Atlanta airport closed

[tynopik]

ATL lost power and all flights were cancelled. Delta has already cancelled 300 flights tomorrow (Monday).

Given the amount of traffic Delta funnels through ATL, this is going to cause huge problems throughout their network

Reports of people stuck, police evacuating the airport, flight attendants blowing slides to get people off, all sorts of madness


http://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/power-outage-reported-at-hartsfield-jackson/85-500042992
http://www.ajc.com/news/local/breaking-power-outage-reported-atlanta-airport/fYiM6b1OHi5G27m38v6V2H/
http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1381377

 

[Herr Kutz]

I'm not sure if shipping companies route through Atlanta, but if my bike like gets delayed because of this I'm going to be super pissed.

 

[Elixer]

I'm not sure if shipping companies route through Atlanta, but if my bike like gets delayed because of this I'm going to be super pissed.

It is a major hub for shipping, both FedEx & UPS use it.

 

[Thunder 57]

Considering the time of year and location, Die Hard 2 comes to mind.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Oops!

Seriously though don't they have some kind of redundancy? I imagine that must be a pretty serious airport if it has 300 flights for just one airline in a single day.

Actually an ADS-B receiver must look pretty interesting near a major airport like that.

 

[tynopik]

Oops!
I imagine that must be a pretty serious airport if it has 300 flights for just one airline in a single day.

um, you could say that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_airports_by_passenger_traffic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World's_busiest_airports_by_aircraft_movements




http://www.ajc.com/news/local/breaking-power-outage-reported-atlanta-airport/fYiM6b1OHi5G27m38v6V2H/

11:55 P.M. UPDATE: Power has been restored to all of Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport.

11:20 P.M. UPDATE: Power has been restored to the airport’s Atrium and Concourses T, A and B.

 

[Ichinisan]

I imagine that must be a pretty serious airport if it has 300 flights for just one airline in a single day.

It's one of the busiest in the world.

Wiki:

It has been the world's busiest airport by passenger traffic since 1998; and by number of landings and take-offs from 2005 to 2013, losing that title to Chicago-O'Hare in 2014, but regaining it a year later.[2][3] Hartsfield–Jackson held its ranking as the world's busiest airport in 2012, both in passengers and number of flights, by accommodating 100 million passengers (more than 260,000 passengers daily) and 950,119 flights.[4][5][6]

 

[feralkid]

I'm not sure if shipping companies route through Atlanta, but if my bike like gets delayed because of this I'm going to be super pissed.

Yes!

That would be a rational reaction to something you can't control.

We will all now kneel in prayer for your precious "bike like", and I am sure the stranded passengers will as well.

 

[Exterous]

Delta is going to have a rough couple of days with planes and crews out of position. They say they'll be fine by this afternoon but I think thats going to be tough to do. The last time Atlanta was closed for any length of time it took Delta 5 days to get their shit together.

Oops!

Seriously though don't they have some kind of redundancy?

From the news reports I read last night they lost power due to a fire that damaged the primary and secondary power substations.

 

[NoTine42]

Delta is going to have a rough couple of days with planes and crews out of position. They say they'll be fine by this afternoon but I think thats going to be tough to do. The last time Atlanta was closed for any length of time it took Delta 5 days to get their shit together.



From the news reports I read last night they lost power due to a fire that damaged the primary and secondary power substations.

But why are there no generators that can run the towers, runway lights and gate loading functions at the worlds busiest airport when thin grid supply goes down?

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

So glad I didn't have to travel this week... otherwise I probably would have gotten cancelled flights, my connection to the small town I'm going to is always out of Atlanta.

 

[Exterous]

But why are there no generators that can run the towers, runway lights and gate loading functions at the worlds busiest airport when thin grid supply goes down?

I think a far more important question would be 'why would a fire be able to damage redundant power ingress paths without significant damage to the facility or the need to evacuate passengers?' To me that sounds like it was a poorly designed redundant system, likely as a cost cutting measure

My guess for the generators would be along the lines of "Why do we need generators? We have redundant power!" I think they did have enough power on hand to handle plane landings for a period of time and they figure they are a priority customer for power restoration meaning any outage would be rare enough to not need to plan for.

 

[Exterous]

So glad I didn't have to travel this week... otherwise I probably would have gotten cancelled flights, my connection to the small town I'm going to is always out of Atlanta.

Yeah we have family flying out today that normally connect through ATL but a different routing was cheaper so they got lucky. We fly out later this week so hopefully this is the only major bad luck to strike flight operations this week.

 

[Darwin333]

But why are there no generators that can run the towers, runway lights and gate loading functions at the worlds busiest airport when thin grid supply goes down?

The tower did have emergency power and never lost function, not sure about the runway lights but I do know the jetways at the gates didn't have power. I'd be more curious how they didn't design a more redundant system, a single electrical fire shouldn't be able to bring down one of the busiest airports in the world for almost 12 hours.

 

[Darwin333]

I think a far more important question would be 'why would a fire be able to damage redundant power ingress paths without significant damage to the facility or the need to evacuate passengers?' To me that sounds like it was a poorly designed redundant system, likely as a cost cutting measure

My guess for the generators would be along the lines of "Why do we need generators? We have redundant power!" I think they did have enough power on hand to handle plane landings for a period of time and they figure they are a priority customer for power restoration meaning any outage would be rare enough to not need to plan for.

