世界著名,英国最大的希思罗机场物理意义上真"火"了! 机场高管"我自豪”!
2025-03-29 bluebit 5873
正文翻译
Why was Heathrow airport slow to resume operations after substation fire?
Time spent switching power supply and rebooting systems raises doubts over resilience of Europe’s largest aviation hub

为何希思罗机场在变电站火灾后恢复运营如此缓慢?
电源切换和系统重启耗费的时间,引发人们对欧洲最大航空枢纽抗风险能力的质疑。


Heathrow started its first flights after the shutdown on Friday evening © Carlos Jasso/Reuters

周五晚暂停运营后,希思罗机场已恢复首批航班起降"

Heathrow is coming under growing scrutiny over its decision to close for nearly 24 hours following a fire at a nearby electrical substation, even though it was still able to receive power from other parts of the grid.
Senior management at Europe’s busiest airport took the decision to close on Friday as they battled to restore full power to a complex that uses the same amount of electricity as a small city.
But John Pettigrew, chief executive of National Grid which operates Britain’s high-voltage transmission network, told the Financial Times that two other substations serving Heathrow were working throughout the incident, meaning the airport never lost potential access to power.
As concerns grow over the resilience of the UK’s critical infrastructure, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on Monday said “there are questions” for airport executives to answer over the scale of disruption.
Why wasn’t there enough backup power to run the airport?

希思罗机场因附近变电站火灾关闭近24小时的决定,正面临愈发强烈的质疑——尽管该机场本仍可通过电网其他部分维持电力供应。
作为欧洲最繁忙的机场,其管理层上周五决定暂停运营,当时他们正全力为这座耗电量堪比小型城市的航空枢纽恢复全面供电。
然而,负责运营英国高压输电网的国家电网公司首席执行官约翰·佩蒂格鲁向英国《金融时报》透露,其实。机场关闭期间另有两座为希思罗供电的变电站始终正常运行,这说明机场从未失去潜在电力供应渠道。
随着各界对英国关键基础设施抗灾能力的担忧加剧,基尔斯塔默首相周一表示,机场管理层需要就此次大规模停运事件'作出解释'。
为何机场没有配备足够的备用电源维持运转?"

Heathrow has enough diesel generators to power critical operations, including its control tower and runway lights, and passengers were able to safely leave the airport late on Thursday night after the outage was first ed. But its generators do not have the capacity to run the whole airport.
Simon Gallagher, managing director of UK Networks Services, a consultancy specialising in power grids, said few other airports have better backup supplies than Heathrow.
But he said other industries “are far more resilient”.
“The airport industry as a whole has this issue with resilience . . . other industries with even bigger connections ensure they never go off supply,” he said.

希思罗机场虽配备有足够驱动关键设施(包括空管塔台与跑道指示灯)的柴油发电机,且在周四夜间首次断电后已确保乘客安全离场,但其备用电力并不具备支撑整个机场正常运转的能力。
英国专业电网领域咨询公司董事总经理西蒙·加拉格尔表示,很少有其他机场配置的备用电源能达到希思罗机场的水平。但他也同时指出,其他行业'抗灾能力明显更强'。
'整个航空业在抗灾能力建设上存在系统性缺陷……即使其他更大规模的行业都能确保永不中断供电。'

How does Heathrow’s resilience compare?
A nearby data centre run by Ark Data Centres, which is equipped with 12 emergency generators, was also affected by Friday’s substation fire, but says it managed to avoid disruption by switching on its backup supply.
“I don’t think that the people buying services off me would buy them without this resilience built in,” said Huw Owen, Ark’s chief executive.
A 2023 US government found one large hub airport ed having 10 diesel fuel generators and enough fuel on site to power the entire airport for three weeks. The airport was seen as an outlier, analysts said.
Resilience must “strike the right balance between risks and costs”, said Olivier Jankovec, director-general of trade group Airports Council International Europe. “Ensuring minimum disruptions and keeping operations going as much as possible is simply not always possible — especially when faced with rare and extreme events.”

