Continuation Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The fire...

Your entire argument in this post boils down to, "Because I say so."

Just no.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Nope. According to this lady from Wexford, the floor collapse happened almost immediately.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...d71cb83e_z.jpgScreenshot 2023-11-09 172057 by Username Vixen, on Flickr

It is a screen shot as the link seems a bit dodgy.

They could see the flames from the top of the steps up to the plane. This tells me they were getting off, down mobile steps. Her original story points out that they'd been sitting on the plane for 2 hours before that, which puts her seeing the fire and hearing collapse at somewhere around 11pm.

Your post is either colossally stupid or intended to deceive. Or a mix of both, I suppose.

link to story

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by phiwum

If true, that would explain the arrest. Leaving the scene of a fire caused by your vehicle suggests a casual approach to responsibility.

However, where did you hear that?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

It's a joke going around. I wouldn't take it seriously. But there was a lag before they arrested the chap.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan

I wasn't asking for requirements I was asking for examples of diesels converted to hybrids. I know you can converted a car to an ev by replacing 's lot of the internal, you suggested the vehicle in question was a conversion. Demonstrated it is possible and happening.

The link you provided last time had nothing to do with it. Don't you remember?

I was in a hurry at the time and on my way out.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Obvs.

Nice of you to recognise, finally, that the UK is different from Finland and Sweden.

[MarkCorrigan]

Originally Posted by Vixen

I was in a hurry at the time and on my way out.

Doesn't explain anything, isn't an excuse and still doesn't answer the question.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Why in Ed's name would you even introduce such a thing as though it's evidence?

Many a jester has been a prophet.

[MarkCorrigan]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Many a jester has been a prophet.

You keep saying things like this when people point out your source are satire or nonsense or admit they're lying for entertainment.

It doesn't make your use of them any less stupid.

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Many a jester has been a prophet.

And many an armchair detective is just a conspiracy theorist grasping at every straw.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Vixen

...
Lithium-ion fires throw flames and become so hot, it explains why the floor beneath Vehicle Zero collapsed from the heat intensity.
...

You have zero evidence that this actually happened.

[Disbelief]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The fire in the photograph appears to be confined to the front left of the car and towards the lower part. There is no smoke coming from the engine at the front or the fuel tank at the rear. The flames are orange and red with the grey smoke that is a classic of a lithium-ion fire. The driver was unable to extinguish it with a couple of fire extinguishers which would normally do the job, or failing that by the fire brigade who arrived very promptly - 'within eight minutes'.

So this should rule out a hybrid, since the information I can find indicates that the batteries are under the seats in Land Rover vehicles.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

The question is what did you mean. The building withstood its contents being on fire for some hours, did it not?

The Firefighter union guy who spoke to LBC Radio quoted fifteen minutes withstanding time but they had to retreat almost straight away.

I presume he was referring to how long they had to bring the temperature down and thus prevent further spread of the fire.

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The Firefighter union guy who spoke to LBC Radio quoted fifteen minutes withstanding time but they had to retreat almost straight away.

A firefighter's tolerance for the conditions has nothing to do with whether the building is withstanding anything.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Vixen

There are youtube videos which explain how cheap and easy it can be to convert an ICE car to hybrid or EV.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXCTXxL5lr0

How CHEAPLY Can You EV Convert Your Old Car?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYbMuHpa6wY

Simplest EV Conversion under $3000 - Convert Your Car in 3 Days!

Both of those appear to be EV conversion. You have been speaking of taking a Range Rover and converting it to hybrid. It's not at all obvious that converting an ICE to hybrid is as simple as converting it to EV -- at least not to me.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Nope. According to this lady from Wexford, the floor collapse happened almost immediately.

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...d71cb83e_z.jpgScreenshot 2023-11-09 172057 by Username Vixen, on Flickr

It is a screen shot as the link seems a bit dodgy.

That quote doesn't say anything about how long the fire had been burning or when her flight boarded. How does it support your claim at all?

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Has the fire chief confirmed this?

We have been given little to no information at all. But think about it. The fire was on 10 October and the fellow was arrested 23 October. A nice fortnight's holiday in the sun, perhaps?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

I presume ...

