Luton Airport Car Park Fire

[Jack by the hedge]

Being an airport car park, it was surely designed with strength in mind.

As opposed to all the other car parks, which aren't?

 

[Mojo]

This is turning into a Two Ronnies sketch.


Ronnie Barker: Good Evening, we have a press release from Bedfordshire’s Chief Fire Officer stating that the car involved is believed to be diesel at this stage, subject to verification.

Ronnie Corbett: Good EV, I mean good Ev-ing, I’ve been told by them upstairs –

Ronnie B: Who? Suella, Fluella, or wassername – or maybe Rishi?

Ronnie C: Yeah, him, the one whose wife knows the CEO of Tata. I’m under orders to tell you to announce it as though you are saying it is NOT an EV but without saying ‘It is not an EV’.

Ronnie B: <fx taps side of nose> It is believed to be a not-EV, that is, a diesel subject to blah blah blah, and then I can get Tracey on Reception to write up the Facebook, webpage and Twitter/X corporate pages in plain English, no fancy words.

Ronnie C: Smashing! When it is discovered three years down the line it was a hybrid we can pin it on Tracey’s lack of comprehension. We aren’t lying, technically. What's the term, 'It was inadvertent'.

<sfx hysterical canned laughter>

Ronnie B: Leftie woke organisations like Full Fact can contact Tracey for verification of her tweet.

Ronnie C: I foresee peerages for us in the New Year’s Honours for services to Rishi and Akshata…er, industry.

Ronnie B: So it’s good night from me.

Ronnie C: And it’s goodnight from him. Oh, and we’d better get the driver arrested so he can’t blab.

Ronnie B and Ronnie C: And it’s Ta-ta from Tata!

It's almost as if you made all that up.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

This is turning into a Two Ronnies sketch.

Not one of the good ones.

F. U. N. E. Diesel?
S. V. F. Diesel.
F. U. N. E. Lithium?
9. V. F. N. 10. E. Lithium.
O. U. Z. U. F. a hybrid!
No. Some morons on Twitter said that. They were wrong.


It's the punchlines that tend to let the two Ronnies down.

 

[theprestige]

Eighteen pages just trying to get Vixen to stipulate her premise in starting this thread.

 

[JayUtah]

As opposed to all the other car parks, which aren't?

Literally every structure is designed "with strength in mind." In all structures, the designed-for live load and fire endurance are decisions based on several factors. There is no incentive to design a car park never to fail. No design factor is superlative. That it failed in this case is hardly remarkable.

 

[Steve]

Look who's trying to be an engineer again.

Well she's repeated the self aggrandising lie that she's a scientist, so why not?

And an accountant, and a psychologist......

 

[Steve]

Eighteen pages just trying to get Vixen to stipulate her premise in starting this thread.

Just like all her other threads - something nefarious is going on and Vixen is the only person that can see it. The world needs to know!!!

 

[theprestige]

Just like all her other threads - something nefarious is going on and Vixen is the only person that can see it. The world needs to know!!!

This one is even worse than usual. The whole point of the thread is that people are questioning the official story.

But eighteen pages in, Vixen's telling us there is no official story.

 

[Vixen]

Because the police haven't identified him and he didn't contact the papers, I'd wager.

Do the police usually identify a motorist whose car catches fire?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Maybe not by name (although the press did in the Cork fire incident) but the press don't have the same inhibitions (unless it's subjudice) and are usually quick to get a firsthand account.

 

[zooterkin]

Maybe not by name (although the press did in the Cork fire incident) but the press don't have the same inhibitions (unless it's subjudice) and are usually quick to get a firsthand account.

Which is all irrelevant to the fact that we now know for certain that the car where the fire started was a diesel, not an EV or a hybrid.

If you have a shred of evidence that says otherwise, please produce it now.

 

[Vixen]

Not one of the good ones.

F. U. N. E. Diesel?
S. V. F. Diesel.
F. U. N. E. Lithium?
9. V. F. N. 10. E. Lithium.
O. U. Z. U. F. a hybrid!
No. Some morons on Twitter said that. They were wrong.


It's the punchlines that tend to let the two Ronnies down.

I like it! Best one is the Sweet Shop Scene, 'nothing is too much trouble'.

Customer: Can I have a Range Rover Sport, a diesel Not-EV, MEV.

Shopkeeper: Certainly sir, see the sign, 'Nothing is too much trouble'.

Customer: Can you demonstrate what sort of fire a diesel will catch with a fuel leak run.

Shopkeeper: Certainly sir, nothing is too much trouble. <fx lights a rag soaked in kerosene throws it over a leaking pipe, as achieved by pricking a hole in it> Let's just apply a little blow torch onto it.

Customer: Doesn't quite match the Luton fire. Flames the wrong colour. Too much black smoke, floor still there. Can I test the hybrid model -

Shopkeeper <fx grits teeth> Certainly Sir, nothing is too much trouble, like the sign says, how would you like the flames, Sir?

Customer: A big whooshy white heat flame!

Shopkeeper: Nothing is too much trouble, Sir, Just let me set off the Lithium-ion battery, Sir. STAND BACK! - <sfx WHOOSH, entire shop demolished in flames that only die down after two days>


BBC Newsreader: A car believed at this stage to be a Not-Ev diesel...subject to verification...caused a fire at the Nothing is Too Much Trouble Car Dealership today...

