Are New Criticisms Over Hong Kong Airport’s Travel Response to the Display Screen Failure Justified?

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Experts and critics have voiced concerns over Hong Kong International Airport’s handling of a significant failure of its flight information and baggage collection display systems. The malfunction occurred on a Sunday morning, causing chaos and leading to missed flights for some passengers. Observers have pointed out that the airport’s response was delayed and lacked a human-centered approach, calling for a thorough review and improvement of the airport’s emergency plans.

The Airport Authority has been urged to clarify the exact cause of the system crash. This call came after the incident left flight and baggage information screens non-functional for more than nine hours, starting at 7 AM. Allan Zeman, an entertainment tycoon and former board member of the authority, emphasized the critical role the airport plays in Hong Kong’s economy. He argued that the airport must have robust backup systems to manage such emergencies effectively.

Zeman stated that a high-functioning airport is essential and that the incident serves as a vital lesson. He underscored the need for comprehensive backup models for various technologies, particularly those related to information systems, which are crucial for operational continuity. Zeman suggested that the airport should consider compensating affected passengers since the disruption was not their fault but an airport management issue.

Response Criticized for Lack of Preparedness

Ronald Pong, an information security management specialist and chairman of the IT governance committee of the Smart City Consortium, criticized the airport’s response time. He noted that the delay in acknowledging and communicating the problem—approximately two hours after the issue was first detected—was unacceptable. Pong argued that continuous monitoring should have identified the problem immediately, allowing for prompt activation of contingency plans and timely public notifications.

Passengers were initially informed about the system failure through announcements in the departure hall. However, many found it difficult to read the handwritten updates that replaced the electronic displays. Moreover, boarding passes did not show the correct gate numbers, compounding the confusion. Pong indicated that the problems likely originated from the airport’s back-end systems rather than the display screens themselves. He speculated that the issue could involve third-party processes interfacing with the Airport Authority’s systems and called for clear communication on whether the fault lay with the airlines or the authority’s infrastructure.

Inadequate Contingency Plans

The incident highlighted significant gaps in the airport’s crisis management and incident response preparedness. An executive from the airport acknowledged at noon that the issues would not be resolved quickly, prompting staff to set up temporary digital displays for flight information in the departure hall. However, these measures fell short, with passengers noting that updates on some whiteboards in the arrivals hall were infrequent and insufficient.

Francis Fong Po-kiu, honorary president of the Hong Kong Information Technology Federation, pointed out the lack of a human-centric approach in the airport’s contingency measures. He advocated for a backup system that could operate independently and maintain at least 80% functionality during a primary system failure. Fong explained that such a system should have the capability to “failover,” seamlessly switching to a standby server or system in the event of a failure of the active application. He stressed that the Airport Authority must enhance its backup plans or develop a new, reliable system, especially considering the ongoing expansion project, which includes a new runway, a second terminal, and a new concourse expected to be completed this year.

Comparison with Other Airports

The incident at Hong Kong International Airport is not isolated. Similar failures have occurred at major airports worldwide. In 2018, Gatwick and Heathrow airports in London experienced display screen failures, forcing staff to provide flight information manually via whiteboards. At Gatwick, a damaged Vodafone fiber optic cable led to the chaos, while at Bristol, a cyberattack rendered the flight information screens blank for two days, leading the airport to take the screens offline to contain the issue. These airports, like Hong Kong’s, resorted to using whiteboards and megaphones to communicate with passengers.

As Hong Kong International Airport addresses the fallout from this incident, it becomes clear that robust emergency plans and backup systems are crucial for maintaining operational integrity and passenger satisfaction. The Airport Authority’s response and future preparedness will be closely watched by both the public and industry experts.