| Author | Message | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 169 Registered: 9-2009 |
Of all people, they should have known better. But they did it anyway. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 874 Registered: 7-2009 |
No apologies needed. Just make sure you help finish off the last little bit of my puzzle. =) They = HAM? How many are they...2? 3? 4?...etc? 100s? 1000s? more? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 172 Registered: 9-2009 |
I'll try (: They = HAM? Yes. How many are they...2? 3? 4?...etc? 100s? 1000s? more? 10-20 I think, the exact number is not important. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 880 Registered: 7-2009 |
Was it necessary for them all to be male? Or would the scenario be the same if some of them had been female? Was it necessary for them all to be adults? Or would the scenario have been the same if some of them had been children? teenagers? Were they together when they did it? Did they do it as a group? Or are they all individuals who happened to do the same thing separately? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 175 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was it necessary for them all to be male? Or would the scenario be the same if some of them had been female? It would've been the same. Was it necessary for them all to be adults? Assume yes. Were they together when they did it? Yes. Did they do it as a group? Yesish. Or are they all individuals who happened to do the same thing separately? No. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 886 Registered: 7-2009 |
Did they do something to an object? Did they say something? Did they decide something? Did they discuss something? Did they do something verbal? Did they think about something? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 177 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they do something to an object? This, irr to the rest. Did they say something? Did they decide something? Did they discuss something? Did they do something verbal? Did they think about something? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 895 Registered: 7-2009 |
Did they all do something to one object? Or were there multiple objects? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 185 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they all do something to one object? This. Or were there multiple objects? | ||
| Sixtyeight (Sixtyeight)
New member Username: Sixtyeight Post Number: 1091 Registered: 6-2007 |
did the people act alone? were the people connected in a work environment? were the people connected in a social environment? is time period relevant? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 190 Registered: 9-2009 |
did the people act alone? They acted together as a group, if that's what you're asking. were the people connected in a work environment? This. were the people connected in a social environment? Irr. is time period relevant? Yes. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 197 Registered: 9-2009 |
Update: I checked the facts some more, and "they" were about 40 people. The exact number is not that important for the puzzle though." | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 1604 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is their profession relevant? What about the time period? The location? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 199 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is their profession relevant? Very. What about the time period? Somewhat. The location? Location is important. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 919 Registered: 7-2009 |
By location, do you mean a specific political location (e.g. country or city)? Or physical geography location (e.g. mountain)? Or other? Are they indoors? outdoors? Profession: Artistic / musical / writer * Banking / financial / real estate * Clerical / Administrative * Computer related / Hardware * Construction / Craftsman * Criminal / Questionable Repute * Education / Academic Research * Entertainment / Media * Environmental / Outdoors / Nature * Executive / Management * Hospitality / Travel * Legal Services * Manufacturing / Distributions * Medical / Health Services * Politics / Government / Military * Sales / Marketing * Technical / Science / Engineering * Teaching / Child care * Transportation * Food Service * Other ? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 215 Registered: 9-2009 |
By location, do you mean a specific political location (e.g. country or city)? No. Or physical geography location Thisish. (e.g. mountain But not this.)? Or other? No. Are they indoors? outdoors? This. Profession: Artistic / musical / writer * Banking / financial / real estate * Clerical / Administrative * Computer related / Hardware * Construction / Craftsman * Criminal / Questionable Repute * Education / Academic Research * Entertainment / Media * Environmental / Outdoors / Nature * Executive / Management * Hospitality / Travel * Legal Services * Manufacturing / Distributions * Medical / Health Services Somewhat related * Politics / Government / Military * Sales / Marketing * Technical / Science / Engineering * Teaching / Child care * Transportation * Food Service * Other This. ? | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 262 Registered: 6-2009 |
