So, what is it about this time, CAD
 

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

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/p...c-iii#comments

Does this mean CX will be trying to claw back leave/Unpaid Leave that it has allocated in November. They should make a tv show about this comedy act.

The article is dated March!

Might help to check the date of the article...
This article is from March

Do try to keep up Hopeless.

It was actually in use yesterday during the phased introduction.

I love the sensationalistic $1.5 Billion as well; It was less than a 1/3 of that and you'd be struggling to buy the engines for 1 A380 for that. And we're handling 2,200 flights a day now? Chicken feed.

HK urgently needs air traffic controllers: aviation chief | South China Morning Post

We need many more now for the new system.

What is this?? A competition to see who can dig up the oldest news story???!

Grossly short of human resources nevertheless.
Hint for THB: it's not just about the HKIA traffic.

New centre layout??

http://cdn.obsidianportal.com/assets/123119/slaves4.jpg

Therefore, more of these??

http://www.joserodriguez.info/bloc/w...//BenHur07.jpg

How was the PFI on approach today? Anyone knows?

Smooth it seems. Traffic light tho due typhoon Megi.


More important, when is CAD going to comply with ICAO Doc 4444?:


8.4.2 The number of aircraft simultaneously provided with ATS surveillance services shall not exceed that which can safely be handled under the prevailing circumstances, taking into account:


a) the structural complexity of the control area or sector concerned;


b) the functions to be performed within the control area or sector concerned;


c) assessments of controller workloads, taking into account different aircraft capabilities, and sector capacity; and


d) the degree of technical reliability and availability of the primary and backup communications, navigation and surveillance systems, both in the aircraft and on the ground.




Has they ever done c)????


May be Apple Daily and SCMP can ask.

Don't worry mate! They have conducted a very strong SAFETY CASE report that the new system is safe to use.

Everything is so smooth, ready to go with the new useless system.

Here is the chemistry :

Severe Shortage of Controller to create more Executive/Planner Control Positions + Rough System Testings + Poorly Managed Adaptation + Poor CAD Top Top Management + Rubbish ATM System + Poor New Centre Fung Shui = Catastrophic Failure

The catastrophic failure in the last Phased Functional Implementation (PFI in short) is a welcome drink, the entree is coming soon. How do you like your steak done? Rare or Blue?

VSD.
Not much argument from me on the rest but please feel free to come over and tell us which of the 10,000+ VSPs you'd like us to change, within the system limits.
Or are you perhaps somebody who has only ever worked with AT1 and thinks that the only way ATC can be done in HK is the way it was done 20 years ago.
I hate to break it to you but we are the speed bump in the Region now, holding up reduced surveillance separation, simplified handling and just generally a lot less draconian attitude to what the job of an ANSP actually is.
No system, no matter what we bought , be it even the most expensive, expects ATC to be done in such an old fashioned way.
The latest Thales product does not even come with an EFS, so how the hell would we cope???
Funnily enough, places that HK controllers might think are backward are actually more progressive.
And before you get too excited about how busy HK is; even Jakarta Centre has more movements per day. (No disrespect to Jakarta- I chose that as there is this notion that our overflight situation is so unbelievable, when in fact several other FIRs have larger and more complex route structures with vastly more complicated mix of traffic types)

Easy fix: put a couple of Lions out the front and Viola". It's what Phillip C did during his CEO stint at Cathay and they have been killing it ever since!

Thales is known to have deployed integrated EFS solution since 2011 and demonstrated IPad EFS since 2013.

My flight is TCAS equipped
 

:ok: We have TCAS.

OMG>>>new software build days before opening (are you serious??) and ridiculous low confidence level and insufficient hands on hours and absolutely unready mindset.....

They are making broth for their customers:

http://img10.deviantart.net/d630/i/2...a7-d39fv62.jpg

Which airlines will drink this first? Management has to make sure each controller under the pyramids is handcuffed (the cup holders) in his console so that he won't run away when something happens. They have to go to jail because they said they were Level 3, 4, 5 in their Phased Functional Implementation Self Assessment Form. Those said they were Level 5 are criminal acts; you give up your right you deserve it.

FIX THE :mad: SYSTEM

For anything associates with the word "Risk", Just look at AirServicesAustralia's recent assessment on Raytheon. I agree with them.
http://www.pprune.org/members/451968...aytheonasa.jpg
http://www.pprune.org/members/451968...ytheonasa2.jpg

What are those pics?

EK have TCAS, CX have IVAN

Australian assessment of the 3 bidders in their OneSky ATC system projects:
Attachment 1224

Raytheon just had all the highest score for anything associated with Risk.

Highest score means hight capability to contain the risk?

Does there anyone know when is the day one operation?

Highest costs to contain the risk.

Comments on today (Sunday's) HK CAD Press Release?

CAD responds to media enquiries on new ATMS

CAD responds to media enquiries on new ATMS
************************************
In response to media enquiries today (November 19) on the new Air Traffic Management System (ATMS), a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Department (CAD) said:

The operation of the new ATMS has been smooth in general since its full commissioning on November 14. On November 15 afternoon, the position of an departing aircraft was not displayed temporarily on the radar screen of one workstation in the new Air Traffic Control (ATC) Centre and there was a brief occurrence of split tracks (showing two flight tracks of the same aircraft on the screen). Through radar screen updates, the aircraft position was shown again automatically within 12 seconds. The allegation made by a source in a Chinese-language newspaper today that the position of an aircraft "resurfaced after some 20 to 30 seconds" was not factually correct. During the process, radar screen display of all other workstations were operating normally in the new ATC Centre.

As a matter of fact, the phenomenon of aircraft positions temporarily not displayed on the radar screens was also observed occasionally in the ATMS elsewhere. It is a common practice for the ATMS developers to address the issue in their system design. In Hong Kong, no matter the air traffic controllers (ATCOs) use the old or the new ATMS, they can retrieve the position of an aircraft immediately or avoid split tracks by choosing an appropriate radar signal through the main system in accordance with established operation procedures. This procedure is called switching to the "bypass mode" (in case of the old ATMS) or "local mode" (in case of the new ATMS). There are long established guidelines on how to tackle relevant scenarios for all ATCOs to follow. The allegations quoted by the newspaper that "ATCO could not get hold of the aircraft position" or that "the phenomenon will have profoundly impacted on the daily operations" were unfounded. Moreover, the same set of aircraft information are available to the workstations operating in the "bypass mode" or "local mode". There is no question of putting extra pressure on the ATCOs.

The CAD has been in close communications with the President of the Hong Kong Air Traffic Control Association and the Chairman of the Civil Aviation Department Electronics Engineers Branch of Hong Kong Chinese Civil Servants' Association. They both understood the situation on November 15 and supported the management of the CAD. They acknowledged that there is a set of clear guidelines for frontline officers to follow. They considered it reasonable for the CAD management to remind the ATCOs to switch to "local mode" in order to address the issue in case of recurrence. They believed that the ATCOs who have all undergone professional training are capable to handle this kind of known phenomenon.

The new ATMS, with sophisticated design, adopted multi-radar tracking system to enhance the precision of aircraft position. It may take a bit longer occasionally for synchronisation. Sometimes, radar signals may be affected by different external factors (for instance aircraft transponder is busy or has radio communication problems, the reception of radar signals is interfered by external factors, terrain or obstacles etc.). Even if the aircraft is following a standard flight path, there is still a possibility that its position cannot be displayed temporarily or there are split tracks on the radar screen.

According to the guidelines issued by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL), the position of an aircraft displayed on the radar screen should be updated at an interval of not more than five seconds. The CAD has adopted an update rate of four seconds. On November 15, the position of the aircraft concerned appeared after two to three updates (within 12 seconds), even without the need to switch to "local mode".

In conclusion, the phenomenon mentioned above is a relatively minor occurrence, in relation to local external factors, that requires further optimisation of the ATMS in the light of operational experience. The overseas independent consultant of the Transport and Housing Bureau from the United Kingdom, National Air Traffic Services (NATS), has confirmed that the CAD's new ATMS is safe, stable and reliable, and that the CAD is ready for the full commissioning of the new ATMS. According to the experience of NATS, given the complexity of an ATMS, even with all reasonable efforts and endeavours, there could still be possibilities to have set‐backs during introduction of a new system. To safeguard aviation safety, the CAD has laid down procedures for trained and professional ATCOs to handle different situations. It is normal and in accordance with international practice that the new ATMS needs some time to optimise its performance and suit the local operating environment. The CAD will continue to closely monitor the operations of the new ATMS with a view to bringing further improvements to it.

Ends/Saturday, November 19, 2016
Issued at HKT 20:04

And, no response from [email protected] to this query on 14 November despite a reminder:

What software is used in the UK?

Specifically, is the Raytheon AutoTrac III in use anywhere in the UK and if so, where?

Any info anyone?

Normalisation of Deviance
 

From Apple Daily News:

??????????12? ?????????????? | ???? | ?? | 20161120

?????????? ????????????????? | ???? | ?? | 20161120

From Oriental News:

???????????????????? - ????