希思罗的抗灾能力究竟处于何种水平?
同样受周五变电站火灾影响的Ark数据中心(配备12台应急发电机)表示,其通过及时启用备用电源成功避免了业务中断。
Ark数据中心首席执行官休·欧文表示:'若没有这种内建的抗灾能力,我认为客户根本不会使用我们的服务。'
美国政府2023年一项调研发现,某大型枢纽机场配置了10台柴油发电机及可维持三周运转的现场燃料储备,但分析师指出该案例属行业特例。
欧洲国际机场协会总干事奥利维尔·扬科维奇强调,抗灾能力建设必须'在风险与成本间找到精准平衡点'。'既要确保最低限度的运行中断,又要最大限度维持运营——但面对偶发极端事件时,这往往难以兼顾。'

Why did it take so long to restart if power was available?
While the fire took North Hyde substation out of operation, two others remained capable of providing power to the airport. But in order to access the power from the remaining two substations, Heathrow said it had to “reconfigure” its internal electrical networks.
In practice, this meant the airport had to send technicians to its own power distribution points, where they physically toggled circuit breakers to disconnect Heathrow from North Hyde and reconnect it to the other stations.

关键疑问:既然电力未断,为何恢复耗时如此之久?
尽管北海德变电站因火灾停运,但另两座变电站仍具备向机场供电的能力。希思罗机场表示,要接入这两座变电站的电力,需对其内部电网进行'重构配置'。
实际操作中,机场技术团队需前往自主配电节点,通过物理切换断路器实现双重操作:先切断与北海德变电站的连接,再接入其他两座变电站。

原创翻译:龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处



The airport also had to shut down, restart and systematically test hundreds of its systems before it could resume operations.

机场还必须关闭、重新启动,并对数百个系统进行系统测试后,才能恢复运营。

Heathrow said: “Given Heathrow’s size and operational complexity, safely restarting operations after a disruption of this magnitude was a significant challenge.”
It is unclear how long each step of the process took, and some experts said they were surprised by the length of time it took to return the airport to normal operation.
Heathrow announced at 4.30am on Friday that it would close until midnight, and by 12.30pm it had begun restarting its systems. By 4pm the airport was “100 per cent confident that all systems were safely operating”, said transport secretary Heidi Alexander. The first flights restarted around 7pm.
“In some ways, this seems to [have been] a process failure,” said David Wallom, professor of informatics at Oxford university. “It seems like Heathrow had never considered the possibility of this scale of failure.”

希思罗机场表示:“考虑到希思罗机场的规模以及运营复杂性,在遭受如此重大破坏后安全恢复运营是一项重大挑战。”
目前尚不清楚系统恢复过程每个环节所耗时间,一些专家表示,对机场恢复正常运营所需时长表示震惊。
周五凌晨4点30分,希思罗宣布关闭至午夜;中午12点30分启动系统重启程序。交通大臣海蒂·亚历山大表示,至下午4点时机场已'百分百确认所有系统安全运行'。首批航班于晚7点左右复飞。
牛津大学信息学教授戴维·瓦隆指出:'从某些层面看,这暴露出希思罗机场流程缺陷。该机场似乎从未考虑过解决可能可能出现大规模故障的应急预案。'

Should Heathrow have been better prepared?
All contingency planning requires a “weighing up of the economics”, said Malte Jansen, an energy policy researcher at Sussex university.
“No technical system will be 100 per cent fail-proof,” he said. “I didn’t get the feeling this was a reckless design — the system is designed to be reliable and a very unlikely case has come to fruition.”
Nevertheless, power industry executives said Heathrow should have been better prepared given its status as Europe’s busiest airport. The ability to switch power quickly “should be a minimum standard”, said one executive.

