Fire in Douglas - See Mod note in post #506

Padre_Pio

TheBoyConor wrote: »

That's what I was thinking too. Car fires are mostly burning plastic and oil, a sprinkler spraying water will have a hard time putting them out, probably ineffective. Also, a fire in a car is mostly sheltered and protected by the shell of the car. Water from sprinklers won't get in.

And if you are spraying the high volumes of water you'd need to extinguish a car fire or foam into a car park, that would not be safe as there will be people in there that could be injured by high pressure water gushing out of nozzles.

His theory was that you'd actually have burning plastic and oil floating on top of the water and spreading to other cars, with a chance you'd get an explosions, similar to how you should never throw water on a pan fire.

mordeith

sondagefaux wrote: »

and the arrival of Santa Claus by helicopter to the Shopping Centre in the early 1970s.

That was actually the official opening which took place on 17 November 1971.
Two local children and comedian Hal Roach were on the helicopter with Santa Claus.

TheChizler

Padre_Pio wrote: »

His theory was that you'd actually have burning plastic and oil floating on top of the water and spreading to other cars, with a chance you'd get an explosions, similar to how you should never throw water on a pan fire.

Engineers Ireland wrote a report after the Liverpool fire which seemed to come to the opposite conclusion.

https://www.engineersireland.ie/EngineersIreland/media/SiteMedia/groups/Divisions/structures/SCOSS-Alert-Fire-in-Multi-Storey-Car-Parks.pdf?ext=.pdf

my3cents

TheChizler wrote: »

Engineers Ireland wrote a report after the Liverpool fire which seemed to come to the opposite conclusion.

https://www.engineersireland.ie/EngineersIreland/media/SiteMedia/groups/Divisions/structures/SCOSS-Alert-Fire-in-Multi-Storey-Car-Parks.pdf?ext=.pdf

I always thought that the idea of sprinklers was to give people time to escape. That after all is the number one priority. If they reduce the effects of the fire then thats a bonus.

j8wk2feszrnpao

TheBoyConor wrote: »

does it HAVE to?

Yes. Much like the Red Cow interchange.

zilog_jones

Padre_Pio wrote: »

His theory was that you'd actually have burning plastic and oil floating on top of the water and spreading to other cars, with a chance you'd get an explosions, similar to how you should never throw water on a pan fire.

I'm no expert on this stuff, but I imagine it's quite different to throwing water on a chip pan fire. Sprinklers wouldn't be proportionately as much water and is delivered in a different way. Wouldn't sprinklers reduce the temperature of surrounding cars and objects, thereby reducing the chance of ignition, and also restrict oxygen supply to the fire?

sondagefaux

mordeith wrote: »

That was actually the official opening which took place on 17 November 1971.
Two local children and comedian Hal Roach were on the helicopter with Santa Claus.

Thanks, I never knew that. I was three when it happened.

Cork Trucker

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/demolition-of-sections-of-cork-shopping-centre-to-begin-next-week-948789.html

Some perfectly good cars appear to be lost and will only be removed after demolition, the driver of the Zafira must be public enemy number 1 if she did drive it in there with smoke coming from it

Nearly all of the damaged vehicles which can be removed from the multi-storey car park at Douglas Village Shopping Centre have been taken out of the building, but some remain in the section which will be demolished.

He said he hoped all the vehicles which can be safely removed will be by the end of yesterday.

However, he said that some vehicles, which he couldn't give a precise number for, would have to remain there.

"Some of them are in the demolition area and some are very close to it," Mr Mieszala explained.

TheDriver

It just shows how bad the floors must be in that section. And I've heard if cars in neighbouring section on level 1, only a few m from the fire and theres no sign of smoke etc.

beer enigma

Cork Trucker wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/demolition-of-sections-of-cork-shopping-centre-to-begin-next-week-948789.html

Some perfectly good cars appear to be lost and will only be removed after demolition, the driver of the Zafira must be public enemy number 1 if she did drive it in there with smoke coming from it

Let's see what comes out of it, cctv will confirm but I had a car fire 10 years ago and rationality isn't high

TheDriver

beer enigma wrote: »

Let's see what comes out of it, cctv will confirm but I had a car fire 10 years ago and rationality isn't high

Pulling off the road into say McDonalds is irrational. Driving into a tight entry car park and parking it nice and tight into a space is lunacy.

