Why safety fears over Hong Kong’s new air traffic control system are groundless

I am thrilled to learn that the government has set a clear timetable to launch the new air traffic control system in phases, starting this month. This will mark a new chapter in Hong Kong aviation history. Nevertheless, when attending a recent Legislative Council subcommittee meeting on the three-runway project, I noticed that individuals, including some lawmakers, still have doubts over the new air traffic control system, particularly its safety and efficacy. Let me, a 30-year veteran in this profession, try to allay such concerns.

Delayed take-off: Further hold up for HK$1.5 billion Raytheon AutoTrac III air traffic control system

The existing system, known as AutoTrac1, was designed and supplied by Raytheon, an American manufacturer. Since its commissioning in 1998, the system has performed very satisfactorily, providing a safe and reliable air transport service to the public. The new system, known as AutoTrac3, is the latest model by the same manufacturer, with greatly enhanced capability. In particular, advanced electronics technology is used with the aim of improving and automating various functions. Examples include: enhanced flight information and data processing capacity, advanced conflict alert features, precise aircraft trajectory predictions, and satellite-based technology. All these new features will help improve the efficiency of our frontline air traffic controllers.

Hong Kong’s air traffic control system three years out of date

It is equally important that the new system is equipped with multiple layers of backup, and the “ultimate fallback” system is now fully independent of the “main” and “standby” systems. This ensures air traffic control operations will not be paralysed even in the unlikely event that both the “main” and “standby” systems are disrupted one after the other. In a nutshell, the new system will be more effective in safeguarding air traffic control operations than the existing one.

Some critics said the contract for AutoTrac3 has been amended twice, and a number of follow-up items were identified during acceptance tests. The inference is that the new system might not be up to scratch. These worries are ungrounded. Given that the International Civil Aviation Organisation updated its air traffic management requirements after the contract was awarded, it was wholly appropriate to modify it to take in the latest international standards.

Air-traffic control system at airport meets tough safety standards

As regards follow-up items identified during the acceptance tests, it is the norm for large-scale computer systems in all areas, including civil aviation, and highlights the importance of comprehensive testing for a system where safety is critical. Items identified were mainly concerned with optimising the system to adapt to the needs of local air traffic control operations, and had nothing to do with aviation safety. Other civil aviation authorities around the world have faced similar challenges in replacing their air traffic control systems.