希思罗机场是否应做好更为充分的准备?
萨塞克斯大学能源政策研究员马尔特·詹森表示,所有应急预案都需进行'经济性权衡'。
'没有任何技术系统能实现百分百故障免疫,'他补充道,'我不认为这是草率的设计——系统本就追求可靠性,只是恰巧触发极低概率事件。'
然而,电力行业高管强调,作为欧洲最为繁忙的机场,希思罗理应具有更为完备的应急预案。某高管直言:'快速切换电源本应是最低标准。'

Firefighters work to douse the flames at North Hyde substation near Heathrow © AFP via Getty Images

正在希思罗机场附近海德变电站灭火的消防员
原创翻译:龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


A 2014 by consultancy Jacobs, prepared as part of an earlier Heathrow expansion push, said “even a brief interruption to electricity supplies could have a long-lasting impact”.
But it concluded “Heathrow is equipped with on-site generation and appears to have resilient electricity supplies that are compliant with regulations and standards”.
Heathrow has spent a total of £7.4bn in capital expenditure on the airport since 2014, including on new security scanners. But at a time when landing fees have risen, airlines have criticised its owners for spending this money inefficiently, leaving the airport with ageing infrastructure.

2014年,雅各布斯咨询公司为希思罗机场早期扩建计划的建议报告中表示:'即便短暂断电亦可能引发长期影响。'
但结论仍认定'希思罗配有现场发电设备,或可拥有符合法规和标准的弹性电力供应'。
自2014年以来,思罗共计投入74亿英镑,包含新型安检扫描仪,用于机场资本支出。但随着起降费的上涨,航司批评其运营方资金使用效率低下,导致机场基础设施老化。"

评论翻译
Strandline
Well, if their disaster recovery and resilience planning is anything to go by, the management at Heathrow dint know what they are doing. This should be absolutely bread and butter basics for a large business like this.
Can they be trusted with a large infrastructure project of the third runway?

好吧,如果他们若以灾难恢复与抗灾规划水平做参照的话,希思罗机场的管理层就是绝对的无能。对于像这样的大企业来说,应急救灾本应是生存的基础根本。就他们这样,谁还敢信他们能建设好第三条跑道这种大型基础设施项目?
原创翻译:龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


aftrsrsersef
Russian sabotage.

俄罗斯人干的

Astounder
A country led by people who don't have the brain cells to have a backup power supply for its most vital air transport infrastructure asset, is planning on fighting a real war with Russia - a nation that has sustained 3 years of intense war against everything Nato could throw at them (bar nukes) while maintaining a mostly normal life for the vast, vast majority of its huge population spread across 11 time zones.
Britain is a joker state - and as a relevant extra point - the backup power supply was a NetZero biomass generator, which could not activate quickly, while the reliable and cheap diesel engine backup was shut down! Clown nation with a green obsession - but it's ok, a few connected people are living it up off taxapyer subsidies to fund the green projects.

一个连为其最重要的航空运输基础设施资产提备用电力都搞不好,高层基本像是脑死亡领导的国家,居然敢去与俄罗斯开战,你可知对面可是横跨11个时区,经历除核武,在北约倾全力支持的高强度战争打击下,不仅硬刚三年,社会运转几无影响的国家,。
英国就是一个小丑,更具讽刺性的是,机场备用电源竟然用的是无法快速启动的' NetZero '生物质发电机,而可靠廉价的柴油备用系统却弃之不用!英国就是一个过分迷信绿色环保的小丑国家,但没关系,总会有人通过关系拿着纳税人补贴的'绿色项目'资金,过着纸醉金迷的生活。

Jim23(ID)

In reply to Astounder(回复某ID,以下同))

Sorry - everything NATO could throw at them?! LOL. All Nato nations have done is supply Ukraine with weapons - you'd be screwed if Nato actually wanted to attack Russian territory. Russia, a nation that tried to take Kiev in just a few days and ran away with its tail between its legs when Ukraine destroyed its tank columns. Russia, a nation that has lost over 600,000 troops and has only gained a small amount of land.
Russia is a joke - thought it would take Ukraine in a matter of days but instead got bogged down in a war on its periphery.