 

[Vixen]

Literally every structure is designed "with strength in mind." In all structures, the designed-for live load and fire endurance are decisions based on several factors. There is no incentive to design a car park never to fail. No design factor is superlative. That it failed in this case is hardly remarkable.

So in your opinion, would you say people whose cars were affected by the ahem diesel fire, together with the people hospitalized by fume inhalation have a good case for claiming a tort and compensation for the negligent architecture, design & materials used, together with the cars and personal effects inside ruined...?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

I haven't insisted any such thing. If the accident was due to the driver having a fuel runway or an overheated coolant issue or even an electrical fire why not just say so?

Because they don't know. The one thing they do know is that it wasn't a lithium traction battery that caused it, because that vehicle didn't have one. Hopefully a forensic investigation will determine the exact cause of the fire, but until then there's little point speculating.

Cars catch fire for a variety of reasons due to their nature. Gas cars are particularly prone to it due to the combination of a highly combustible fuel that produces vapors, heat and vibration from the engine, and the 12V electrical system. Some makes and models may be less susceptible than others, but none are immune. That's just something we have to put up with if we use that technology.

Give us the name of the model and make and charge the guy if he has committed a criminal offence. Not put him on bail 'as a precaution'.

What's the charge?

And why should they publish the make and model?

Imagine the driver was you. OK, so you did spot your vehicle seemed to be burning and you stupidly drove into the car park anyway. Should you really have the destruction of 5,000 cars and a collapsed car park pinned on you, if the real culprit is JLR Range Rover - yet again!!! - and the fault is inherent to their model?

Perhaps you knew the vehicle was subject to a recall and you didn't get it done. Perhaps you knowingly drove a vehicle with issues. Perhaps you didn't get it serviced as often as you should. There are many reasons a person might be culpable even if the make/model in question had a higher than average incidence of fires.

But hey, let's play that game. It's a fact that gas cars are 20-100 times more likely to catch fire than EVs. Surely everybody must know this by now, so anyone who continues to drive a gas car (especially an older one) knows that it's a rolling bomb compared to any EV. Therefore any time one of these death traps catches fire the driver should be prosecuted for depraved indifference.

Would you buy a car of a type that is 20-100 times more likely to catch fire than those which have a much better technology (ie. EVs)? I know I wouldn't, especially since around 100,000 cars catch fire each year in the UK alone. That's a statistic I would not want to be a part of, and a really good reason to switch to electric.

 

[zooterkin]

I like it! Best one is the Sweet Shop Scene, 'nothing is too much trouble'.

Customer: Can I have a Range Rover Sport, a diesel Not-EV, MEV.

Shopkeeper: Certainly sir, see the sign, 'Nothing is too much trouble'.

Customer: Can you demonstrate what sort of fire a diesel will catch with a fuel leak run.

Shopkeeper: Certainly sir, nothing is too much trouble. <fx lights a rag soaked in kerosene throws it over a leaking pipe, as achieved by pricking a hole in it> Let's just apply a little blow torch onto it.

Customer: Doesn't quite match the Luton fire. Flames the wrong colour. Too much black smoke, floor still there. Can I test the hybrid model -

Shopkeeper <fx grits teeth> Certainly Sir, nothing is too much trouble, like the sign says, how would you like the flames, Sir?

Customer: A big whooshy white heat flame!

Shopkeeper: Nothing is too much trouble, Sir, Just let me set off the Lithium-ion battery, Sir. STAND BACK! - <sfx WHOOSH, entire shop demolished in flames that only die down after two days>


BBC Newsreader: A car believed at this stage to be a Not-Ev diesel...subject to verification...caused a fire at the Nothing is Too Much Trouble Car Dealership today...

So you believe the police and fire service are lying to the public. ok...

 

[phiwum]

Maybe not by name (although the press did in the Cork fire incident) but the press don't have the same inhibitions (unless it's subjudice) and are usually quick to get a firsthand account.

How do they interview someone who doesn't want to be interviewed and whose name they do not know?

 

[phiwum]

So you believe the police and fire service are lying to the public. ok...

No. It's diplomacy and that makes it totally not a conspiracy theory.

Accusing cops and fire officials of using diplomacy to protect a corporation is not a conspiracy theory AT ALL. And saying that it was a diesel vehicle when it was really a hybrid? NOT lying. Just being diplomatic.

 

[JayUtah]

So in your opinion...

Don't try to change the subject. You're trying to play engineer and pretend there's something suspicious about the fire and collapse of the building.

There isn't, and you're not qualified to argue with me about it.

 

[ferd burfle]

Why do you think the concrete was 'burned through'?
Could it be that the steel reenforcing was weakened by the heat and the concrete cracked due to expansion?
Why do you think the fire didn't reach 1000 degrees?What colour was the fire? that's a good indication of heat.

Best to abandon this line of argument. Elsewhere we’ve been assured by our resident scientist, who always cites their sources, that temperatures over 700 degrees cannot be achieved outside a laboratory. /s

 

[Foster Zygote]

Best to abandon this line of argument. Elsewhere we’ve been assured by our resident scientist, who always cites their sources, that temperatures over 700 degrees cannot be achieved outside a laboratory. /s

That's devastating news for the steel industry.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The car park was just four years old. Being an airport car park, it was surely designed with strength in mind. It is difficult to tell the colour of the fire as white heat doesn't translate well onto video.

Why does being at an airport require any more strength than anywhere else?

If it's like all the others it will be designed to the minimum cost and specifications to do the job.