..and with what logic?
More likely to be Farnborough.

2 s

Well last time I looked, ATCOs weren't investing hundreds of millions in disused airfields, so whether you like it or not, it's beancounters and investment groups that buy and develop assets.
To them ATC it's purely a tool that allows an airfield to operate. You shop around and you get the best deal available. Hate the game, not the player.

The new owners of the brand name don't seem to be interested in ATC contracts; I got my info from a well informed source outside SafeSkys.

Farnborough could do the APS using existing equipment considering the likely movement rate, however Southend would be a more likely candidate as Riveroak want 24/7 ops and Farnborough don't work those hours whereas Southend do.
As for a remote tower, Farnborough would be a non starter, there just isn't room to install all the huge 360 deg VDUs necesssary; it may look a huge building from the outside but about 3 quarters of the accomodation is occupied by the aerodrome authority, not ATC.

Surely the key point of a remote tower is ‘remote’. The lack of space in the building is just another possible reason to have a remote tower.

Remote Towers is an emerging technology so you'll need a partner with expertise on call, willing to make some of their own investment in the remote part, ability to train and rate ATC staff and with access to a suitable site with the necessary network connectivity and security. ANS, through their parent company if necessary, have access to the first three and would probably be willing to set up the last as part of an attempt to enter that market in the UK. There is one other organisation in the UK that fits the bill but if you want it on the cheap you might want to be the launch customer for the market incomer.

Remote radar is far less demanding technology wise and well established with far more options but if I was placing an ATC contract for my soon to re-open airport I'd want a single contract with one supplier.

Of course if I was soon to re-open an airport in this market I'd probably not be throwing a lot of money at capital investment in a brand new remote tower unless either the physical tower needed a lot of money to return it to use or there was a significant incentive and that is definitely beancounter territory.

Is there any further news on the remote tower operation for LCY? Project on hold due the pandemic, perhaps.

On the contrary, up & running fine following transfer at the end of January. Good opportunity to transition & settle in, whilst the traffic is down.

Thanks Alfaman, they kept that quiet! Or at least I missed any publicity.

Here you go...

London City airport replaces control tower with virtual system
Air traffic controllers 70 miles away to oversee landings in UK first
April 29, 2021
https://www.ft.com/content/1c3d319f-...2-20d9270402de

London City has become the first airport in the UK to install a virtual control tower, putting all operations in to the hands of controllers based more than 70 miles away on the south coast of England.

Management at the 30-year-old airport has spent the past few years installing 16 cameras and sensors mounted on a 50m mast to provide a live 360 degree view of the runway, taxiways and aprons, as well as the surrounding airspace.

The feed is passed through fibre optic cables to the control centre operated by Nats, the country’s main air traffic manager, in Swanwick, Hampshire. The live footage, an audio feed and radar information is used to control aircraft on the ground at the airport and give them permission to take-off and land.

The new technology at London City was officially unveiled on Friday but has quietly been in use since late January. It was originally scheduled to go live in 2019.

Tower controllers rely on the human eye to manage aircraft movements on the ground and at the very start and end of flights, when aircraft are on final approach or about 30 seconds from the runway.

Air traffic controllers at Nats handle all other UK traffic. The Swanwick centre’s main roles are to manage all high-altitude aircraft crossing through English and Welsh airspace and handle all flights below 24,500 feet as they fly in and out of all of London’s airports, including City. Nats has a second control centre in Scotland.

The new system at City is built by Saab, the Swedish aerospace group, and has already been installed at some of Sweden’s airports. The technology allows controllers to magnify objects up to 30 times, and the screens can be overlaid with an “enhanced reality view” including information such as call signs, altitude and speed of aircraft.

“Digital tower technology tears up a blueprint that’s remained largely unchanged for 100 years, allowing us to safely manage aircraft from almost anywhere, while providing our controllers with valuable new tools that would be impossible in a traditional control tower,” said Juliet Kennedy, operations director at Nats.

The biggest challenge could be reassuring the public that removing sharp-sighted controllers from the airport is safe. But Alison FitzGerald, chief operating officer at London City, said the technology was “proven” and had more than a decade of research and live trials behind it.

“The system is designed to safely manage any equipment failures with backups available if required,” she said.

If one static camera fails then the image can be replaced by one of the mast’s tilting zoom cameras, while there are back-up screens at Nats in case of a failure there, she said.

She added that “two entirely independent, private fibre network connections carry the camera images”.

The 30-year-old analogue control tower in the London Docklands will be redeveloped as part of a modernisation plan at the airport, parts of which have been delayed by the financial impact of the pandemic.

Passenger numbers fell more than 80 per cent to 905,000 last year, a period when the airport was closed for three months.

The remote technology has the potential to significantly improve efficiency, and Nats has estimated it could cut costs of managing traffic into and out of an airport by 20 to 30 per cent if rolled out across several sites.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Cranfield the first?
And aren't there ANSPs other than NATS who handle some UK traffic?

I think the original press release has been corrupted a little: the version I saw said "first UK major airport", which seems fair enough; take out "UK" & I think Budapest was 2017, although varying reports as to whether it's remote 100% of the time; take out "major", & Cranfield was first.

That huge mast so close to the runway carrying the cameras must surely affect the iap minima.

Under normal circumstances probably yes as the mast (173 FT AAL) penetrates well in to the 09/27 Transitional Surface. However due to other obstacles, the resultant 5.5 DEG GP, and a very high DH for the ILS IAPs, no apparent change.

How easy is it to look behind you at traffic following the river?

Hermione Norris is a controller at Cranfield?

Sorry, don't understand the reference. Was she meant to be in the video? Maybe she got cold feet.

Given the number of other obstacles around the runway, I wouldn't be surprised if it was sited and designed to be shielded by another big thing and so has no effect on minima.