抱歉,还北约‘倾尽全力’?!笑死。北约国家只不过向乌克兰提供了些武器罢了,若真想打,俄罗斯早完蛋了。就俄罗斯?就那个想在数日内摧毁基辅的国家,他们在面对乌军坦克纵队打击时仓皇逃窜,俄罗斯,就那个死了60多万士兵,只拿到一点土地的国家?
俄罗斯才是那个小丑,本以为几天就能吞并乌克兰,可结果深陷边境战争泥潭无法自拔。

Astounder
In reply to Jim23
Russia is beating Nato hands down. Get out of your propaganda bubble and open your eyes and look at the realities. Only one side is begging for a ceasfire or peacedeal and it isn't Russia.
And please drop this Kiev-myth. The only people who said that Kiev would fall in 3 days was US Gen Mike Milley and American military advisers, prior to the invasion. Putin himself and others in his government never claimed that. Because unlike the jingoist hot air balloons in the UK-ruling Oxbridge clique, Russia (and China etc) never blabber that much about what they intend to do or hope to do. As we know, empty vessels make most noise, and Starmer/UK is making the most noise of all.

俄罗斯正全面碾压北约。醒醒吧,别活在宣传泡沫里了,睁眼睛看看现实吧,现在只有一方在苦苦哀求停火和谈,但绝不是那个俄罗斯。
至于所谓'三天拿下基辅'的神话,这种话趁早收起来吧。说这话的人是美军将领马克·米利和那些美国军事顾问。普京和他政府高官从未说过此话。毕竟和英国牛津-剑桥统治集团里那些爱说沙文主义大话不同,俄罗斯(和中国等国家)从不吹嘘自己。众所周知,空桶响声最大,而斯塔默领导的英国,正是时下响声最大的那只空桶。

Jim23
In reply to Astounder
Oh diddums - NATO (and its not even NATO, its individual nations) isn't really involved beyond arms, you are fighting Ukraine. We all know what happened in Kiev. Your mighty Z campaign failed. Putin tried to take Kiev and he failed miserably. You are now just fighting for a bit of rump land on Ukraine's periphery and have lost hundreds of thousands of men doing it - and what for, just so Putin can boast about it. Get out of your propaganda bubble and open your eyes troll.
Imagine expecting to take Ukraine in a short time period and finding yourself three years in, bogged down in a pointless long war with nearly a million men dead and having to rely on North Korea for troops.

我去,北约除了提供武器根本没下场(其实连北约都算不上,都是那些单独的国家),而你们面对的始终只有一个对手——乌克兰。基辅发生了什么大家都看在眼里,你们唬人的'Z行动'已经彻底破产,普京占领基辅的意图彻底失败。现在你们只不过是在为夺取乌克兰周边那一小块地在死拼,为此已经死了快几十万人,别听普京在那吹啦?醒醒吧,别活在宣传泡沫里了,你这网络喷子。
曾经信誓旦旦要速战速决拿下乌克兰,如今三年过去了,你们深陷这场毫无意义的持久战,近百万人死亡,现在还得靠朝鲜派兵来帮忙!。

Libby
In reply to Astounder
Mate, Europe would wipe Russia's troops out in an afternoon if you actually tried anything stupid. Enjoy the meat grinder when you're drafted.

伙计,别做傻事,否则欧洲会在一个下午把你们俄罗斯军队摧毁殆尽。一旦你被拉去当兵,你就知道什么是绞肉机的滋味了。

————
Richard
They blamed Russia for blowing up its own gas pipeline, and for shelling its own nuclear power plant; so I'm going to say, clearly this was an act of sabotage by the British secret services. Of course, they're going to blame Russia.

他们(英国人)曾栽赃俄罗斯炸毁自家天然气管道、炮轰自家核电站,都这样了我想说,这显然是英国情报机构的自导自演。当然,他们最后肯定会说这是俄罗斯人干的!

PG
In reply to Richard
More likely those Nazis in Ukraine are responsible.

更有可能是乌克兰纳粹干的。

RandomCommenter7.1
In reply to Richard
No one's blamed Russia. They're saying it's a fault at a substation.

也没人说是俄罗斯人干的啊,他们说是变电站出了故障

Iain Mc
The negligence of the airport operator here simply astounds me. Even modern datacentres have a requirement for dual sourced power and communications which are connected to their server racks ie. power connected to 2 sub stations and 2 communications hubs in different geographic locations. The fact that Heathrow airport doesn't follow rule 101 of business continuity process (BCP) is simply mind blowing. All our financial institutions would be censured by their regulator if they didn't test their BCP at least annually. This is just bonkers! How???? Makes us look like total amateurs.

