B787-800
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 5
Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
I was working sector 10R and received sector system messages for Aircraft X that the AFN (ATS Facilities Notification) logon was rejected; FP (Flight Plan) not found (as well as a duplicate FP message; which I routinely see with aircraft proposals long before they are in our airspace). I expanded out and did not see a datablock anywhere near my airspace; and checked FPEA where I saw that there were 2 different proposed flight plans coming from RJJJ. Having frequently seen similar 'nuisance' messages with aircraft proposals that are far outside the sector; my standard approach is to wait until receiving coordination from RJJJ (or calling them when receiving a 'coordination from RJJJ overdue' notice) to confirm that I am working with the correct flight plan. I anticipated that I would receive either automatic or manual coordination; at which point the proper flight plan would be activated and the 'nuisance messages' would cease. I was also focused on an area of turbulence/buildups that aircraft were climbing/deviating around; and an AFN/duplicate proposed FP error was lower on my priorities list.When I was relieved; I noticed during my post-view that a blue datablock for Aircraft X had suddenly appeared east of PASRO; showing a proposal-only altitude of F410. I pointed it out to the relieving R-side who called RJJJ; and the RJJJ controller stated that Aircraft X had crossed PASRO several minutes prior at F370. The relieving controller opened the coordination window; which showed all black text (not red; yellow; or dark blue for ABI/pending coordination/accepted coordination). The relieving controller entered in the manual coordination; at which point the system activated the flight normally.When asked; RJJJ said that they showed coordination for Aircraft X had gone through automatically and normal. In aircraft messages; the system shows an ABI (Advance Boundary Information) and CPL (Current Flight Plan) accept for Aircraft X at the appropriate times.There was no loss of separation; but there easily could have been if another aircraft had passed PASRO at a similar time and asked for a climb to/through Aircraft X. In hindsight; had I processed the sector queue message for the AFN logon reject (a new feature in T26 that I am still gaining familiarity with); I may have been presented with a clue that the aircraft was actually approaching the airspace and not far inside RJJJ's sector.It seems like a definite safety issue that ATOP (Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures) apparently accepted coordination on an aircraft without presenting any kind of datablock information on the screen. While there may have been more clues presented if I had further investigated the AFN logon reject/duplicate FP messages; the system should not accept coordination without displaying a datablock on the screen. The ATOP system; in my opinion; should never accept coordination automatically without displaying a datablock. A sector queue message about an AFN logon error or duplicate proposed FPs is not sufficient information/notice to what is happening behind the scenes (an aircraft is entering the sector without any kind of datablock depiction to the controller.
ZAN Controller reported Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures failed to display aircraft's data block after automatically accepting coordination.