Cork Trucker

TheDriver wrote: »

Pulling off the road into say McDonalds is irrational. Driving into a tight entry car park and parking it nice and tight into a space is lunacy.

Bingo! If the smoke was coming from the car prior to entry to the car park why wasn't the vehicle just abandoned is what i'd like to know, worst case scenario you were looking at just the loss of 1 vehicle and a patch of burned tar that could've been repaired overnight. Instead we have someone who took out an entire car park,shopping centre and multiply jobs literally in a blaze that wasn't of glory. If it can be proven via CCTV that it was driver negligence then a prosecution must follow at the very least. Seeing the photos of the burned out cars is like a scene from Terminator 2 or Backdraft.

TheDriver

How does the loss of good cars work? Is it the zafira insurance writes them off? What if an owner of a car technically ok doesn't want it destroyed? Obviously an awkward owner situation but what legislation is there to insist that the car is forcibly taken from owner? Most situations, the car would be ejected which is not possible in this case

Cork Trucker

TheDriver wrote: »

How does the loss of good cars work? Is it the zafira insurance writes them off? What if an owner of a car technically ok doesn't want it destroyed? Obviously an awkward owner situation but what legislation is there to insist that the car is forcibly taken from owner? Most situations, the car would be ejected which is not possible in this case

Let's just hope the Zafira owner has insurance in the first instance. What we know is that the tow truck that was sent into the car park pulled cars from lower floors where safety was not compromised and towed them to the roof to be lifted by the crane. As regards the first floor vehicles that are undamaged i don't know how they can get them out without major health and safety concerns regarding the instability of the area. I'm unsure if there is such legislation that directly covers it, but does this car park now come under the derelict sites act given its condition?

TheDriver

I'd say its level 2 cars down by the gym that are the issue. I know of cars close to the fire on level 1 that are now out. It's a right complicated one.

zilog_jones

Cars were being removed with the crane from the north side today, some pictures (not great) from my dashcam:



There were quite a few on the road when I passed again in the evening:



I'd agree in that it's probably the level 2 cars by the gym that cannot be recovered, unless they cut holes either from the side or from the roof to get to them. Not sure how feasible that is.

TheDriver

zilog_jones wrote: »

Cars were being removed with the crane from the north side today, some pictures (not great) from my dashcam:



There were quite a few on the road when I passed again in the evening:



I'd agree in that it's probably the level 2 cars by the gym that cannot be recovered, unless they cut holes either from the side or from the roof to get to them. Not sure how feasible that is.

I'd say we know the answer to that unfortunately. They took level 1 and 2 cars out of level 2 roof and then moved crane for top floor\roof so I'd say they're finished removals.

TheChizler

TheDriver wrote: »

I'd say we know the answer to that unfortunately. They took level 1 and 2 cars out of level 2 roof and then moved crane for top floor\roof so I'd say they're finished removals.

They lifted the the truck from the level one open area yesterday, no roof access to level two, then put it back in to level three from the relief road side. Can't figure out why they would need to do that, surely they had all the access they needed via the ramps on the west side.

skallywag

sondagefaux wrote: »

As far as I know, it was the first suburban shopping mall in Ireland outside of Dublin, and was built in the mid/late 1960s.

It was originally semi uncovered, with large canopies rather than a fully-covered mall, similar to the original Stillorgan Shopping Centre.

Remember going there with my mum I would spend an hour in the sport shop which was at one end of it while she did the weekly shop in Quinnsworth. Trying to remember what the same of that sports shop was now, just remember it seemed massive at the time, although admittedly I was quite small myself then!
Leisure something or other I think?

