logo
Heathrow Rumbles Back to Life After Substation Fire Shut Down Airport

Heathrow Rumbles Back to Life After Substation Fire Shut Down Airport

New York Times21-03-2025

Heathrow Airport in London was plunged into chaos after a fire at an electrical substation shut down operations at one of Europe's busiest air hubs, forcing the airport to cancel or divert more than 1,000 flights on Friday and removing a global linchpin of air travel.
Heathrow's chief executive, Thomas Woldbye, described the disruption as 'unprecedented,' telling reporters on Friday that the airport had lost power equal to that of a midsize city, and that though a backup transformer worked as it should, there had not been not enough to power the entire airport.
But he said, 'We expect to be back in full operation, so 100 percent operation as a normal day,' by Saturday.
The British authorities said the counterterrorism police would lead the investigation into the cause of the blaze, which broke out at an electrical substation in North Hyde, northeast of Heathrow. But the Metropolitan Police in London said later Friday, 'After initial assessment, we are not treating this incident as suspicious, although inquiries do remain ongoing.'
It was too early on Friday to calculate the precise cost of the outage. But the outage raised questions about the resilience of Britain's largest airport and why it appeared to be so reliant on a single electrical substation.
Residents of the Hayes neighborhood near the airport described hearing two loud bangs and seeing 'a massive ball of flame' shoot into the sky on Thursday night. Minutes later, the airport said it was shutting down all air traffic, incoming flights were diverted, and passengers at Heathrow were sent home. Nearby residents were also evacuated.
By Friday morning, roads around the power station were cordoned off, and a helicopter hovered above. An odd stillness had descended on Heathrow. The runways were empty, the check-in desks quiet, digital flight information screens were blank, and passageways were dimly lit by emergency lighting. It was a lifeless calm not seen even during the early panicked weeks of the coronavirus pandemic.
Britain's National Grid said on Friday afternoon that it had reconfigured its network to partly restore power at Heathrow on an interim basis. The London Fire Brigade said in the afternoon that 10 percent of the fire was still burning but that it was under control.
The closure resulted in dozens of flights from the United States landing far from their original destination. They were diverted to airports in Glasgow, Madrid and even Happy Valley-Goose Bay, a tiny town in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
John Connor, 22, sat at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey on Friday, waiting in vain to get home to England after backpacking abroad for two years.
'We sat on the plane for about five hours before they said the flight was called off,' he said. 'I'm trying to get a plane somewhere close — Paris, Dublin, anywhere else,' he added. 'We're being told straight up no.'
Frantic travelers swarmed social media to ask airlines about managing canceled flights and upcoming departures, claiming in posts on X that airline apps were lagging in notifying passengers about cancellations and that customer service could not be reached by phone.
Some travelers stuck in Europe were urged to consider traveling to Britain by rail. A Delta spokesperson said the airline would reimburse the cost of traveling to London by train for passengers who had their flights diverted to Amsterdam.
By Friday morning, only a few British Airways passengers remained camped out in Terminal 8 at Kennedy International Airport in New York. After making new travel arrangements, some waited for cars to take them to nearby hotels. Others said they planned to spend all day Friday in the terminal.
Some airlines affected by the outage said they would issue waivers allowing free rebookings, including British Airways, Delta Air Lines, American Airlines and United Airlines. Cirium, an aviation data company, estimated that as many as 290,000 passengers could be affected by Heathrow's closure.
By late Friday, several flights had landed at Heathrow, as the airport began to rumble back to life, about 16 hours after the fire. The first to touch down was a British Airways plane. It had not traveled far, arriving from Gatwick Airport in London after being diverted there from its original destination, Singapore, according to the flight-tracking service FlightAware.
A Heathrow spokeswoman said the airport was working to first restore 'repatriation flights and relocating aircraft' as it sought to untangle a day of disrupted service. Officials said that airlines would make it a priority to also relocate planes and crews and bring in flights diverted to other cities.
Britain's Department of Transport said it was temporarily lifting restrictions on overnight flights to ease congestion while Heathrow Airport resumes normal operations.
But the chief executive of British Airways, Sean Doyle, warned earlier that Heathrow's closure would have 'a huge impact' on the airline's customers over the coming days. British Airways had been set to operate more than 670 flights carrying about 107,000 customers on Friday, and similar numbers were planned over the weekend, he added.
'We have flight and cabin crew colleagues and planes that are currently at locations where we weren't planning on them to be,' he said.
The Heathrow crisis was likely to upset not only the movement of people, but the flow of goods, as well. The closure of such a crucial aviation hub, even for a short while, would cause delays and logistical headaches for the many businesses that ship products through Heathrow, supply chain experts said.
Heathrow has two runways and four terminals that serve more than 230 destinations in 90 countries. Last year, about 83.9 million passengers and 1.7 million tons of cargo were flown through the airport. It is the third-largest hub for air cargo in Western Europe, measured in metric tons shipped. Goods worth nearly 200 billion pounds ($258 billion) went through Heathrow in 2023, about a fifth of the value of the British goods trade.
'Goods move around the globe in a really precise, timed way on a daily basis,' said Ben Farrell, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply, a global network of supply chain professionals based in London. 'Any disruptions to any part of that leads to a knock-on effect elsewhere.'
British businesses will likely be most affected, experts said. Global trade can be handled by other large airports in Europe, said Eytan Buchman, chief marketing officer at Freightos, a digital shipping marketplace. 'This will likely be a localized problem rather than a broader European or global one,' he said.
Mr. Woldbye, Heathrow's chief executive, apologized to travelers for the shutdown and said the airport had done well to resume flights by Friday evening, given the scale of the outage. But he said such disruption had 'never happened before.'
The closure of Heathrow came 15 years after one of Europe's most severe air travel disruptions, when a volcano eruption in Iceland sent ash miles into the sky and obstructing travel for millions, including at Heathrow.
The ash cloud grounded more than 100,000 flights over nearly a week in April 2010 as it drifted across Northern Europe, including the English Channel. The airline industry's losses from the volcanic disruption were estimated at $1.7 billion.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Christiane Amanpour Now Treats Travel To U.S. 'As If I Was Going To North Korea'
Christiane Amanpour Now Treats Travel To U.S. 'As If I Was Going To North Korea'