Well, quite.

The building would have had a fire rating for how long it should withstand a fire in order to allow safe evacuation. I don't know how long that was. Nor do you. I don't know how long it actually withstood the fire. Nor do you. But that didn't stop you blithely telling us the building "burned down" in less than an hour. A complete invention of yours.

You've invented a story in your head and now expect reality to bend to your requirement. Reality demurs.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan

Not only does this not answer the question asked, it's also a straight up lie. You claimed 700°C could not be replicated outside a lab. No qualifiers, no nothing. It was only after people started mocking this obvious idiocy that you attempted to warp your boneheaded statement into something far more specific to prevent yourself from being laughably wrong. It's not working Vixen. We were there for the initial incident. We remember it, so attempting to lie about it isn't going to work.

Fair enough, but it was a silly claim in a different thread. It's not really worthwhile discussing it here.

Not everything that Vixen says is on-topic in every Vixen-created thread.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

Please justify your eight minutes claim.

The report was that the fire service arrived about ten minutes after the initial call to 999. We have no idea how many minutes it took from the start of the fire to the first 999 call.

And even if they had arrived exactly eight minutes after the fire started, the A5 video proves that a car can be fully engulfed in flames in the space of just a few minutes.

Do you think that firefighters arriving on scene just run full tilt into a fire without carefully assessing the situation? It's not a cartoon like Paw Patrol. They don't just speed straight into the garage with the pumper truck and douse the fire with water. Even getting the hoses deployed and hooked up to the water source takes a few minutes.

As desperately as you want to deny it, the diesel Land Rover had plenty of time to erupt into a fire capable of spreading to other vehicles in the garage.

An employed firefighter said it was eight minutes in the LBC broadcast, link provided.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

We have been given little to no information at all. But think about it. The fire was on 10 October and the fellow was arrested 23 October. A nice fortnight's holiday in the sun, perhaps?

"Think about it" is code for make a little story up in your head, it seems.

You have absolutely no good reason to think there was any delay at all between the police deciding to arrest the driver and their doing so.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by phiwum

That quote doesn't say anything about how long the fire had been burning or when her flight boarded. How does it support your claim at all?

It appears that they saw what she describes as they were getting off, after sitting in the plane for two hours.

link

Which is almost certainly why Vixen posted a screen shot. The story as published demolishes Vixen's "point".

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

An employed firefighter said it was eight minutes...

"It" was eight minutes, where "it" was the time the fire brigade took to travel to Luton Airport, after receiving the callout, yes?

That's not the time they took to begin any firefighting efforts, three storeys up in the car park. You don't know how long that took. You don't know how long the fire had been burning for in total. You don't know how many cars were already alight when firefighting began.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by GlennB

It appears that they saw what she describes as they were getting off, after sitting in the plane for two hours...

Thanks. So the witness heard the floor panels collapsing hours after the fire started.

So much for almost immediately.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by GlennB

Nice of you to recognise, finally, that the UK is different from Finland and Sweden.

Lest we forget the point being made, YOU claimed that 'for security reasons' and GDPR - DPA - it was not possible to obtain owner details of UK DVLA-registered cars. I questioned your assumptions it was to do with security and DPA because northern Europe (we seem to copy German law here) is far far stricter than the UK when it comes to privacy. That was the point being made. How come, if the UK is incredibly lax about people's privacy (well, for plebs anyway) as compared to other European countries.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Requirements for converting an ICE car to a hybrid or EV.

Which are irrelevant since we know it was a diesel.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Vixen

But the fire brigade were there within eight minutes. What was the problem in putting out a simple electrical fire in a diesel car?

Nobody is disputing 'a car burns intensely'.


I notice you have tried to introduce a new strawman in your last sentence.

It has been confirmed by the fire service that it was a diesel car.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Vixen

There are youtube videos which explain how cheap and easy it can be to convert an ICE car to hybrid or EV.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXCTXxL5lr0

How CHEAPLY Can You EV Convert Your Old Car?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYbMuHpa6wY

Simplest EV Conversion under $3000 - Convert Your Car in 3 Days!

I looked on Google and a replacement battery for a hybrid costs between US$2,000 and US$10,000.

So when my car was written off by my insurers due to the cost of repair exceeding the threshold of circa three-quarters of its market value, despite my pleading with them to pass it for repair*, it was bought by a typical salvager, such as Co-Part and sold on to someone. He contacted me and requested the second key and defa heat-lamp cable (I had tried to send the key to the initial salvagers with no luck and it being returned uncollected). Now this cable is only worth about €20 in a local hardware store and it connects an engine block to the coolant to stop it freezing in wintry weather plus for inside heating to stop the car frosting up overnight with snow and ice, so I presumed he was planning to fix it and resell it.

With the hybrid battery alone, it might have been considered worth his while buying the car on auction for a few hundred euros, probably more as it was less than three years old and only had about 5,000 kms on the odometer.

The initial garage for the insurance company had said it was too expensive to fix because the floor was bent and the wheel axle damaged, together with the wing mirror broken and the bodywork dented. The back of the car was untouched. The selling price is hidden although I could see the car sold on their webpage.

So, all a car enthusiast needs to modify a diesel into a hybrid is the hybrid battery and some mechanical know how. Plus, of course, you need the relevant permissions and approval from DVLA to reregister it.

*The sorrow turned to gladness when I was reimbursed what I had paid for it, as here, if the car is less than three years old you get the market value, instead of a heavily depreciated one. On the downside, the price of a new model had gone up quite a bit so I had to use some of my savings to make up the price difference (but at least it won't need an MOT for four years).

It has been confirmed by the fire service that it was a diesel car

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Lest we forget the point being made, YOU claimed that 'for security reasons' and GDPR - DPA - it was not possible to obtain owner details of UK DVLA-registered cars. I questioned your assumptions it was to do with security and DPA because northern Europe (we seem to copy German law here) is far far stricter than the UK when it comes to privacy. That was the point being made. How come, if the UK is incredibly lax about people's privacy (well, for plebs anyway) as compared to other European countries.

Car ownership details available online in the respective countries suggest the exact opposite - that we are more careful about privacy. And multiple links I've provided demonstrate that those details are withheld because of UK's data protection laws.

In short - you posted a bunch of words that boil down to meaningless gibberish.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by phiwum

That quote doesn't say anything about how long the fire had been burning or when her flight boarded. How does it support your claim at all?

A tabloid has the roof collapse at date stamped and time-stamped, as per photo, which appears to be a CCTV one, as circa 11:32pm - you can look up this pic on google images.

So two hours from the time it was declared a 'major incident' would be correct confirmation.

It would appear the Wexford lady's comments were all condensed into one sentence to make it seem to have happened in quick succession.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Vixen

I just saw this, completely by accident, and was reminded of this Two Ronnies sketch:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

The Man Who Repeats Things

That doesn't change the fact that it has been confirmed by the fire service that the fire started with a diesel car.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Well, quite.

The building would have had a fire rating for how long it should withstand a fire in order to allow safe evacuation. I don't know how long that was. Nor do you. I don't know how long it actually withstood the fire. Nor do you. But that didn't stop you blithely telling us the building "burned down" in less than an hour. A complete invention of yours.

You've invented a story in your head and now expect reality to bend to your requirement. Reality demurs.

Wait. When the fire brigade pronounces a fire uncontrollable they mean they can no longer prevent it from spreading and burning the whole shebang down.

What do you think it means?

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by Vixen

It would appear the Wexford lady's comments were all condensed into one sentence to make it seem to have happened in quick succession.

Which is why media reports are almost never used as evidence in a forensic engineering examination. You would do well to remember this as you spin your conspiracy theory.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The fire in the photograph appears to be confined to the front left of the car and towards the lower part. There is no smoke coming from the engine at the front or the fuel tank at the rear. The flames are orange and red with the grey smoke that is a classic of a lithium-ion fire. The driver was unable to extinguish it with a couple of fire extinguishers which would normally do the job, or failing that by the fire brigade who arrived very promptly - 'within eight minutes'.

So what happened here? I likely scenario IMV having looked at all of the possible facts available so far is that a thermal runaway started in a lithium-ion battery situated towards the front of the vehicle. This is uncontainable by ordinary means as it self-oxygenates, so the driver abandoned his attempts. A burning lithium-ion battery is not only intensely hot (up to 2,000°) - it is the size of a suitcase and is packed with cells - but it gives of projectiles of intense heat. A shrapnel from this lithium battery fire penetrated the diesel fuel tank, causing the hot vapours there, which are given off by the diesel at circa 100 °C, to ignite being within 10% of the flashpoint, causing a massive fireball and it is this fireball of intense heat together with the lithium-ion battery fire that caused rapid spread to other vehicles and causing the concrete and steel rebars to buckle, somehow causing the vehicles in the next roof top level to ignite, being completely open-air and fanned by windy weather. The evidence for this are witnesses describing flame being 'thrown'.

Lithium-ion fires throw flames and become so hot, it explains why the floor beneath Vehicle Zero collapsed from the heat intensity. In addition, lithium-ion battery fires give off extremely noxious fumes and this explains why five personnel were immediately stricken by inhalation difficulties and the entire fire brigade having to withdraw from the building all together. If you recall, at Liverpool they were able to fight the fire from the stairwells for nigh on two hours before giving up. At Luton a major incident was declared just half an hour after their arrival.

That's nice.

However

It has been confirmed, by the fire service that it was a diesel car.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Vixen

A tabloid has the roof collapse at date stamped and time-stamped, as per photo, which appears to be a CCTV one, as circa 11:32pm - you can look up this pic on google images.

So two hours from the time it was declared a 'major incident' would be correct confirmation.

It would appear the Wexford lady's comments were all condensed into one sentence to make it seem to have happened in quick succession.

No. 'Almost immediately' were your words. A glance at the story debunks the idea in seconds.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Nope. According to this lady from Wexford, the floor collapse happened almost immediately.

Originally Posted by Vixen

A tabloid has the roof collapse at date stamped and time-stamped, as per photo, which appears to be a CCTV one, as circa 11:32pm - you can look up this pic on google images.

So two hours from the time it was declared a 'major incident' would be correct confirmation.

It would appear the Wexford lady's comments were all condensed into one sentence to make it seem to have happened in quick succession.

So, you go from 'almost immediately' to "two hours from the time it was declared a 'major incident' " without batting an eyelid? Have you encountered the concept of 'shame'?

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Wait. When the fire brigade pronounces a fire uncontrollable they mean they can no longer prevent it from spreading and burning the whole shebang down.

What do you think it means?

What does it have to do with what sort of car the fire started in?

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

So, you go from 'almost immediately' to "two hours from the time it was declared a 'major incident' " without batting an eyelid? Have you encountered the concept of 'shame'?

I took the lady's words at face value. It seems to be her perception that the car park floor collapsing was connected to her being about to fly off with Ryanair. I appreciate now that the reporter was likely condensing the Wexford lady's observations into one sentence to get her article to fit the '500 words' rule. This was misleading as it was in quotation marks as a verbatim comment.

But let us not miss the point that the car park floor collapsed very quickly, given how new the building was, and built to withstand the weight of modern cars. The heat must have been extraordinarily intense, of an all together higher magnitude than the Liverpool one.

[JayUtah]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Wait. When the fire brigade pronounces a fire uncontrollable they mean they can no longer prevent it from spreading and burning the whole shebang down.

No, it is not inevitable that a fire deemed uncontrollable by firefighters will result in structural failure. Fire ratings for structures presume no attempt to contain or extinguish the fire.

Quote:

What do you think it means?

I explained clearly what it means in the engineering world, which may or may not correspond to how firefighters categorize fire endurance. I'm asking you to reconcile that understanding with your garbled news sources that you seem to think are dispositive of the evidence.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Wait. When the fire brigade pronounces a fire uncontrollable they mean they can no longer prevent it from spreading and burning the whole shebang down.

What do you think it means?

They did not pronounce the fire uncontrollable.

They declared a major incident. Declaring a major incident is not fire brigade speak for "We give up. Run away".

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

What does it have to do with what sort of car the fire started in?

Intensity of heat.