What century would this have taken place in? 21st? 20th? 19th? 18th? 17th? 16th? 15th? 10th? 5th? BC? Bodies of water relevant? Deserts? Forests? Jungles? Arctics? Wars relevant? Elections? Sporting Events? Was the object smaller than a computer mouse? A microwave? A grand piano? Is it electronic? Was it invented? Are there other objects exactly the same? Is it made of... Metal? Plastic? Wood? Paper? Cotton/Silk/Nylon/Polyester/Denim/Leather/Wool? Plant? Animal? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 239 Registered: 9-2009 |
What century would this have taken place in? 21st? 20th? 19th? 18th? 17th? 16th? 15th? 10th? 5th? BC? It's based on a true event, which took place early 21st century. Could've easily happened in the 20th century as well. Bodies of water relevant? Deserts? Forests? Jungles? Arctics? Wars relevant? Elections? Sporting Events? None of the above are relevant. Was the object smaller than a computer mouse? A microwave? A grand piano? Larger than a grand piano. Is it electronic? No. Was it invented? I wouldn't say that. More like developed. Are there other objects exactly the same? Not exactly the same, but it's a very common thing ("object" may not be the best word) Is it made of... Metal? Plastic? Wood? Paper? It probably contains all of the above materials. Cotton/Silk/Nylon/Polyester/Denim/Leather/Wool? Plant? Animal? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 971 Registered: 7-2009 |
Is it a vehicle? A building? A structured location (like a neighborhood or a park)? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 242 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is it a vehicle? A building? This. A structured location (like a neighborhood or a park)? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 973 Registered: 7-2009 |
Did they build a building? Change it? Destroy it? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 243 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they build a building? Change it? Destroy it? This. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 263 Registered: 6-2009 |
By fire? Explosives? Air? Heavy Impact? Water? Using some natural disaster? Did they have a good reason to destroy the building? Did they kill anybody? Were they told to by the state? Was the type of building relevant? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 424 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did they intentionally destroy the building? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 245 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they intentionally destroy the building? Yes, but... | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 246 Registered: 9-2009 |
By fire? This. Explosives? Air? Heavy Impact? Water? Using some natural disaster? Did they have a good reason to destroy the building? Yes. Did they kill anybody? No. Were they told to by the state? Possibly/irr. Was the type of building relevant? Yesish. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 265 Registered: 6-2009 |
Was this part of their occupation? Did they work with fire? Were they saving people's lives? Was the building contaminated? Was it poorly constructed? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 974 Registered: 7-2009 |
Are they firefighters? Is that why they, of all people, should have known better? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 247 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was this part of their occupation? Yesish. Did they work with fire? Yes. Were they saving people's lives? Not at the moment. Was the building contaminated? Was it poorly constructed? No, but... Are they firefighters? Is that why they, of all people, should have known better? Exactly! | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 270 Registered: 6-2009 |
Were they fighting a fire? Did they save people after this event? Before? Did they save them from fire? Did they just let the building burn? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 248 Registered: 9-2009 |
Were they fighting a fire? No. Did they save people after this event? Before? After. Did they save them from fire? Yope. Did they just let the building burn? No. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 271 Registered: 6-2009 |
Is how high up the building goes relevant? Was the building on fire? Had destroying the building bad consequences? Did they make a mistake? | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 975 Registered: 7-2009 |
Is this one of the houses they burn for practice at putting fires out? Did something go wrong with the practice? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 249 Registered: 9-2009 |
Is how high up the building goes relevant? Noish. Was the building on fire? Yope. Had destroying the building bad consequences? Yes. Did they make a mistake? Yes. Is this one of the houses they burn for practice at putting fires out? Yes. Did something go wrong with the practice? Yes! | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 273 Registered: 6-2009 |
Did something go wrong with creating the fire? Or did something go wrong with putting the fire out? Is the equipment relevant? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 250 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did something go wrong with creating the fire? Yes. Or did something go wrong with putting the fire out? No. Is the equipment relevant? No. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 978 Registered: 7-2009 |
Is this one of the houses they burn for practice at putting fires out? Did something go wrong with the practice? | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 274 Registered: 6-2009 |
Is how they made the fire relevant? Did they forget about something? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 251 Registered: 9-2009 |
Noel: Ask something new (; Is how they made the fire relevant? Yes. Did they forget about something? You could say that. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 275 Registered: 6-2009 |
Matches? Friction? Flame throwers? Those little welding things? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 253 Registered: 9-2009 |
Matches? Assume this. Not that relevant. Friction? Flame throwers? Those little welding things? | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 280 Registered: 6-2009 |
Did they set fire to something? Cloth? Some flammable/inflammable (what's the difference) substance? Wood? Paper? Other? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 254 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they set fire to something? Yes. Cloth? Possibly. Some flammable/inflammable (what's the difference) substance? Yes! (no difference, strangely) Wood? Paper? Other? Probably all of these things as well. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 282 Registered: 6-2009 |
Gasoline, butane, propane, jet fuel, oil? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 257 Registered: 9-2009 |
Gasoline, This. butane, propane, jet fuel, oil? | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 284 Registered: 6-2009 |
Did they spray the building with gasoline? And then did the light the place on fire? Were they meant to do that? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 258 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they spray the building with gasoline? And then did the light the place on fire? Were they meant to do that? Yes to all. Somewhere during this, a big mistake was made (none of the above is the mistake). | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 426 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did the mistake result in setting something on fire which should not burn? In something not burning which should burn? In harmful effects of the fire other than setting something else on fire? Maybe unusually toxic or otherwise harmful smoke? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 260 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did the mistake result in setting something on fire which should not burn? In something not burning which should burn? In harmful effects of the fire other than setting something else on fire? This. Maybe unusually toxic or otherwise harmful smoke? But not this. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 289 Registered: 6-2009 |
Melting? Something that shouldn't come into contact with heat/light? Smoke alarms relevant? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 429 Registered: 5-2009 |
Did the harmful effects of the fire cause or threaten to cause - the death of people? - injury of people? - other health problems for people? - damage to property? - disruption of traffic or public services (water supply, telephone etc.)? - unnecessary work besides the work related to the dangers above (e.g. convincing people they are *not* in danger)? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 261 Registered: 9-2009 |
Melting? Something that shouldn't come into contact with heat/light? Smoke alarms relevant? No to all. Did the harmful effects of the fire cause This. or threaten to cause - the death of people? No, fortunately. - injury of people? Yes. - other health problems for people? Possibly. - damage to property? Yesish. - disruption of traffic Probably this, but not that relevant. or public services (water supply, telephone etc.)? No. - unnecessary work besides the work related to the dangers above (e.g. convincing people they are *not* in danger)? Irr. | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 430 Registered: 5-2009 |
What aspects of the fire were causes of the damage: Heat? Smoke? Light? Using up of oxygen? Sparks relevant? A smell? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 272 Registered: 9-2009 |
What aspects of the fire were causes of the damage: Heat? Yope. Smoke? Light? Using up of oxygen? Sparks relevant? No. A smell? Noish. | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 432 Registered: 5-2009 |
Does "Yope" for heat mean that the heat of the fire indirectly caused the damage? That there was another equally or more important cause? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 275 Registered: 9-2009 |
Does "Yope" for heat mean that the heat of the fire indirectly caused the damage? Yesish. That there was another equally or more important cause? Yope. Hint: the fuel is important. | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 399 Registered: 3-2004 |
Did they use United States Patent 2761586 ("Combination gasoline dispenser and fire fighter")...? Did they use too much gasoline? leaded gasoline? Were they too close to the gasoline tank when making the practice fire? | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 435 Registered: 5-2009 |
Were the people who had to be saved in the burning house? In another house? Another kind of building? A vehicle? Outdoors? Underground? Were they firefighters themselves? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 283 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they use United States Patent 2761586 ("Combination gasoline dispenser and fire fighter")...? No. Interesting invention though...sooner or later some idiot would fill their tank with dry ice or pour gas on a fire - because there is no such thing as foolproof =) Did they use too much gasoline? Maybe - that was not the real mistake though. leaded gasoline? Irr. Were they too close to the gasoline tank when making the practice fire? FA - there is no gas tank involved. Were the people who had to be saved in the burning house? Noish. And slight FA. In another house? Another kind of building? A vehicle? Outdoors? Yes. Underground? Were they firefighters themselves? Yes! No to the rest. | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 404 Registered: 3-2004 |
They didn't think about it being too much wind? (we had a mishap like that in Sweden 30 years ago when the fire-fighters burnt down an entire small village...) | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 288 Registered: 9-2009 |
They didn't think about it being too much wind? (we had a mishap like that in Sweden 30 years ago when the fire-fighters burnt down an entire small village...) Good question, but that's not it. Hello there fellow Swede (: Var hände detta? | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 405 Registered: 3-2004 |
It happened in Varnhem 1979... Was the mistake related to the gasoline? or a procedure they didn't follow? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 290 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was the mistake related to the gasoline? Yes. or a procedure they didn't follow? That too. | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 415 Registered: 3-2004 |
The fire-fighters set something on fire for practice, so they should put that fire out? did they succeed in putting out that fire? had something else caught fire before then? They poured gasoline onto something and set it on fire? People and property were injured/damaged? were they hurt before the fire was put out? would they have been hurt if just the gasoline had been applied but not set on fire? were the people close to the fire? watching the practice? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 340 Registered: 9-2009 |
The fire-fighters set something on fire for practice, so they should put that fire out? Yes. did they succeed in putting out that fire? Yes, eventually. had something else caught fire before then? No/nothing relevant. They poured gasoline onto something and set it on fire? Yes. People and property were injured/damaged? Yes. were they hurt before the fire was put out? Yes. would they have been hurt if just the gasoline had been applied but not set on fire? No. were the people close to the fire? Yesish - far enough for safety, had the mistake not been made. watching the practice?Yes. The event was caught on film, I'll post the link when you've solved the puzzle. | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 421 Registered: 3-2004 |
The mistake, did they not: account for an object near the fire? think about a way the fire could spread? think about an interaction of the gasoline with something else? have everything prepared for putting out the fire? The fire was not put out, than started again? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 349 Registered: 9-2009 |
The mistake, did they not: account for an object near the fire? think about a way the fire could spread? Thisish. think about an interaction of the gasoline with something else? Thisish. have everything prepared for putting out the fire? The fire was not put out, than started again? All else no. | ||
| Tommyp (Tommyp)
New member Username: Tommyp Post Number: 422 Registered: 3-2004 |
Did the fire spread in the air? on top of the ground or to objects on the ground? below ground? Were there anything special about the gasoline? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 350 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did the fire spread in the air? This. on top of the ground or to objects on the ground? below ground? Were there anything special about the gasoline? All else no. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 390 Registered: 6-2009 |
Type of building they used relevant? Did they forget equipment? Was any of the equipment faulty? Did anything/anybody get injured/damaged before the fire? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 363 Registered: 9-2009 |
Type of building they used relevant? No. Did they forget equipment? No. Was any of the equipment faulty? No. Did anything/anybody get injured/damaged before the fire? Something got damaged, but it's not that relevant. May help you to get a new angle though. | ||
| Quovynyte (Quovynyte)
New member Username: Quovynyte Post Number: 398 Registered: 6-2009 |
Did they use anything other that gasoline to light the fire? Did they overuse/underuse the gasoline? Did they misuse the gasoline? Did they follow the correct instructions they were given? Would this have happened if they were more ... sensible? Serious? Alert? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 364 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they use anything other that gasoline to light the fire? No. Did they overuse/underuse the gasoline? Possibly overuse, but they would've been fine anyway had the mistake not been made. Did they misuse the gasoline? In the sense that it's meant to be burnt in engines and not for starting fires, yes they did. Did they follow the correct instructions they were given? Possibly not, or precise enough instructions were never given. Would this have happened if they were more ... sensible? Serious? Alert? It wouldn't have happened, had they thought it all the way through. Lack of knowledge and/or respect was probably the main contributors. | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 21 Registered: 10-2009 |
Did they burn a flag? Did they burn a building? Did they burn an effigy? Did they burn a tree? Did they burn seized property? Did they burn leaves? Did they burn drugs? Were they engaging in a practice exercise? | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 22 Registered: 10-2009 |
Were fireworks involved? Was there an explosion? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 375 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did they burn a flag? Did they burn a building? This. Did they burn an effigy? Did they burn a tree? Did they burn seized property? Did they burn leaves? Did they burn drugs? Were they engaging in a practice exercise? Yes. Were fireworks involved? No. Was there an explosion? Yes! | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 26 Registered: 10-2009 |
Was the practice exercise in a secluded area? Was the exercise to retrieve objects or dummies from a burning building? Was the exercise to fight flames using water? Was the exercise to fight flames using a fire-retardant substance? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 378 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was the practice exercise in a secluded area? No. Was the exercise to retrieve objects or dummies from a burning building? No. Was the exercise to fight flames using water? Yes. Was the exercise to fight flames using a fire-retardant substance? No/irr. | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 28 Registered: 10-2009 |
To recap, a group of around 40 firefighters intentionally set a building on fire in a public area, using excessive quantities of gasoline to do so, intending to then put out the flames with water as a training exercise. Unfortunately, the building exploded, injuring one or more of them. Correct? Is there more to know? | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 29 Registered: 10-2009 |
Did they forget to remove something from the home that would explode? Was there a natural gas line in the house? A tank of something else that would explode? Were people in the home when it was lit on fire? Was the firefighters' "lack of respect" in regards to people? Fire itself? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 380 Registered: 9-2009 |
To recap, a group of around 40 firefighters intentionally set a building on fire in a public area, using excessive quantities of gasoline to do so, intending to then put out the flames with water as a training exercise. Unfortunately, the building exploded, injuring one or more of them. Correct? Correct. Is there more to know? No, you have all the pieces. Now what did they do wrong, what made the explosion and why? Did they forget to remove something from the home that would explode? No. Was there a natural gas line in the house? A tank of something else that would explode? No to both. Were people in the home when it was lit on fire? No. Was the firefighters' "lack of respect" in regards to people? Fire itself? Lack of respect regards to fire and one other thing. | ||
| Amosoya (Amosoya)
New member Username: Amosoya Post Number: 35 Registered: 10-2009 |
Did the firefighters fail to respect a sign that had been posted? Was the explosion due to small particulates such as flour? Was the explosion due to gas such as hydrogen or oxygen? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 381 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did the firefighters fail to respect a sign that had been posted? No. Was the explosion due to small particulates such as flour? No. Was the explosion due to gas Yesish, it's usually described by another word. such as hydrogen or oxygen? But not this - except for the oxygen present in the air. | ||
| Probably_monty_hall (Probably_monty_hall)
New member Username: Probably_monty_hall Post Number: 34 Registered: 10-2009 |
Was the gasoline applied to the building too long before the fire was set, thus allowing the gasoline vapors to build up in the house? Thus resulting in a fireball explosion as the fumes ignited? | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 385 Registered: 9-2009 |
Was the gasoline applied to the building too long before the fire was set, thus allowing the gasoline vapors to build up in the house? Thus resulting in a fireball explosion as the fumes ignited? Yes exactly! ***SPOILER*** During a training excercise, firefighters doused a house in gasoline as preparation for setting it. A firetruck that was to be used in the excercise broke down, and the gasoline sat in the house for an hour before the excercise could be continued. When a firefighter went to set fire to the house, the gasoline vapors inside exploded with great force, completely demolishing the house and injuring several firefighters. Luckily, noone was killed. I will post a link to the video when I get home, since youtube is blocked at work. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 386 Registered: 9-2009 |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dSpoUUFBBM | ||
| Markobr (Markobr)
New member Username: Markobr Post Number: 464 Registered: 5-2009 |
Uh - that looks nasty. But it made a great puzzle - thank you. |
