Luton Airport Car Park Fire

Status
Not open for further replies.
zooterkin said:
We have had the verification.


Indeed. Understand that an official website contains official statements.
Click to expand...

The website page was written by their communications officer, a Rebecca something or other.

Like some of the tabloid newspapers who think Mr. Hopkinson's press release 'confirms' it was a diesel powered car, what Mr. Hopkinson ACTUALLY said is:

"Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service revealed on Wednesday morning the cause of the blaze was a diesel car.

“We don’t believe it was an electric vehicle,” Andrew Hopkinson, chief fire officer for Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service, said.

“It’s believed to be diesel-powered, at this stage all subject to verification. And then that fire has quickly and rapidly spread.”

Stop pretending or mis-critical thinking that this equates to ultimate confirmation, when as of Thursday 12 October 2023 05:42 BST there is no way their investigation can have confirmed anything, other than initial speculation.

Yes, it the final report it may well confirm it or otherwise but in the meantime learn to read with critical faculties and comprehension of what 'at this stage', 'believed to be' and 'subject to verification' actually means.

Yes, 'woke' is good but that should not becoming a misinformation source yourself. The end does not justify the means.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Just no.

If the fire service had officially stated, "it was a diesel Land Rover, which is a notoriously dangerous brand with an alarming tendency to burst into flames whenever you look at it funny", that would be criminally libelous. Just factually stating the make and model of the vehicle is absolutely not libelous.

But keep grasping at those straws.
Click to expand...

They have NOT confirmed the make and model.


Nota bene.
 
Foster Zygote said:
You still seem to struggle with the concept of analogy. Fine, since you can't seem to understand the issue unless we use exactly the same example, let me ask you this:

If your own vehicle is destroyed in a fire started by a seal failure on a high pressure fuel rail, or worn insulation on a 12V battery lead, on a decade old diesel Land Rover owned by someone else, do you think you can successfully sue JLR?

Are you aware of any manufacturing faults causing a high risk of fire in Land Rovers? If not, then you're left with the following facts:

1 - Gas and diesel vehicle fires are common
2 - The most common causes of car fires are fuel system faults and electrical faults
3 - Car fires are often severe, releasing a tremendous amount of energy
4 - Hundreds of cars parked close together are a huge fire risk

There's nothing "fishy" about the nature of the Luton garage fire. The only reason conspiracy theorists, like those clowns in the Daily Mail comments, want it to be "fishy" is so they can prop up their delusions that they're smarter than most everyone else.
Click to expand...

JLR certainly can be sued if it knew of the hypothetical manufacturing fault but failed to recall that production line. Just because someone stupidly believes the spiel about Range Rovers being the 'ultimate experience in refinement' (snob value) and buys a secondhand model on the cheap because you think it tells people you 'have arrived' that doesn't release the manufacturer from the responsibility of ensuring safety although of course there is a burden on the buyer of Emptor Caveat. So, if there had been a previous recall, say the offending vehicle was indeed one of those Range Rover Evoques, then their lawyers could perhaps evade liability by arguing that the owner having seen the recall notices should have taken due action to rectify the matter.

Range Rovers known problems?

These Are The 13 Most Common Problems On Range Rovers
BY
R J WALDRON
UPDATED JUN 13, 2023
The Land Rover Range Rover is a luxury SUV that offers comfort, prestige, and more, but it is also plagued by a poor reputation for reliability.

<snip>

The air suspension features air struts made with flexible rubber and is prone to punctures, cracking, or rotting. Most of them wear out at the same rate, meaning that once you replace one, chances are you'll need to replace the remaining three soon.

<snip> Besides this, the suspension bushes are weak

<snip> One common problem is with the differential unit.

<snip> Another common problem that arises due to oil starvation is the differential whine. If untreated, the gears can grind, shed teeth or seize.

<snip> Whatever the year, the Range Rover often suffers from engine problems. Early cars would overheat. Diesel units would suffer a whole raft of catastrophic failures. Gasoline units kill radiators, eat timing chains, and suffer manifold woes, and none are likely to be wallet-friendly to fix.

<snip> Unfortunately, there have been parking brake faults for many Range Rovers.

<snip> The Range Rover has had electrical issues throughout its lifespan.

<snip> Jaguar Land Rover issued a major recall on some vehicles built between 2019 and 2021. In some conditions, they had seen cars lose all electrical functionality. Earlier vehicles also have a terrible reputation for electrical complications. Each model year has critical faults.

<snip> Contrary to this watertight prowess, Range Rovers seem to have fluid issues. Oil leaks are common and can be from almost every part of the engine, transmission, and connected units.

Range Rovers also seem averse to retaining coolant, fuel, and other system fluids. If it gets poured into a Range Rover, it will likely leak out somewhere

<snip> As identified in yet another recent recall, there have been steering concerns. Mainly with bolts corroding on the power steering unit, leading to potential steering failure.