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Christiane Amanpour Now Treats Travel To U.S. 'As If I Was Going To North Korea'

British journalist Christiane Amanpour said she treats travel to the U.S. under President Donald Trump 'as if I was going to North Korea.' The longtime CNN correspondent talked about her experience flying to the U.S. on her podcast, 'The Ex Files.' 'I must say I was afraid,' Amanpour told her co-host and ex-husband, Jamie Rubin, on Wednesday's episode. Amanpour was traveling to the U.S. last week to give a speech at Harvard University, which has come under increased attacks by Trump, including revoking the university's ability to enroll international students. Trump has also ramped up his attacks on immigrants, using agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to snatch people off the streets and imprison them without due process. And on Thursday, Trump announced that citizens of 12 countries would be banned from visiting the U.S. and seven others that would face restrictions. 'I'm a foreigner,' Amanpour said. 'I don't have a green card. I'm not an American citizen. I'm fairly prominent, and I literally prepared to go to America as if I was going to North Korea. I took a burner phone, Jamie. Imagine that. I didn't take a single … not my mobile phone, not my iPad, nothing, and I had nothing on the burner phone except a few numbers.' Amanpour said she also spoke to CNN security about what precautions to take. 'I've heard that many, including British citizens, have been stopped at the border and been questioned for hours and hours and hours,' she said. Thankfully, Amanpour said she went through airport security without any issues. 'I was welcomed,' she said. 'The immigration officer at Boston, where I came in, could not have been nicer. Huge sigh of relief I breathed.'

If we do not control our borders, Britain will not exist in the next century
If we do not control our borders, Britain will not exist in the next century

