and unqualified.
 
Vixen said:
We have been told that the car is not an EV ('it is believed') but a derv.

That doesn't rule out a diesel hybrid.

So if the car turns out to have been a hybrid or a full EV, then that is the Beds Fire Chief lying by omission. He has obviously been told what he can and cannot say.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
Oh good grief, more childish conspiratorial drivel.
 
Vixen said:
How can they know on day one, when the CCTV cameras likely melted very quickly and they'd have to await forensic experts to pinpoint the exact cause.

Hold that thought and let's see whether a lithium battery is involved or not when confirmation comes through.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
So we can video and data storage to the long list of things you don't understand.
Sigh.
The cameras are connected, by RF or wired networking, to a control centre where they can be monitoried and recorded.
 
zooterkin said:
What does that have to do with the fire starting in a diesel car, which is what this thread is about?
Click to expand...

If you read my post correctly, you would have understood I was asking Crazy Chainsaw whether a diesel fire has the property to burn away the concrete floor, and this was in response to his listing the properties of a diesel fire.
 
Vixen said:
...And why do ships run on diesel fuel and not petrol...? Anything to do with its low propensity to burst into flame?
Click to expand...
Cost. And most run on kerosene or bunker fuel, heavier hydrocardons than either.
 
Vixen said:
What is your opinion about this same diesel fire being able to burn away the concrete floor?
Click to expand...

Firstly, is your source for the detailed damage caused by the fire any more reliable than your source for there being no such thing as a 2014 diesel hybrid Range Rover Sport?

Your previous bewilderment that the fire service did not rush into a parking structure fully involved in a fire leads me to imagine there might be some gaps in your personal expertise.
 
Agatha said:
The words that Full Fact used were "confirmed to Full Fact". There is no way to read that as a précis of Mr Hopkinson's statement; indeed, a quick read of Full Fact's website shows clearly that they independently fact check by obtaining confirmation from the relevant source rather than rely on press releases.
Click to expand...

Er, no! Some admin bod simply précis-ed back Mr. Hopkinson's original words.
 
Vixen said:
If you read my post correctly, you would have understood I was asking Crazy Chainsaw whether a diesel fire has the property to burn away the concrete floor, and this was in response to his listing the properties of a diesel fire.
Click to expand...

Christ on a flaming stunt motorbike ... is it "Jet fuel can't melt steel" all over again?
 
Er, no. That's not what they do. It's clear from their website that they don't regurgitate press releases but that they independently fact check.

It's also clear to anyone with English as a first language from the words "confirmed to fact check" and the word "previously" (referring to the press release) that they did not use the press release.
 
Vixen said:
Er, no! Some admin bod simply précis-ed back Mr. Hopkinson's original words.
Click to expand...

Again, that is very clearly not what they said. You are accusing them of deceit.

You are accusing them of conspiring to "gag the anti-ULEZ swivel-eyed loonies' disinformation of EV's" instead of checking facts. You are a conspiracy theorist, siding with the "swivel-eyed loonies".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom