
Unmanned Airport Control Tower Installed in Northern Colorado - jonbaer
https://denver.cbslocal.com/2018/08/31/unmanned-airport-control-tower-colorado/
======
Elrac
I think the word "unmanned" in the title is a bit misleading. I wanted to read
the article because I was curious about what I thought would be an AI project.
"ATC? How do they pull that off without human operators?"

~~~
PJDK
Such things do exist, at least for general aviation.

This is based on memory from landing (as a passenger) at 29 Palms in
California many years ago - hopefully an actual pilot might chip in.

From your map you get the frequency of the tower - when you tune into this
there is a looped message giving you some instructions. If you send some click
sequence (tap the send button on the radio 3 times or something like that), it
plays a weather report.

You have a good look around and if you don't see anyone else landing you
broadcast your intentions "intending to land from the north at 29 palms" \-
then you have a good listen and if no one objects you say your entering final
approach, cross your fingers and land!

~~~
chrisper
What you are talking about is uncontrolled airspace. Pilots announce their
moves to each other.

The automatic message is called ATIS, which also exists at manned airports.
These days it is recorded automatically, tho.

~~~
Justin_K
The message is more specifically AWOS.

~~~
cmurf
Or ASOS. The ASOS is a bit more sophisticated. Both are automated, including
the generation of the outgoing message.

ATIS found mainly at airports with a control tower, is recorded by a human,
and contains airport information in addition to weather information;
construction, hazards, active runways, what approach procedures are being
used. They can also be approach and departure specific.

All of these can typically be called by phone as well as heard by radio.

------
AndrewKemendo
For reference, the overwhelming majority of airports don't use air traffic
controllers ("non-towered"). That's because they are way too small and service
too few aircraft.

For those airports, the procedure is to dial the unicom frequency that the
sectional chart gives for the airport and tell everyone what you're doing.

It's unclear what exactly this control tower actually does for pilots flying
into the airport. It's supposed to centralize ATC so they can remotely control
air traffic? From the project site, it seems like it's just the cameras and
monitoring. No communication otherwise.

[https://www.codot.gov/programs/remote-
tower/TheProject](https://www.codot.gov/programs/remote-tower/TheProject)

[http://www.cfidarren.com/r-radiocommnta.htm](http://www.cfidarren.com/r-radiocommnta.htm)

~~~
dlgeek
Nitpick: Technically it's the common traffic advisory frequency
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_traffic_advisory_freque...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_traffic_advisory_frequency))
rather than unicom. Often they're the same one, but in places where they're
split, unicom is for the ground and CTAF for coordinating in the air and for
taking off and landing.

------
bo0tzz
Tom Scott made a video about something similar a while ago:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii_Gz1WbBGA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii_Gz1WbBGA)

------
walrus01
London City airport is working on a virtual control tower located 100km away:

[https://www.google.com/search?q=london+city+airport+remote+t...](https://www.google.com/search?q=london+city+airport+remote+tower&oq=london+city+airport+remote+tower&aqs=chrome..69i57.6421j0j4&sourceid=chrome-
mobile&ie=UTF-8)

------
Animats
This is part of a project to provide better aircraft location information in
mountainous areas.[1] Radar visibility in mountainous areas is poor. So a
system was deployed that pings aircraft transponders, like a full radar, but
doesn't have a directional antenna. Instead, there are small transmitters and
receivers in multiple locations, and from relative receive times, position can
be computed.

So the airport camera system is just the airport component of a larger control
area.

[1] [https://www.codot.gov/news/2010news/12-2010/innovative-
color...](https://www.codot.gov/news/2010news/12-2010/innovative-colorado-
surveillance-project-now-certified-and-commissioned-for-use-in-national-air-
space)

~~~
cjrp
Using the receive times to determine a plane's location is one method
(multilateration), but it's also becoming common for planes to broadcast their
position (ADS-B), determined with a high degree of accuracy using their
onboard GPS. This ADS-B transmission is what sites like FlightRadar24 use as
their main source, although they're now also able to use MLAT in areas with
good base-station coverage.

~~~
ceejayoz
It's "becoming common" largely because the US is requiring it by 2020 in all
aircraft, incidentally.

~~~
village-idiot
Legislative mandates tend to make things very common, now that you mention it.

------
berti
This is being done around the world. My home city will be the first in my
country: [https://www.airways.co.nz/media-centre/media-
statements/inve...](https://www.airways.co.nz/media-centre/media-
statements/invercargill-gets-nzs-first-digital-air-traffic-control-tower/)

~~~
bdamm
Similar also operating in Sweden and Canada.

------
easytiger
Done also at London City (LCY): [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-
truths/london-city...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travel-
truths/london-city-digital-air-traffic-control-tower-inside/)

------
dawnerd
They say it’s the first one but I’ve seen this installation being tested
elsewhere. And of course I recall it having issues recently.

Found it:
[https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34278788](https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34278788)

------
univacky
There has been one in Leesburg, VA for a few years undergoing testing and
evaluation. It is the first in North America. It is currently in daily
production use.

[https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/departments/airport/re...](https://www.leesburgva.gov/government/departments/airport/remote-
air-traffic-control-tower)

------
apazgo
Sweden seems be using it already; [https://www.lfv.se/en/services/airport-
services/saab-digital...](https://www.lfv.se/en/services/airport-
services/saab-digital-air-traffic-solutions/remote-tower-services/one-year-in-
operation-21-april)

------
m-app
I wonder what would be the failsafe on these systems? Are there redundant
cameras? I would guess there will be dual fiber paths, but other than that? Or
is the visual aspect just a relic and can most remote operation be done using
radar/telemetry anyway?

~~~
joshvm
The failsafe is pilots talk to each other in the air. There are lots of
totally unmanned airports and airports have established procedures to follow
if you don't have radio contact.

Not sure about this airport, but in some (most?) places with a tower, there is
a very low tech contingency where the airport can operate from a hut on the
ground. Everything could be done visually plus a handheld radio and would
obviously be slower, but it's there in case the tower had to be evacuated, or
similar.

See, for example (there's a picture comment on the question)

[https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13438/can-
plane...](https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/13438/can-planes-still-
land-during-a-regionally-diverse-atc-malfunction)

~~~
m-app
> The failsafe is pilots talk to each other in the air. There are lots of
> totally unmanned airports and airports have established procedures to follow
> if you don't have radio contact.

This makes sense, of course there will be contingency plans, up to and
including shutting down the airport and rerouting flights like your sibling
mentioned.

> Not sure about this airport, but in some (most?) places with a tower, there
> is a very low tech contingency where the airport can operate from a hut on
> the ground. Everything could be done visually plus a handheld radio and
> would obviously be slower, but it's there in case the tower had to be
> evacuated, or similar.

I think this highlights my point, since the airport itself is now "unmanned"
in the sense that there is no one there to do the "legacy" way of visual
controlling. This means that the analog fallback scenario is not an option
anymore, which could be of small importance if it was not used a lot anyway
before actually falling further back to other options.

------
cmurf
Sounds like a variation on ARTCCs, and TRACON. The difference being piping
(hopefully high quality and zoomable) video to the remote "tower" controller,
in addition to the usual radar and radio communication.

------
timwaagh
the obvious question: what hurdles remain before we can outsource this service
to low-wage countries?

------
mrhappyunhappy
Auto play video, reader view not working, NOPE! Not giving this site another
second of my time.

~~~
jshevek
Thank you for the warning about the auto play video.

