Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire III

[phiwum]

Everything in that press release - which is simply a clarification of the first one - was already reported in all of the papers. It said on day one that the guy drove a vehicle that was already on fire into the car park.

Hell, they still haven't said that. The latest press release says, "As a result of the investigation, all evidence points to the most probable cause being an electrical fault or component failure, which started in the engine bay of the vehicle whilst it was in motion."

"In motion" is not the same as "on fire before entering the park". If any official has claimed the latter is true, go ahead and show me.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

According to this video at 20:31 the fuel drainage system as recommended by the Merseyside Fire Brigade report into the King's Dock (ECHO) fire of 2018/19 is illustrated here:

Rather the opposite. It's the design they criticised for encouraging the fire to spread.

 

[Vixen]

Huh.

You said "A diesel car fire is something a team of firefighters can put out within ten minutes." You also agree, I assume, that this fire was not put out in ten minutes. I thought this would mean that you don't think this was (started by) a diesel car fire.

But now you claim that there's no strong evidence that this WASN'T a diesel car fire.

Isn't the fact that the firefighters didn't put it out in 10 minutes strong evidence that this wasn't a diesel car fire (given that, as you claim, firefighters can make quick work of such fires)?

I am expressing doubt it was a common-or-garden diesel car fire. If it was such a fire, even if 'electrical fault spreading to the engine bay' there needs to be an explanation of what was the problem in extinguishing it (even if it had spread to another vehicle) and why the need to pass it off as an entirely innocuous every day event. For example, in the aforementioned Newark Airport blaze when seventeen vehicles burnt uncontrollably within a very short time frame, there was a special reason the initial car spread the fire so rapidly. Simply saying, 'It's OK, it was a diesel, not an EV of any sort', is an outrageously inadequate statement by which to fob off the British people.

 

[Vixen]

Well, they weren't there in 3 to 4 minutes. What now?

The first responders to arrive got there in 8 minutes, travelling from Stopsley, 2½ miles away, and then found the car fire was not in an easily accessible area but 3 floors up in the multi storey car park.

So what point are you making? Do you wish fire engines could drive faster? Do you doubt the time response actually took? Do you think Rishi Sunak delayed them? It's not clear what point you want to make.

Better information than what we have been given so far.

Where did you get your information from about Stopsley?

As I recall, in the Liverpool King's Dock Fire 2018 video, it mentions that there is supposed to be - or recommended to be - a localised firefighting team at or near the airport itself. Rather like most office staff having to pick a 'fire officer' amongst themselves to spring into action when the fire alarm goes off, but with actual fire-fighting skills, even if rudimentary.

 

[phiwum]

Citation please of where 'actual, certified fire investigators' confirmed the vehicle to be a Range Rover. Your claim that you know its make, model and registration number comes straight from a poorly written blog without any citation of sources. Just someone's guesswork, rather like the tweeter who tried to match a photo of a serial knifer with images from the internet and came up with completely the wrong person all together. (55,000 views, at one point.)

Sure the vehicle in the CCTV clip is a JLR model but it hasn't been confirmed by anyone official it was the initial vehicle.

Neither has the Tesla been confirmed by anyone official regarding the Gatwick fire. Why the double standard?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The CCTV footage (the one accepted as verified by the press) obviously shows a JLR car so what is the problem with publishing the make, model and year ...

How would you establish the make, model and year?

Would you avoid reporting the story until these facts had been established? Of course not. Would you republish every news story each time another minor bit of information was established? No, of course not.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Where did you get your information from about Stopsley?

From a primary source: the fire service.

The people you insist haven't had anything to say about the incident since the initial press conference you weirdly insist upon calling a 'press release'.

If that's not a good enough source I can try to find a random YouTuber reacting to the same information.

 

[JayUtah]

If it was such a fire, even if 'electrical fault spreading to the engine bay' there needs to be an explanation of what was the problem in extinguishing it (even if it had spread to another vehicle)...

Who besides you, and who is qualified to make such a determination, thinks the firefighting effort was suspiciously inadequate?

...and why the need to pass it off as an entirely innocuous every day event.

Straw man. No one is claiming a major structure fire is an "innocuous" event.

For example, in the aforementioned Newark Airport blaze...

Your uninformed comparison of apples to oranges is not evidence.

 

[JayUtah]

As I recall, in the Liverpool King's Dock Fire 2018 video, it mentions that there is supposed to be - or recommended to be - a localised firefighting team at or near the airport itself.