<snip> Low boost pressure can make a Range Rover crawl along, spewing black smoke – not a good look.

<snip> The company has even had to issue a recall over transmission problems in the past.

<snip> Land Rover builds their cars with a mix of aluminum and steel and while this has its pros, there’s a major con to it – rust!
Click to expand...
hotcars.com

So, this young lad aged 30, the presumed driver who was arrested was either:

  • driving his parents' car
  • is a well-paid young footballer who can afford £132,000 for a car.
  • Bought it cheap for a few thousand
  • ...and it was cheap because the previous owner couldn't wait to get rid of a faulty vehicle.
 
Mojo said:
Not in the UK, it was abolished by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
Click to expand...

Still valid in some countries*. JLR won't just be worrying about its UK sales.

*For example, Victoria Beckham successfully sued for 'criminal libel; when someone called her boutiques in France rubbish.
 
Vixen said:
Still valid in some countries*. JLR won't just be worrying about its UK sales.

*For example, Victoria Beckham successfully sued for 'criminal libel; when someone called her boutiques in France rubbish.
Click to expand...

That's a long-winded way of saying, "Oops, I was wrong again".
 
Vixen said:
The website page was written by their communications officer, a Rebecca something or other.

Like some of the tabloid newspapers who think Mr. Hopkinson's press release 'confirms' it was a diesel powered car, what Mr. Hopkinson ACTUALLY said is:

"Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service revealed on Wednesday morning the cause of the blaze was a diesel car.

“We don’t believe it was an electric vehicle,” Andrew Hopkinson, chief fire officer for Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service, said.

“It’s believed to be diesel-powered, at this stage all subject to verification. And then that fire has quickly and rapidly spread.”

Stop pretending or mis-critical thinking that this equates to ultimate confirmation, when as of Thursday 12 October 2023 05:42 BST there is no way their investigation can have confirmed anything, other than initial speculation.

Yes, it the final report it may well confirm it or otherwise but in the meantime learn to read with critical faculties and comprehension of what 'at this stage', 'believed to be' and 'subject to verification' actually means.

Yes, 'woke' is good but that should not becoming a misinformation source yourself. The end does not justify the means.
Click to expand...

Of course, you have no evidence whatsoever that the official statement on the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service website was based on the press statement rather than being an actual statement in its own right, do you?

Even if it were based on the statement to the press, if it was inaccurate, it would by now have been updated. (It hasn't been.)
 
Vixen said:
JLR certainly can be sued if it knew of the hypothetical manufacturing fault but failed to recall that production line. Just because someone stupidly believes the spiel about Range Rovers being the 'ultimate experience in refinement' (snob value) and buys a secondhand model on the cheap because you think it tells people you 'have arrived' that doesn't release the manufacturer from the responsibility of ensuring safety although of course there is a burden on the buyer of Emptor Caveat. So, if there had been a previous recall, say the offending vehicle was indeed one of those Range Rover Evoques, then their lawyers could perhaps evade liability by arguing that the owner having seen the recall notices should have taken due action to rectify the matter.

Range Rovers known problems?

hotcars.com

So, this young lad aged 30, the presumed driver who was arrested was either:

  • driving his parents' car
  • is a well-paid young footballer who can afford £132,000 for a car.
  • Bought it cheap for a few thousand
  • ...and it was cheap because the previous owner couldn't wait to get rid of a faulty vehicle.
Click to expand...

What does any of this nonsense have to do with the fire starting in a diesel car?

And I see that, contrary to your earlier attempts to appear to distance yourself from the conspiracy theory you were just passing on, you now seem to have embraced it yourself. What caused you to decide that the police and fire service are lying to the public?
 
Vixen said:
So the answer's 'no', you cannot explain how a simple diesel fire, albeit with plastics, electrics and other combustibles thrown in, can spread incredibly rapidly to set the next car park level alight within ten minutes.
Click to expand...

As the post said to which you are responding, it's been explained to you many times. Your long-demonstrated inability to grasp anything even remotely scientific or technical doesn't mean there's a legitimate controversy.
 
Vixen said:
A burning tyre gives off very thick black smoke; it doesn't 'explode' per se. The airbags are designed to activate in a collision. Perhaps the eye witness said it was a 'fuel tank explosion' because the fireball was towards the back of the car...?
Click to expand...

You don't know how much smoke there was at that time nor whether or not it was a tyre bursting or an airbag inflating charge cooking off or any other part of the car going bang. You don't know what a bursting fuel tank would look like, nor probably does the witness, nor do you know if there was a fireball, nor if whatever did happen was noticeably in the location of the fuel tank. You're just making stuff up in your head and then demanding to be judged correct. No.

All this is moot, as the way the fire developed is not at issue. Only the fact it was a diesel and not a hybrid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom