News article: 

https://news.sky.com/story/luton-airport-car-park-fire-due-to-vehicle-fault-as-man-arrested-12990789

 

Might be negligence on maintenance? Or fitting non-supported modification into car, as previously suggested? 

 

I wonder where insurance stands with this development. An individual couldn't possibly be held liable for such a large sum? 

Fire alarms.   Who knows, but best not speculate.    

Just found this on the BBC website,

 

Luton Airport fire: Man arrested over car park blaze - BBC News

16 minutes ago, Rooted said:

Fire alarms.   Who knows, but best not speculate.    

 

The articles state "vehicle fault", a reasonable assumption would be that a fault in their vehicle started the fire.

 

Quite how a vehicle fault accidentally starting a fire (their words) becomes a charge for criminal damage is an pertinent question.

 

I can think of many vehicle manufacturers whose swept under the carpet vehicle faults have caused fire and loss of life who were never prosecuted.

I had not read the article when posting a reply, and it was me that posted what i heard on the radio. 

 

So due to knowing nothing other than what i heard or about Sub judice or anything else i never guess.  As it is not under any court yet if released.  not even the court of Social Media / speculation...

Just have to wait and see what happens on this one I think.

Some of the grasping at straws on this thread gets to the level where you could mistakenly imagine they were the grasping actions of shills trying to undermine a threat to their business.

 

Lets keep these things real please rather than wild speculation. 
 

Ignoring the car… a bigger question is why on earth the car park isn’t built with sprinklers, fire breaks and able to withstand a reasonably intense fire without serious collapse.

If the car park was built with the steel frame clad in some form of fire resistant cladding, like concrete then it is highly likely that it might have to be demolished. Thinking a bit more about the sprinklers, I doubt that they would have been of any good once fuel tanks give way as the burning fuel would have been circulated wherever the sprinkler water ran. Sprinklers in car parks would need to be capable of spraying foam in order deny the fire oxygen as much as possible. Problem is that as the number of electric cars grows, fire fighting these types of fires is going to be almost impossible. 

Edited 23 October, 20232 yr by Graham Butcher

1 hour ago, cheezemonkhai said:

Ignoring the car… a bigger question is why on earth the car park isn’t built with sprinklers, fire breaks and able to withstand a reasonably intense fire without serious collapse.

 

Because the building regulations of the time and probably today do not require it.

 

Has it "seriously collapsed"? I have only seen a couple of photos, remember that a car park unlike a multi-storey apartment building has very few people in it at any time, nobody asleep or bedridden, very good evacuation routes etc, by the time any collapse might happen anyone remaining inside would have already been calcinated.

I'd read (not substantiated and can't provide source) that the Range Rover was subject to a recall.

I know there have been a few fire risk recalls over the years. I wonder if you failed to have a recall carried out on your car if you could be held liable if it did something like this.

1 hour ago, cheezemonkhai said:

fire breaks

 

With open sides which are good for fire safety and open ramps between each floor for vehicles fire breaks are inconcievable, the Channel Tunnel was forced to achieve it on the train wagons after the first fire but it cost billions and seriously affected their operating viability as each wagon contains 2 or 3 less cars now but that is an aside.

 

The stairwell fire exits and lift shafts of the car park will have full fire protection, the former also leads to the roof if egress by the lower level becomes impossible or dangerous.

 

If I had the choice of where to be trapped in a fire it would be a multi-storey car park.

 

Were there any casualties or injuries?

3 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

With open sides which are good for fire safety and open ramps between each floor for vehicles fire breaks are inconcievable, the Channel Tunnel was forced to achieve it on the train wagons after the first fire but it cost billions and seriously affected their operating viability as each wagon contains 2 or 3 less cars now but that is an aside.

 

The stairwell fire exits and lift shafts of the car park will have full fire protection, the former also leads to the roof if egress by the lower level becomes impossible or dangerous.

 

If I had the choice of where to be trapped in a fire it would be a multi-storey car park.

 

Were there any casualties or injuries?

 4 firemen and 1 airport staff member were treated at hospital for I smoke inhalation, otherwise no.

 

Yes the structure is deemed unsafe as it is highly likely to collapse as a result of the intense heat of the fire seriously altering the steel characteristics and in many cases allowing the beams to sag and twist. Had they been protected, they are more likely to still be OK, but like many cases, speed of construction is likely to have been a major factor and also the cost incurred in such protection. The irony is however, that had the protection been in place, the damage to the structure should have been far less and therefore less costly to repair and bring it back into service. The fire breaks, yes, you have some natural ones, being the ingress and egress lanes on each floor along with up and down ramps, problem there is that like so many of the modern car parks you may have more than 1 ingress/egress lane per floor and where this is true, often there are rows of cars parked end to end separated only by a low wall just above boot level to avoid cars bashing into each other, and fire can jump over these walls. If these walls were properly rated and floor to ceiling, then any fire is less likely to spread beyond that particular row as the wall is then the fire break.

 

I have one subject to a RECALL , coolant EGR, fire risk.

Sitting 3 feet from an EV. 

Just as well as not driving the BMW. It will get into BMW in the next few weeks.

 

Edited 23 October, 20232 yr by Rooted

This is what the Times have to say about the man arrested in connection with the Luton fire.

(680) Man arrested in connection with Luton airport car park fire - YouTube

4 hours ago, Aspman said:

I'd read (not substantiated and can't provide source) that the Range Rover was subject to a recall.

I know there have been a few fire risk recalls over the years. I wonder if you failed to have a recall carried out on your car if you could be held liable if it did something like this.

RR subject to a recall? Surely not. Thought RR always denied there was anything wrong with their vehicles 😂

26 minutes ago, BTandSid said:

RR subject to a recall? Surely not. Thought RR always denied there was anything wrong with their vehicles 😂

Ha ha !

I have mixed feelings on that, I found RR recalls pretty solid.....but then they have had enough practise at it unfortunately.

3 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

This is what the Times have to say about the man arrested in connection with the Luton fire

 

If only, over a minute of a click bait video for just 4 sentences saying nothing but the obvious and which is already known, a Times article it was not.

42 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

If only, over a minute of a click bait video for just 4 sentences saying nothing but the obvious and which is already known, a Times article it was not.

Well, it was an actual Times publication, but you need to copy the link to your browser in order to learn where the video came from and any further details about it. Simply clicking on the video on the forum page does not provide the links and extra info, so sorry about that, I don't control how the forum software handles external links.

 

Here is the extra info not shown in the video, which was, shamefully, just old news rehashed.

 

"A man has been arrested by police in connection with a fire that gutted a multistorey car park at Luton airport and destroyed about 1,500 vehicles. About 30,000 passengers were affected when more than 200 flights were suspended on October 10 because of the fire. Six firefighters and a member of the public were treated in hospital for smoke inhalation. Read the best of our journalism: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/ Subscribe to The Times and The Sunday Times YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/timesandsund... Find us on Twitter:

 

I had to chuckle at the bit about the best journalism, when they are quoting 6 firefighters and a member of the public were treated, when most of the rest say either 4 or 5 firefighters and a airport staff member 🙂

 

15 hours ago, BTandSid said:

RR subject to a recall? Surely not. Thought RR always denied there was anything wrong with their vehicles 😂

Mine was ok but maybe it was an oddity and I only had it a couple of years

Some recent drone footage of the destroyed car park at Luton, you can clearly see where some of the structure has collapsed around the ramps going up and down, dreadful devastation.

 

 

Edited 24 October, 20232 yr by Graham Butcher

On 24/10/2023 at 09:53, Aspman said:

Mine was ok but maybe it was an oddity and I only had it a couple of years

We had a Freelander for five years until Khan imposed his whim; no recall issues with that either although I was aware there were mechanical problems that numerous forum members experienced time and again but JLR wouldn’t accept as worthy of recall.

On 25/10/2023 at 17:30, BTandSid said:

We had a Freelander for five years until Khan imposed his whim; no recall issues with that either although I was aware there were mechanical problems that numerous forum members experienced time and again but JLR wouldn’t accept as worthy of recall.

I had a Fullfat Rangerover for those years and it was actually nearly compeltely reliable in that time. I had one warranty claim for a baggy leather seat and one repair which was a misaligned tailgate. That was apparently quite common as the motors are not always equal twisting the plastic panel. They wouldn't take a warranty claim on that.

What was uncovered in routine servicing was that JLR at the factory had put the brakes pads in wrong. Two outers on one wheel and two inners on the other.

5 hours ago, Aspman said:

I had a Fullfat Rangerover for those years and it was actually nearly compeltely reliable in that time. I had one warranty claim for a baggy leather seat and one repair which was a misaligned tailgate. That was apparently quite common as the motors are not always equal twisting the plastic panel. They wouldn't take a warranty claim on that.
What was uncovered in routine servicing was that JLR at the factory had put the brakes pads in wrong. Two outers on one wheel and two inners on the other.

 

Brummies.  Then Solihull oft say they are Solihull and not Brummies.  Guy at my TKD school work at the plant. Drove a Citroen.

Impressed with a visit to the Castle Bromwich plant making the F type, wow, bit old tech compared to Toyota at Derby and probably Nissan at Sunderland but beautiful cars.

Good to see stats of UK car production up but still a big worry how long volume production will last. We get to move the Astons and McLarens which are also beautiful.

Range Rovers, boxy but goods.  Uk Intelligence service still love them it seems.  Had a race with an Overfinch version in one of my VRSs, top speed not great with the Range Rovers.  Good export earner in the past.

Edited 27 October, 20232 yr by lol-lol

This article popped up in my news feed: 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/do-electric-cars-pose-a-greater-fire-risk-than-petrol-or-diesel-vehicles

 

Quote

The verdict

Despite the increased danger once a battery fire is burning, the probability of being caught in an EV fire appears overall to be much lower than for petrol or diesel cars, based on currently available data – although this could change as more people get electric cars.

Walker said it was possible that the prevalence of fires in EVs could increase as the average age of batteries on the roads increases. However, at this point, it appears that they would have to multiply by many times to be worse than internal combustion engines.

 

I thought it was a balanced view using statistical data collected, includes both sides of the coin. 

 

 

Edited 20 November, 20232 yr by wyx087

This must be true because he says here that is is.   Scrap EV,s that are involved in accidents.