What do you think is the significance of such a recommendation? When I participate in accident investigations, we conclude all the time with recommendations. None of these are binding. They merely inform policymakers of their options, from a position of solicited expertise. You seem to be treating these recommendations as rules that subsequent government action is bound to follow. You don't seem to understand how investigation in general and accident investigation in particular actually works. So maybe what's suspicious in all this is why you're so aggressively trying to hold your betters to account on nothing better than your ignorant say-so?

 

[phiwum]

I am expressing doubt it was a common-or-garden diesel car fire.

Sorry, this isn't clear. Do you or do you not think that the evidence suggests the initial vehicle was NOT a diesel ICE vehicle?

If you DO think that it was an ICE diesel, then I don't think I care whether it was a "normal" fire in such a vehicle. At least not unless there is some specific allegation about how it was an unusual fire.

If it was such a fire, even if 'electrical fault spreading to the engine bay' there needs to be an explanation of what was the problem in extinguishing it (even if it had spread to another vehicle) and why the need to pass it off as an entirely innocuous every day event. For example, in the aforementioned Newark Airport blaze when seventeen vehicles burnt uncontrollably within a very short time frame, there was a special reason the initial car spread the fire so rapidly. Simply saying, 'It's OK, it was a diesel, not an EV of any sort', is an outrageously inadequate statement by which to fob off the British people.

Not sure why anyone should be breathing a sigh of relief that the initial vehicle was a diesel.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Vixen why do you run away and ignore Jay when he corrects your ignorance?

Why do you then repost your suppositions, based on the ignorance that Jay has previously corrected as if it never happened?

Why do you always ignore people who point out and explain why you're wrong?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Sorry I couldn't find a random nutcase on X or YouTube to confirm, but here's that reference to Stopsley fire station being the first on the scene at Luton Airport, 8 minutes after the callout:

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/about-us/london-luton-airport-review

 

[zooterkin]

Sorry I couldn't find a random nutcase on X or YouTube to confirm, but here's that reference to Stopsley fire station being the first on the scene at Luton Airport, 8 minutes after the callout:

https://www.bedsfire.gov.uk/about-us/london-luton-airport-review

Ooh, I see that also says:

At this time, we can confirm the vehicle involved was a diesel-powered vehicle. To further clarify it was neither a fully electric vehicle (EV) nor a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). More information on the incident and cause of the fire will be released once the investigation has been concluded

(And, of course, they've also since clarified that it's not any other sort of EV, hybrid or otherwise, either.)

 

[Mojo]

Despite the fact that official confirmation has been given!

But that official confirmation said the same thing as the initial press release, so in Vixenworld it doesn't count as a confirmation.

 

[Mojo]

Stop trying to shoe horn a straight forward current affairs item into a conspiracy theory.

You have it bass-akwards. You have spent the last 6 months trying to shoehorn a conspiracy theory into a straightforward current affairs item.

 

[Mojo]

Huh.

You said "A diesel car fire is something a team of firefighters can put out within ten minutes." You also agree, I assume, that this fire was not put out in ten minutes. I thought this would mean that you don't think this was (started by) a diesel car fire.

But now you claim that there's no strong evidence that this WASN'T a diesel car fire.

Isn't the fact that the firefighters didn't put it out in 10 minutes strong evidence that this wasn't a diesel car fire (given that, as you claim, firefighters can make quick work of such fires)?

Remember also that the fire at Gatwick, that Vixen says was started by an EV, was controlled and extinguished.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The average response time to primary fires was 9 minutes and 13 seconds, in the year ending March 2023. This was an increase of 23 seconds compared with the previous year (8 minutes and 50 seconds) an increase of 35 seconds compared with 5 years ago (8 minutes and 38 seconds)

That is from when they are notified. It doesn't mean from when the fire started.

https://www.gov.uk/government/stati...xt=All primary fires,8 minutes and 38 seconds)

 

[Carrot Flower King]

How would you establish the make, model and year?

Would you avoid reporting the story until these facts had been established? Of course not. Would you republish every news story each time another minor bit of information was established? No, of course not.

Ask an undercover psychic policeman from Oldham, who talks in a Cockney accent despite being born in Bury St Edmunds, which actually has a Birmingham post code. Obvious, innit?

I mean, that's what I would do, but I'm not making any great claims here.

 

[GlennB]

Ask an undercover psychic policeman from Oldham, who talks in a Cockney accent despite being born in Bury St Edmunds, which actually has a Birmingham post code. Obvious, innit?

I mean, that's what I would do, but I'm not making any great claims here.

Well, ceteris paribus, I suppose so.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Well, ceteris paribus, I suppose so.

Mange tout Rodney, mange tout.