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

If we do not control our borders, Britain will not exist in the next century

It is the truth that dare not speak its name. The daily reality for millions of people in this country. Britain is changing before our very eyes. And, for years, our two-faced leaders have been pretending it isn't happening. Even now, as the Prime Minister throws off the cosy blanket of immigration denial and embraces the brave new world of 'smashing the gangs' and 'strangers' in our own land, I get the feeling that Westminster still doesn't get it. Countless politicians continually pitch up on TV programmes and radio shows branding anyone who wants to safeguard our borders as far-Right. Just this week, when newly elected Reform MP Sarah Pochin dared to ask during PMQs whether our illustrious leader might consider banning the burqa, a collective groan rose from the Chamber. There was also a sharp intake of breath as the incumbents of the Commons realised just what exactly was going on. Of course Sir Keir Starmer refused to even consider answering the question. Along with the majority of MPs he finds such questions all rather distasteful. They would rather declare war on Russia than admit that immigration has changed the fabric of our country forever. Never before have our elected representatives been so out of touch with the British public. They have been gaslighting us for years. Boris Johnson supported globalism and immigration. He never really meant it when he promised to reduce net migration. Theresa May was useless whenever she went to negotiate with Brussels on freedom of movement. And when she tried to create a hostile environment for illegals, she was painted as some kind of cross between Attila the Hun and Pol Pot. No government has been truly honest with the electorate about immigration. Time after time we have been told not to be bigoted. We've been encouraged to embrace a multicultural society. We've learned that kebab shops and Turkish barbers are enriching our society. After all, diversity did build Britain, didn't it? And it's our greatest strength, isn't it? Well now the chickens have truly come home to roost. I've been telling my audience at Talk for years that mass immigration – which has allowed millions of people to come and settle here in the past decade or two – is unsustainable. And this week that same audience has signalled that enough is enough. Entire towns, cities and neighbourhoods have been transformed – and not for the better. But does your MP care? Does your local council worry about what might be happening? We have come a very long way from the time when local administrations from John O'Groats to Lands End decided it would be a great idea to rename the local High Street Nelson Mandela Way. Now, thanks to a fascinating study by Professor Matt Goodwin, we know that the effect of mass immigration on this country means that we are losing our identity. According to Goodwin, white British people will become a minority by 2063. The foreign born and their children will be a majority by 2079. And, incredibly, roughly one in five people will be Muslim by the year 2100. This news should come as no surprise to anyone who has been listening to Talk since 2015. Visit parts of Birmingham, Rochdale, Blackburn, Manchester, Sheffield and Leeds: what you will find are communities which are not British. English is not spoken as a first language by many. British mores of conduct, behaviour and politeness have gone out the window. And yet, despite what we see before our very eyes, our politicians are busy trying to convince us that this is all good. Heaven forbid you should question government policy. Make no mistake; the Tories were no better than this current lot. In fact, on their watch, immigrants became ever more bold in their attempts to come here. No one with a brain will think that immigration is all bad. Of course there are brilliant things that different people from all round the globe bring to a country like Britain. We can wax lyrical about amazing restaurants, cool festivals, convenient food delivery and the joy of learning about different cultures. But please, don't pee down my back and pretend that it's raining. There is a world of difference between people who come here to make a new life for themselves and those who are connected to criminal gangs. There can never be a justification for welcoming young men who brandish swords and machetes in our high streets. And families who arrive on our shores while refusing to integrate or learn our language should not be welcome in our future. The gaslighting is over. The die is cast. If we do not reverse the current state of play on our borders, we won't make it to the next century. Mike Graham presents Morning Glory every weekday morning from 6-10am on Talk Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Feared King Charles 'Blocked' Kids' Passports Over HRH Titles, Considered Name Change: Report
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Feared King Charles 'Blocked' Kids' Passports Over HRH Titles, Considered Name Change: Report

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Feared King Charles 'Blocked' Kids' Passports Over HRH Titles, Considered Name Change: Report

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly explored the idea of changing their family name amid a prolonged delay in receiving passports for their children. Harry, 40, consulted his uncle Charles Spencer about the possibility of using the Spencer surname during the impasse, according to The Guardian. The U.K. outlet reports that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had grown 'exasperated' over the repeated delays — with the passports for Prince Archie, 6, and Princess Lilibet, 4, arriving nearly six months after the initial application. Standard processing time is typically around three weeks. 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids,' a source close to the Sussexes said, according to the outlet. A source confirms to PEOPLE that the delay was significantly longer than normal. A legal source also told The Guardian that government officials were allegedly 'dragging their feet because the passport applications included the titles HRH (His/Her Royal Highness) for both children.' A source claimed to The Guardian that 'the King hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names'. Buckingham Palace strongly denied the claim that the King or his officials had any role in the delay, The Daily Telegraph reports. The source added to The Guardian, 'Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months.' 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'' Harry did meet and speak with his late mother's brother, Charles Spencer, about the possibility of using the family name, PEOPLE confirms. However, a source denies reports published last weekend that Spencer advised against the change or that it would be legally 'insurmountable,' calling those claims inaccurate. A spokesperson for the Duke told PEOPLE, 'We do not comment on private issues pertaining to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's children.' The passports were eventually issued to the couple shortly after the Sussexes' lawyers wrote to the U.K. Home Office, threatening to file a data subject access request — a legal move that could have revealed internal discussions or decisions behind the delay. According to The Guardian, Prince Archie previously held both U.K. and U.S. passports under the Mountbatten-Windsor surname until the more recent application. Read the original article on People

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store