On 29 Aug 2003 09:56:23 -0700 someone who may be
(Richard Catlow) wrote this:-

Perhaps a small scale in terms of the number of substations, or even
the geographical area affected, but big in terms of consumers,
megawatts, gigawatt hours and ciruits to which the surface railway are
connected.

Thanks for the information, which I am considering along with the
BBC's map which may be at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...263/html/1.stm
as I said in an earlier message.

Of course having this information makes me a terrorist, according to
Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000, so you may not hear from me
again for a while.

We tried to restore supplies from Byfleet, Croydon and Northfleet
132kV supplies, but the voltage drop and charging currents involved
made this a non runner.

That is in essence the question that I think needs raising. DC
railways have these high voltage circuits running along the lines,
though feeding the London terminals is a rather different matter to
some rural section.

Looks like some NGC folk have got some explaining to do

They are certainly the ones with the majority of the explaining to
do.

as have LUL.

I think Mr Livingstone shot himself in the foot with his
ill-informed criticism. As a result it may be difficult for him to
ask the real questions that need answering.

I wouldn't mind betting that
the situation between LUL and EDF was uncertain immediately after the
fault, whilst its impact was measured up. Eventually, LUL decided that
it could be long time before supplies could be relied upon that they
would take no chances and evacuate the trains and hey presto 20
minutes later in mid evacuation, the power comes back on.

That is my suspicion too.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.