From SCMP:

WORK IN PROGRESS!!

In general, CAD said all problems were normal and expected. Doesn't it sound familiar in the Space Shuttle accidents?! CAD, you are making a good progress of practising NORMALISATION OF DEVIANCE.

From what I perceived from the press conference this afternoon, we are testing the system with real target.

Dear Pilot

If controllers are being confused by the problems in the new system that air accident happened, I will normally go to jail and you will be expected being cleared to heaven.

Praise to God.

Scapegoat


Reserve six cells in Stanley, please!

http://static.apple.nextmedia.com/im...40126_df85.jpg

The fifth cell is for controller-on-duty and the sixth one is for our lovely ex-DG, please make an exception, give him a private bathroom and dancing room.

I think this is the story of the year, certainly in HK Aviation. There is no reason ego and face should ever outweigh safety.

It is time the AOA sent a strongly worded letter to the CAD demanding full accountability towards the testing results, and insisting that our pilots will not be subject to an ATC regime that is compromising safety. I leave it to more eloquent persons than I to write such a letter. But the letter needs to be sent. Also an open letter to the people of HK in the SCMP explaining our concerns and position.

Normalization of Deviance
 

This certainly paints all the elements of "Normalization of Deviance".

Strange to hear they were trying to make the excuse that the problem is new, and has been a problem of the old system. Shouldn't that be one of the priorities when they bought the new system - to have the problem solved and fully tested before they put it into operation?

They didn't explain too much on the "local mode" and how that differs from the "normal mode". But if that is the mode that controllers do not use normally, it cannot be said that the operation is "normal".

Different multi-radar-tracking systems are used in ATC world wide, but not always in airspace (APP-DEP) close to airports. They are supposed to eliminate blind areas of individual radar heads with multi radar heads and optimize towards the ideal 100% coverage. The hilly nature of terrain in the vicinity of CLK makes it most difficult to achieve and requires a lot of radar and local expertise and tests to optimize. Perhaps they just lack some of these.

AT3 seems not the system suitable for HK and it is sad to see what has happened during the last 10 years and all the latest news. Let's hope justice can be done for the frontline controllers and the flying public.

LC Paper No. CB(4)154/16-17(04)
???????? File or directory not found
12 hours ago - States-based firm) for managing air traffic in the Hong Kong Flight ... “Autotrac III”, also developed by Raytheon which was selected by CAD.
NATS: 9. Conclusion
9.1 In conclusion, upon review of the occurrence, and CAD’s responses to each of the NATS’
recommendations, NATS is satisfied that CAD has implemented all actions arising from
the recommendations, some of which bear the benefit of a wider and general coverage to
other potential issues. NATS also find that CAD’s actions are also supported by
documentary evidence. Considering the nature of the occurrence, that corresponding
effective mitigating measures have been in place and the event-tested reversion, NATS is
confident that the issue as reported has been satisfactorily resolved, and NATS’
assessment on CAD’s readiness for Full Transition as previously concluded in Phase 2
Study remains unchanged.

CAD management played down the system failure today and said it lasted only 26 seconds. Imagine your FMS goes blank in front of your eyes and your standby instruments freezes at the same time, 26 seconds is eternity especially when you do not know if it is coming back or not. Next time it happens the controller will scream Yee all be careful now and Norman will say it's so good to be sitting at home

ATC snag forces temporary halt of outbound flights - RTHK

ATC snag forces temporary halt of outbound flights
2016-11-29 HKT 18:10

"Outbound flights from Hong Kong were suspended for 15 minutes on Tuesday afternoon after the new air traffic control system's flight data processor failed to display flight details for up to 26 seconds.

The Director-General of Civil Aviation, Simon Li, said initial investigation showed the programme may have failed temporarily as it was backing up information.

While Li stressed the incident did not affect aviation safety, he said the glitch would not to be taken lightly.

He said he has demanded that the system manufacturer submit a report within 48 hours, adding that an expert panel may be set up to look into the incident.

When asked if there was a need to bring the old system back online to ensure flight safety, Li said: "the system itself have many layers of standby and actually today, we haven't actually activate the standby system. So, its only within the main system, one of the sub-system, which has experienced some problem. We will not compromise any flight safety. If we see any risk to the system which will cause safety implications, we certainly will consider switching back to the existing system".

Last week, Li dismissed complaints about the system as "teething problems".

The HK$1.5 billion Autotrac III system went into operation this month, after a delay of four years.

The Hong Kong Airline Pilots Association had demanded that aviation officials take steps to assure its pilots that the system was reliable."

NATS have still not answered my question as to whether or not Autotrac III is deployed anywhere in the UK...

Raytheon AutoTrac III
 

AT3 is not used anywhere in the UK. India tried it for 10 years before abandoning it altogether. Dubai is using it, but only in limited capacity and apparently not the Flight Data Processor which went wrong yesterday in HK. Doubt if you would see the system or other similar system from Raytheon used anywhere.

I actually can't see how NATS can justify its support for implementation of the system in HK, other than believing CAD on paper and pocketing the easy consultation fee. Quite naive of the Transport Bureau in HK.

Hong Kong should just scrap its faulty air traffic control system | South China Morning Post

n 2011, two years after the tender opened for a new air traffic control system to replace Hong Kong’s ageing one, US military contractor Raytheon won the bid with its AutoTrac 3 system. The new system was meant to be commissioned in 2012, but was postponed when no verified record of its good performance could be found. It was then revealed that no airport had fully rolled out the air traffic system before the Hong Kong tender closed in 2010. India’s New Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai airports only started using the system in 2011, and Dubai in 2012.
Was the Central Tender Board misled by civil aviation officials that there was positive feedback on the system? Media reports later revealed that Hong Kong officials did not visit the airports in India and Dubai until after Raytheon had won the bid.

Chek Lap Kok in a flap over possibly dud air traffic control system | South China Morning Post

When Raytheon, one of the world’s largest military contractors and arms exporters, was announced the winner in February 2011, Indra immediately launched an appeal over the decision, arguing that Raytheon’s AT3 system did not meet the tender requirements as it had no proven performance of at least six months before the tender closed in February 2010. The appeal was rejected.
The AT3 system, released in 2006, was first sold to the Airports Authority of India and later to airports in the United Arab Emirates. But the systems did not go into full operation until after the tender in Hong Kong closed in 2010. India’s New Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai airports only started using the system in 2011 and Dubai in 2012.
As these four airports are the only ones that adopted AT3, Hong Kong lawmakers have questioned why a system that had no proven record before the tender closing date was chosen.

Since NATS has failed twice to the answer the question "Is Autotrac III deployed anywhere in the UK?", one has to assume that the answer is either no or that where it is in use, they are concealing the same dreadful performance by this piece of American rubbish experienced in HK and the very few other countries which have foolishly bought it.

Who has asked that? (Or is it just you?) Surely only someone who has no idea about ATM globally.
Whether or not NATS operates AT3 anywhere is irrelevant to their role in this consultation. It's about whether due process has occurred and whether sufficient mitigation is in place- which it is.

The witch hunt begins....
 

Rather than addressing the issues and giving the purchasers of the system i.e. we HK taxpayers an honest and straightforward explanation of the problems encountered the CAD issued a complicated , meandering response in typical civil service speak justifying the performance and without even a suggestion of fault in the system .
Then they issued a stern warning"memo" to those who might attempt to tell the truth about the performance. Now they have called in the HK police to investigate the whistleblower/s who sought to rectify the secrecy and self serving half truths when those police could be doing what they are trained for ..dealing with real crime in HK .
Only the most ignorant and out of touch government media hack would have told us it is ok we could see the aircraft from the window or justify failures by saying they were encountered on our old system.
When the director of audit discovered illegally enlarged building on the new CAD building and illegally installed comforts for the then Directior were the police brought in ??
I think not
The present witch hunt is another example of a Department attempting to suppress facts and issues which should be in the public domain.
A mentality so much like that practised on the mainland ...

Departing flights suspended for four minutes - RTHK

Departing flights suspended for four minutes 2016-12-12 HKT 22:08

More problems with Hong Kong's air traffic control system resulted in departing flights being delayed by four minutes on Monday.

In a detailed, yet unclear statement, the Civil Aviation Department said radar screens failed to display flight information such as call signs and flight speed for about 75 seconds. It said the situation was similar to an incident on November 29, but this time the data was not available for a longer period.

But the CAD said air traffic controllers were able to get information on flights because the department had brought in extra technology - known as ADS-B - which had been in use since last Thursday, and was operating on another screen.

It said the system's contractor, Raytheon, put the problem down to the way the system prioritised data during maintenance. It said the retrieval and archiving of data had priority for a short period of time, and this lead to a delay in flight data appearing on the screens.

The CAD said the problem was not caused by staff failing to follow new instructions, as originally thought.

The department said flight safety was not compromised. It said controllers were still able to monitor flights.

______________________________
Last updated: 2016-12-13 HKT 05:53