I'd imagine that the amount of backup generators required to have even minimal airport functions would be insane. Like I said in my last post, the tower did have emergency power, never lost operations, and I think I read that some cargo flights were exempt from the ground stop because those planes go to different buildings than the main airport/terminals so I assume things like runway lights were also running on backup power.

One thing that is really surprising was the lack, or incredibly small number, of emergency lights. You would think there would some sort of code that people could be able to see where the hell they are going without using flashlights and phones for light.

 

[Exterous]

I'd imagine that the amount of backup generators required to have even minimal airport functions would be insane.

For sure but important operations died pretty quickly. Granted I'm not super familiar with running an airport but I think having a few generator powered jet bridges to speed deplaning would be better than keeping people\planes on the tarmac for 7 hours.

One thing that is really surprising was the lack, or incredibly small number, of emergency lights. You would think there would some sort of code that people could be able to see where the hell they are going without using flashlights and phones for light.

The emergency lighting batteries probably died after 30-60min while people were stuck there 7+ hours. Occasional lighting powered by a generator would have helped but likely pretty expensive given how large the terminals are

 

[Darwin333]

For sure but important operations died pretty quickly. Granted I'm not super familiar with running an airport but I think having a few generator powered jet bridges to speed deplaning would be better than keeping people\planes on the tarmac for 7 hours.

That would make sense but with 100 planes even a few generator powered jet bridges would take forever to deplane them all not to mention the logistics of shuffling all the planes around after they disembark the passengers. I guess the latter would be doable, they could just park the planes at gates without powered jet bridges but it would just add to the time it would take.

The emergency lighting batteries probably died after 30-60min while people were stuck there 7+ hours. Occasional lighting powered by a generator would have helped but likely pretty expensive given how large the terminals are

That would seem more important than the powered jet ways imho. If they are only planning for 30-60 minutes then at least the people on the planes can see to use the bathroom, have some food and water, etc. I just would assume that code would require you to have adequate emergency lighting to evacuate the building and considering the sheer amount of people, no powered walkways, no escalators, and limited working doors an hour just doesn't cut it.

 

[Exterous]

That would make sense but with 100 planes even a few generator powered jet bridges would take forever to deplane them all not to mention the logistics of shuffling all the planes around after they disembark the passengers. I guess the latter would be doable, they could just park the planes at gates without powered jet bridges but it would just add to the time it would take.

Well they were doing it with just a few stair platforms as it was so the jet bridges definitely would have reduced the wait time. Not that I have any idea what powering those would be (and other relatively important services) vs wiring all the emergency lighting in the terminals

That would seem more important than the powered jet ways imho. If they are only planning for 30-60 minutes then at least the people on the planes can see to use the bathroom, have some food and water, etc. I just would assume that code would require you to have adequate emergency lighting to evacuate the building and considering the sheer amount of people, no powered walkways, no escalators, and limited working doors an hour just doesn't cut it.

The planes were still powered by their APUs so people and, from what I have read, most did have periodic lighting and cooling. Several (many?) also appeared to do a beverage and snack service. The draw back is I doubt most planes were catered enough to do any sort of decent food\drink service on a 7 hour delay. They also drained toilets

 

[local]

The thread on Airliners.net had some pretty good info that answers most of these questions.

Cargo and general aviation were not affected.
Emergency lighting never failed.
Apparently the jet bridges require too much power for generators.
The tower and other critical ops were on backup generators.
An airport this size would require the output of an entire power plant which is much more than a small town, generators would not be feasible as a backup.
The problem apparently occurred at the switching gear which backfed into the primary and secondary substations.

 

[Thebobo]

You have to wonder what happened to their emergency generators.

 

[Darwin333]

You have to wonder what happened to their emergency generators.

From everything I read, they worked perfectly.

 

[Red Squirrel]

To me something like this you even want batteries in a dual conversion setup. So if power goes out batteries take over, then generator takes over (whether manually hooking one up, or auto). For telcos that's how they do it. That's why your land line will always work no matter how long the power goes out, same with your cell.

 

[Exterous]

I read a comparison of Atlanta with 'other airport designs' where 1/2 of the terminal is fed from A and the other half is fed from B so, at most in a situation like this, only half of each terminal would be without power. I guess some go a step farther and have switch rooms per terminal so a single fire can only take down a single terminal instead of being able to take down the entire airport.

Apparently the jet bridges require too much power for generators.

Thanks for the info but too much power for generators? You can buy a 4.5MW generator from CAT and I'd be willing to be you can power a few jet bridges with one of those.

 

[Darwin333]

To me something like this you even want batteries in a dual conversion setup. So if power goes out batteries take over, then generator takes over (whether manually hooking one up, or auto). For telcos that's how they do it. That's why your land line will always work no matter how long the power goes out, same with your cell.

Holy crap I don't even want to start to figure just how many batteries that would take but I know it would take huge structures off-site just to house them and they would have to be replaced at LEAST once a decade using batteries they would have been using up till now at a cost of oh my fucking god.

 

[Darwin333]

I read a comparison of Atlanta with 'other airport designs' where 1/2 of the terminal is fed from A and the other half is fed from B so, at most in a situation like this, only half of each terminal would be without power. I guess some go a step farther and have switch rooms per terminal so a single fire can only take down a single terminal instead of being able to take down the entire airport.

Yeah, a single electrical fire should not have been able to completely take down one of the busiest airports in the world. Hell, any international airport should be able to withstand a single electrical fire without going completely dark.