The LHR power outage inquiry released its findings…

Heathrow commissioned an inquiry into what happened, led by former transport secretary Ruth Kelly, who is an independent member of the airport’s board. Before the full report is published at the end of June, let’s look at the initial findings.

The review recommended that Heathrow considers having a second means of contact to notify key individuals about critical incidents. It concluded that the decision to suspend operations after the power outage was “correctly made” as this was “essential to protect the safety and security of people, as well as the integrity of the airport and the UK border”.

The National Energy System Operator (Neso), which is also investigating what happened, published an interim report earlier this month which stated the cause of the North Hyde substation fire remains unknown.

So, what did we learn about events that led to the decision to cease operations at LHR?

After the fire broke out late on 20 March, LHR’s CEO could not be contacted by a colleague because his smartphone was on silent mode, of which he was unaware whilst sleeping. The COO tried unsuccessfully to alert his boss on at least 2 occasions, before taking the decision to close LHR. The CEO first became aware of the incident at around 0645 on 21 March.

The inquiry found there “may have been opportunities to open parts of the airport slightly sooner” on March 21 but this “likely would have been only by a maximum of a couple of hours or so. The evidence confirms that Heathrow made the right decisions in exceptionally difficult circumstances. Whilst the disruption was significant, alternative choices on the day would not have materially changed the outcome. The airport had contingency plans in place, and the report highlights that further planned investment in energy resilience will be key to reducing the impact of any similar events in the future.”

Responding to the initial findings, LHR CEO said “Heathrow exists to serve our passengers and airlines, which made the decision to close the airport in March because of the North Hyde substation fire tough, but necessary. We hope that all our stakeholders understand this was done to protect the safety of passengers and colleagues. We’re truly sorry for the disrupted journeys and we understand the impact this had on so many of our customers.”

A spokesperson for the Heathrow Reimagined campaign, whose supporters include British

Airways’ owner International Airlines Group and Virgin Atlantic, said: “Lessons must be learnt from the closure of Heathrow during March’s power outage, but the internal Kelly Review allows Heathrow to set and judge by its own standards. It fails to properly tackle the poor contingency planning and years of inefficient spending that left Heathrow vulnerable.”

It is expected to publish its full report by the end of June. More than 270,000 air passenger journeys were disrupted by the incident.

In other news…

FR24 – recently looked at the increasing number of medical diversions, based on their observations and reports from aviation enthusiasts who investigate why an aircraft is squawking 7700. The flight tracker concluded that with the world’s population getting older, flights being cheaper and airport special assistance available then problems were increasing. It was suggested that older passengers may be ignoring medical advice not to fly or misguidedly not taking out insurance for pre-existing conditions. Of course, anyone of any age can feel okay when arriving at airport, then become unwell during the lengthy wait for their flight. No doubt this topic will be revisited by FR24 in the future….

And finally….

Turkiye – recently announced intention to fine passengers who stand up before the aircraft has parked on stand and the seatbelt sign switched off. It’s annoying behaviour as those passengers will not only have to wait for the doors to be opened but may also spend time at the baggage carousel. However, how the Turkish Civil Aviation Authority will enforce this will be interesting. It applies to all airlines operating in their airspace. The fine of around £50/€60/$67 will also be imposed for those who smoke on flights. Airlines have been asked to update their inflight announcements. Some observers consider the fine is too low, with suggestions that they adopt the Ryanair stance of upping the amount to at least £1,000 etc.

Information courtesy of The Independent (UK newspaper), FR24, FlightAware

Images courtesy of Stock Image, Washington Post

©TPSC, LadyJet2 and photo/diagram suppliers