Was a great shopping centre though.

the beer revolu

skallywag wrote: »

Remember going there with my mum I would spend an hour in the sport shop which was at one end of it while she did the weekly shop in Quinnsworth. Trying to remember what the same of that sports shop was now, just remember it seemed massive at the time, although admittedly I was quite small myself then!
Leisure something or other I think?

Was a great shopping centre though.

Johnny Giles
Subsequently became Lifestyle sports, I think

skallywag

the beer revolu wrote: »

Johnny Giles
Subsequently became Lifestyle sports, I think

Spot on, that's the one!

There was a nice restaurant in that complex as well, it was owned by the lad who went on to run Westimers/Elroys I believe, Eric Tracey I think was his name? I remember my mam would bring me in there for a coke and a cake while she had a coffee after the shopping. Trying to recall what else was in there now, there was a newsagent too I vaguely remember, and a dry cleaning place (McKenzies?).

beer enigma

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Let's just hope the Zafira owner has insurance

I'm terms of the other vehicles it doesn't matter unless you can prove it was negligence or a manufacturer defect. I'd guess both are under scrutiny here.

I'm general terms, If a car catches fire and damages yours then you still have to claim from your own policy. Same as house insurance

Cork Trucker

beer enigma wrote: »

I'm terms of the other vehicles it doesn't matter unless you can prove it was negligence or a manufacturer defect. I'd guess both are under scrutiny here.

I'm general terms, If a car catches fire and damages yours then you still have to claim from your own policy. Same as house insurance

Negligence in that it may have been driven into the car park while smoke was evident? Also did Opel recall the car if it was part of that batch and was the recall ignored. Very messy.

Gru

TheChizler wrote: »

They lifted the the truck from the level one open area yesterday, no roof access to level two, then put it back in to level three from the relief road side. Can't figure out why they would need to do that, surely they had all the access they needed via the ramps on the west side.

the ramps are narrow enough between level 1 and 2 maybe it was too wide and it just couldn't fit up them? Also there is an open roof area on level 2 as there is on level 1, it was behind the ramp accessible by some if you made a right turn at the top of the ramp from level 1.

TheChizler

Gru wrote: »

the ramps are narrow enough between level 1 and 2 maybe it was too wide and it just couldn't fit up them?

Good point, might be difficult to turn especially if they're dragging a car behind them.

beer enigma

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Negligence in that it may have been driven into the car park while smoke was evident? Also did Opel recall the car if it was part of that batch and was the recall ignored. Very messy.

Totally, the Opel issue wont be proof as there's nothing left of it. Cctv as to whether it's smoking prior to entry is key.

In reality must insurers will go to a standard fire claim off of own policy but I understand ncb exception may be made

longgonesilver

Why don't they get the keys and drive the cars around?

Cork Trucker

longgonesilver wrote: »

Why don't they get the keys and drive the cars around?

False accusations such as theft of property from cars etc even if there was nothing inside but more importantly health and safety is paramount here. If it can't be done safely it won't be done at all.

Cork Trucker

beer enigma wrote: »

Totally, the Opel issue will be proof as there's nothing left of it. Cctv as to whether it's smoking prior to entry is key.

In reality must insurers will go to a standard fire claim off of own policy but I understand ncb exception may be made

The Zafira has been covered over for forensic examination when it is eventually retrieved. Would there be much of the heater matrix left even if the car is burned to a bare shell? this is probably what they want to look for as it was this element that was causing the fires. I know there was a suggestion of everyone claiming off the Zafira's insurance and let them battle it out with Opel to see who takes the brunt of it all. Is that unlikely to happen? i know of a similar position to this a number of years ago, car caught fire, other cars were damaged as a result, the 'offending' vehicle's insurance company refused liability and the other car owners had to sort it out themselves.

TheDriver

Cork Trucker wrote: »

False accusations such as theft of property from cars etc even if there was nothing inside but more importantly health and safety is paramount here. If it can't be done safely it won't be done at all.

Someone I know whose car was inside was asked for the keys to drive it onto the roof. Others I know had them towed with no request for keys