希思罗机场的管理疏忽可怕的吓人。现代数据中心都要求服务器机架配备双路供电和主备通信链路,即连接两个不同地理位置的变电站和通信枢纽。而希思罗机场竟连“业务连续性管理(BCP)”里最基本规则都没遵守,简直都无法想象!如果我们金融机构不每年经历至少一次“业务连续性管理”,肯定会被监管机构大加惩罚。这简直太荒唐了!怎么会这样???感觉我们看起来怎么像是那么业余!
原创翻译:龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


Omadaun
No backup. Dosent even seem to be much of a fence. Words fail.

连备用系统都没有,(机场安全)围栏形同虚设。简直无语。

The Hierophant
This demonstrates one of the disadvantages of being too overcentralised in this country.

这件事暴露出这个国家(英国)一大缺陷——过度中心化。

Rail Professional
"An executive said that while the airport does have backup power options for its key systems, these do not all necessarily kick in immediately. Once the airport has lost power, its safety critical electronics also need to be tested before flights can resume. “It’s not just like turning on a generator,”
What nonsense - critical IT systems should have back up with uninteruptible power supplies (UPSs) precisely so that they do not need to be rebooted and tested. If this is the calibre of Heathrow's executives no wonder they are in trouble. Perhaps they need to employ more prefessionally qualified engineers. Either that or the "executive" has no clue what he is talking about.

"某高管称,虽然机场关键系统确有备用电源,但并非所有设备都能即时启动…'
这可不只启动发电机那么简单。'
简直扯淡——关键IT系统是必须配有不间断电源(UPS)的,它能保证无需重启检测。希思罗高管若是真这种水平,难怪会出大问题。他们要么请更专业的工程师,要么说明这位'高管'根本就是在胡说八道。"

DiscoBall
In their defense, substations don’t just go up in flame, there simply isn’t enough flammable material lying around. Yet, here we have a rather sizable fire that conveniently took out both the substation and the backup generator right next to it. So, the real question is: where exactly did all that flammable material suddenly come from?

按道理,变电站不可能平白无故地着大火,因为它周围不可能放有大量可燃物。但这次大火却把变电站及其紧邻的备用发电机一起都给烧了。所以,真正的问题的,这些突然出现的大量易燃物是从何而来。

Chadwick
In reply to DiscoBall
Substation system includes 25,000 liters of flammable coolant according to the BBC?

BBC说了,变电站用的25000升冷却剂就相当于那个助燃物。

Charles Levett-Scrivener
Serious failure in contingency planning: a single point of failure.
As one of Europe's largest airports Heathrow should have had two independent electricity supplies via different substations as well as back up generators for key infrastructure.

应急预案存在重大缺陷:竟存在单点故障风险。
作为欧洲最大机场之一,希思罗本应通过不同变电站接入两路独立电源,并为关键基础设施配备备用发电机记住。

M12345678
"National Grid have never seen an event like this", it is "unprecedented", but "no evidence of sabotage". HMMm, fires in cargo warehouses in Germany, retail parks in Lithuania. Do people think we are stupid?
And to blame "lefty activists" marks you as a PutinBot seeking to cause division or a weird fascist type. Time we all woke up and smelled the coffee.

"'国家电网从未遇到过此类事件',一边说'史无前例',一边又说'无蓄意破坏证据'。呵呵,德国货仓火灾、立陶宛零售园区大火...真当大家是傻子吗?
至于甩锅给'左翼活动家'——要么暴露你是个制造分裂的普京机器人,要么就是个古怪的法西斯分子。该醒醒闻闻咖啡味啦。"

Please try to be rational
In reply to M12345678
We need a cool, calm, investigation, not waffly conspiracy theories.

我们要冷静,沉着,安下心来调查,而不是扯那些什么无聊的阴谋论。

原创翻译:龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


很赞 1
收藏