Hatton Gardens

[BBE]

Seems they went through the wall...

Those of us in the US have no idea what you are talking about.
BBE.

[wylk]

Here's an image of a Hilti in use. I might expect the Hatton Garden gang used a smaller drill since reports state several holes were drilled.



Here's a similar setup that was being used to break into a Berlin bank but the bad guys tripped an alarm before they were finished:

[Brian Morland]

2 meters of this...

(from Chubb's own publicity material)

or was it only the door that was new in 1947?

[Huw Eastwood]

Wow- that's a serious size core. With 2 metre thick walls, I was thinking the same. The DD350 seems a pretty impressive bit of kit, and is according to makers spec intended for stitch drilling cores- seeing the size of those it could be possible but there would still be complications. The limited depth feed of the drill (500 mm?) means either continuous drilling by adding additional extensions or drilling to max depth and then breaking out a part-core. not at all easy assuming the 2 metres thickness is peppered with any one of Chubb's famous barrier deflectors- tangbar, spiral matress etc.

my guess is continuous holes drilled with extensions until they broke clean through, but either way it must have been hell of a slog with all the reinforcing.

[Huw Eastwood]

I'd be surprised if they were still using that door from the late 1940s. Perhaps we'll find out eventually but knowing the periodic makeovers and upgrades some of the other deposit centres had over the years it'd be risky if they are.

when you consider the massive risks involved with this sort of business, it raises (for me anyway!) many questions about the vault itself. We all know how secretive the safety deposit world is, and the fact the values and losses involved often many times what's declared. Which raises the big question of what spec vault and door would you opt for? Add into the equation the fact that we're now in an age of off-the-shelf doors made to resist to a certain grade only and the whole concept and idea seems madness to me- unless you're prepared to still take massive risks which insurers are still prepared to cover..

[wylk]

Law enforcement is now admitting they ignored an alarm --

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...der-alarm.html

CCTV video is available:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-watch-5496077

[Huw Eastwood]

It's not looking good is it.. There's likely to be a few heads roll over this and fingers pointed in all directions.

With regard to electric supply, domestic mains is 230—240V here in the UK, totally different to the 415v 3-phase supply used in industry.

But, for the construction and service industry, apart from cordless battery tools, which were allowed, 110V CTE was normally used for portable site equipment, and became compulsory even for locksmiths and safe engineers for on-site works. I completed countless declaration papers for contract work undertaken for large companies who insisted on it.

seems like the rulings changed yet again though as part of a European ruling. Apparently 230V equipment is again permissible for on site use provided it is used with RCD protection. Apparently it come about as a result of increased volume of workers from Europe working in Britain and bringing their 230V equipment with them.

Im guessing this is the explanation for the Hilti DD350 being 230v and not 110v as would have been the norm a few years back.
It certainly did the job anyway..

[Safeone]

Smell a rat with this raid to be honest. OK one alarm actuation was not responded to by the Police (whoops) but come on with the multi layers of technical security employed in that building it will not have ended with one dial out alarm call and if it did who reset it ? Which one person had the dual reset codes ? No. Its like having a two key safe and giving one person both of them, wouldnt / shouldnt happen. A disabled system during closed hours needs authorisation and attendance of middle managers until reset & secured (hang on perhaps they were there !!!!)

And that only deals with the response alarm. I bet there were at least two others.

Wonder how often the insurers actually inspect place like that to make sure they come up to standard ?

[Redoubt]

Yes the Alarm situation does not seem quite right.
With the alarm systems that most of our customers are required to have for insurance purposes the following chain of events would occur.
The alarm is set off.
The monitoring station would bring up the site on their screens and inspect the cameras.
The customer would receive an alert, and on their smartphone inspect the cameras.
A guard would be dispatched whatever the case was.
Most of the guard companies guarantee they will be onsite within 10 minutes and are contracted accordingly.
If applicable the police will be sent with the relevant information.
Either way a number of people will attend quickly.
If it is an alarm fault the techs will be advised to attend and remedy, or if they cannot remedy at the time , static guards remain until the situation is sorted.
In these days of technology I struggle with such a crew being onsite for 3 days.