We cannot imagine that Minister Backes is pushing this project forward hastily or carelessly. Rather, it seems that so far she has had to rely on one-sided or incomplete information. In this context, the Director of the Air Navigation Administration carries a particular responsibility.
At our first meeting with him, it was unexpectedly declared that the planned physical tower would no longer be built, even though the beginning of construction had still been announced earlier this year.
In response, we submitted a well-founded position paper outlining professional and safety-related concerns about the virtual tower. However, no substantive discussion took place. Instead, at the next meeting we were told that the existing tower would have to be demolished in about ten years, and that the virtual tower would now be implemented – “with or without your help.”
The meeting at the Ministry, without the Minister being present, left us with the impression that a serious engagement with the technical arguments we had presented is still lacking.
If operational risks and safety-relevant aspects are ignored in this way, a responsible political decision is hardly possible. All the more important, therefore, is that the voices of qualified professionals, the very people who will later operate and be responsible for the system on a daily basis, are included early on, seriously, and on equal terms.
Especially with virtual and digital solutions that deeply affect safety-critical operations, special care, realistic assessments, and the inclusion of practical operational experience are essential.
We are aware that Erfurt operates as a remote tower airport with CAT II approval. However, with around 6,000 movements per year, Erfurt is in no way comparable to Luxembourg, neither in terms of traffic volume, nor operational complexity nor capacity requirements.
Even London City, so far the largest realized remote tower project, records only about half the traffic numbers of Luxembourg. Nevertheless, in dense fog, no regular operations are possible there. This is not due to the type of tower but to other systemic factors such as approach procedures, the positioning of ground systems, or operational conditions.
This reality shows: camera-based systems do not allow operations in poor visibility, not because they fail (even if their actual performance under such conditions remains questionable), but because they are simply not relevant for that. Whether an aircraft may take off or land depends on weather, procedures, and infrastructure, not on whether the tower has cameras.
The claim that a virtual tower performs better in fog therefore clearly contradicts operational practice. It reflects great confidence in new technologies, and we share this confidence in principle – but we do not wish to trust in them uncritically or blindly.
In our daily work, we already rely on modern ground radar systems, which function reliably regardless of visibility. High-resolution cameras can complement these systems usefully, for example as an additional visual aid. Their use would also be welcome in a conventional tower. But they do not replace operational fundamentals.
What a virtual tower can never replace, however, is the direct 360° view through windows, a decisive advantage in unpredictable or disrupted operating situations. Windows also do not simply fail in the event of technical problems.
That is why we advocate a technology-open, risk-conscious approach: for innovation where it is tested, safe, and meaningful, but also for the preservation of proven physical infrastructure where it ensures stability, redundancy, and safety. The path into the future can only be taken together, with the people who ensure safe flight operations every day.
That Minister Backes has announced a personal meeting with the air traffic controllers in September, we regard as a positive and important signal. It raises the hope that genuine dialogue is possible, an exchange in which not only listening takes place, but also understanding, weighing, and deciding together. For only in this way can a sustainable solution be achieved that unites safety, innovation, and responsibility.