[traceroute66]

> Seems like a national security issue if there’s a single point of failure

No. Its not.

Its the fact that the decades of under-investment in power distribution infrastructure is coming home to roost.

Its no secret there's little to no "fat" in the UK grid system. Hence it has difficulty coping with black-swan events such as this.

Anyone who buys datacentre space in London knows the reason prices have gone through the roof in recent years. Its becasue the grid simply cannot get the extra capacity to where it is needed. And this is before energy prices started rising due to the UK's electricity being mostly dependent on gas (previous governments having sold off gas-storage facilities to build houses on the land instead).

That's why its also a pain in the backside to build new banks of EV fast chargers anywhere in the UK. Getting the power there involves long, protracted, discussions with the grid followed by payments of large amounts of money and a written promise to the grid that you agree to load-shedding at any time if necessary.

I suspect you will find its not a single point of failure either. Its just that Hayes is a high-demand area, so see above for lack of excess capacity .... if one site goes boom, the other will struggle to take on 100% load.

[implements]

> I suspect you will find its not a single point of failure either. It’s just that Hayes is a high-demand area, so see above for lack of excess capacity .... if one site goes boom, the other will struggle to take on 100% load.

Hayes (North Hyde) is a few miles NE of Heathrow, but Laleham (similar sized) is only a few miles South - I’d would have assumed both served as fully redundant supplies for the airport, given it’s critical national infrastructure.

(The old BBC Television Centre in London had three independent supplies, I believe)

[ben_w]

> (The old BBC Television Centre in London had three independent supplies, I believe)

There's a story, possibly apocryphal, that the UK nuclear deterrent submarines used the continued broadcast of Radio 4 as a dead-man switch to determine if nuclear war had broken out and they needed to open the safe containing their orders.

Which is to say: What counts as "critical national infrastructure" can be surprising.

[implements]

Radio 4 on long wave, I believe - which is only guaranteed until the end of June this year because the BBC’s stock of irreplaceable high power valves is running out. As well as triggering Armageddon the LW signal also switched older electricity meters (phew, back on topic!) between standard daytime and cheap overnight power.

[ChrisRR]

How do you say No it's not and then describe points of failure leading to national security issues?

[tonyedgecombe]

>And this is before energy prices started rising due to the UK's electricity being mostly dependent on gas ...

Wind was the dominant source of energy in the UK last year:

https://reports.electricinsights.co.uk/q4-2024/wind-becomes-...

[pjc50]

So .. why are people trying to build new datacentre space in London rather than somewhere a bit further away and less expensive? Easier to put the datacentre near the power and run some fiber rather than the other way round, surely?

The expense is unpleasant, but the money has to come from somewhere, and the user paying is easier to justify than all the other bill-payers collectively or the taxpayer.

[traceroute66]

> why are people trying to build new datacentre space in London rather than somewhere a bit further away and less expensive?

Most likely some combination of:

    1. A chunk of the customer base (financial sector, hyperscalers etc.) that wants the low latency and who are price insensitive because of their deep pockets.
    2. If peering matters to you, then you're limited to where the IXP is, which is usually only at the major London sites.  LINX, for example, have LINX Wales, but that is not interconnected with LINX London, so you either need to get space in London or pay for fibre capacity back to London.
    3. Fibre coverage outside large conurbations in the UK has traditionally been shit and to varying degrees still is.
    4. The rural areas don't have substations ready-to-go and the NIMBY's come running if you propose building one or anything else in their backyards (see protests about new wind farms).

Almost certainly many more things I've missed, those are just a few off the top of my head.

There are various locations outside of Central London but within the M25 boundary. But YMMV when it comes to being any less expensive. I suspect you will find the Outer London market has "hardened" over the last few years.

Verging into cynical territory, marketing might come into it a little bit. "Telehouse London" sounds cooler in the customer presentation "Telehouse near some village you've never heard of".

[everfrustrated]

The UK has a weird National Grid system whereby the cost of electricity is the same nationwide (except Scotland)

So datacenters build in London as the connection/electricity price is same as building in rural areas and they'd obviously prefer being closer to users in London.

[Symbiote]

They build datacentres in/near London and also elsewhere in the country.

Here's one example map: https://www.colo-x.com/data-centre-database-map/

[paganel]

Probably because of easier access to qualified workforce.

[apetresc]

You keep saying “No it’s not” and then describing exactly what most people would call “a single point of failure” and “a national security issue” in a lot more words.

[traceroute66]

> You keep saying “No it’s not” and then describing exactly what most people would call “a single point of failure” and “a national security issue” in a lot more words.

What are you on about ?

Its not a national security issue. Full stop. There are many other airports in the London area and elesewhere in the UK. Heathrow is a civilian airport, not a military one. 99% of air cargo to the UK does NOT come to Heathrow.

Its not a single point of failure either. Sure, for those TEMPORARILY affected it might feel that way. But businesses with contingency plannign will simply invoke their DR plans and go elsewhere ... flights will divert, people will WFH instead of going the offices, people will have to travel to a supermarket a little bit further away.

Also, regarding "single point of failure", see this website[1]... 62,000 customers affected but only 4,800 without power[1]. Not quite a SPOF then is it !

Also, you want guaranteed N+1 resilience at grid level, who do you think is going to pay for that ?

Most people would be happy with the grid sorting out its capacity issues at N level, one thing at a time my friend.

[1] https://powertrack.ssen.co.uk/powertrack#QQ0573

[TheOtherHobbes]

"National security site" is not a synonym for "military installation."

It means "critical infrastructure whose failure causes significant adverse effects."

The UK's main airport is absolutely that.

Your quote about 99% of air cargo not coming through Heathrow is made-up nonsense. The correct figure is closer to around 50% by volume and 70% by value.

https://www.heathrow.com/company/cargo

It's a major, major hub, not just for the UK but Europe, the US, and Rest of World.

[Closi]

> 99% of air cargo to the UK does NOT come to Heathrow.

Not even slightly true - Heathrow carries over 50% of air freight and is a major hub.

(https://www.heathrow.com/company/cargo)

[traceroute66]

> Heathrow carries over 50% of air freight and is a major hub.

Not denying it, but it does depend on what you're sending.

For example, if you send something by DHL, it has a significantly greater chance of going through East Midlands Airport than it does Heathrow.

Same for UPS and others. The bulk of their recent investments have been away from Heathrow.

The non-Heathrow sites have better road connections, and more importantly for air cargo, the noise abatement rules at non-Heathrow sites are more relaxed.

The other problem with Heathrow is that BA have their finger in the pies and they have too many slots, so that limits any growth on the independent freight side.

Heathrow has effectively hit its capacity limit. That may or may not change if they ever build the third runway.

[Closi]

> Not denying it

Your original post did though!

Heathrow undoubtedly does the most air cargo. Sure express often comes into EMA on dedicated flights, but lots of freight comes in the hold of passenger aircraft, and that’s where Heathrow is king. The lack of passenger traffic is undoubtedly a key reason why EMA only does 1/5th of Heathrow’s air cargo, as as you have noted it’s ideally located to serve a lot of the UK.

[richwater]

It's really quite incredible how people just make shit up, even in this board

[ziddoap]

>Heathrow is a civilian airport, not a military one.

Not saying this incident is or isn't a national security issue, but this is not really pertinent to whether an incident is classified as a national security issue.

National security encompasses much more than just military-related stuff. The "security" part of "national security" is using a broad definition of security (like "food security" isn't strictly about physically protecting food from damage).

[WrongAssumption]

National security definitively covers civilian infrastructure. In fact military defense primary purpose is protecting civilian restructure.