It isn't looking any better for Thomas Woldbye today. National Grid CEO John Pettigrew threw shade at Mr Woldbye when he said "There was no lack of capacity from the substations. Each substation individually can provide enough power to Heathrow."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdjy4m0n1exo

And still Heathrow push the lie that the airport totally losing power is "unprecedented". I say again that this is not true. North East America, 1965 and 2003.

The UK losing a substation to fire may be unprecedented, but how the airport lost its power is not the issue here. The CEO should have already soiled himself thinking about that prospect.

And if a CEO is not regularly thinking about "what is the worst ever thing that could happen to my organisation", then that person should not be a CEO.

There are discussions about power provision to the whole area to be had, but that must not detract from Heathrow's failure here.

Still not passing the Sniff Test.

Be like Thomas Woldbye - Start the day with what should be a career ending performance, defending inadequacy in your organisation's Business Continuity response and being critical of people affected by the outage.

I'm not sure what crisis management material Mr Woldbye has been reading but this is a massive failure to read the room and very damaging to Heathrow's reputation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1mn1klj4e4o

Heathrow Airport is operational and open this morning. However, the utterances of Heathrow CEO Thomas Woldbye yesterday and again this morning don't pass my Sniff Test.

Calling yesterday's incident "unprecedented" tells me that he's not familiar with other large outages around the world, like the 1965 Adam Beck power station incident which took out power to NE America and Canada, and the 2003 incident of August 2003 which hit the same area.

As I said in my e-mail to the Commons Transport Committee last night, "Does this mean that Mr Woldbye had not considered what would happen in the event of a complete power outage? If not, why not? These are the sort of things a CEO should be proactively considering."

Something doesn't smell right here. If Business Continuity, Disaster Recovery and Critical Incident Response haven't covered this scenario, why not?

It means that there is no joined up thinking in those areas. What procedures there are appear to be inadequate and deficient. Defending that isn't a good look.

"But an airport is a complex thing" doesn't wash. It is even more important that scenarios are evaluated and recovery procedures documented and tested. Especially when you consider that LHR is classed as Critical National Infrastructure.

How convincing will Mr Woldbye be when he faces the Commons Transport Committee? I won't bet on his being all that impressive.