Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: Military
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter function: Oceanic; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: We had multiple issues with airspace.  All of which were FL000-FL999. Most aircraft leaving ZOA airspace required some sort of reroute to avoid airspace. Aircraft X had a special issue as he was low enough; FL200; to be in conflict with the airspace ranging FL000-FL270. I had just taken the sector from the previous controller at around XA:30z; whom had no plan for Aircraft X; and had to find a new route to make him work with air base. I finally gave him ZZZZZ direct 32N12730W direct ZZZZZ1 which probed green.After measuring the distance of the track; it only showed only 33 NM; of which we needed 50 NM. I then probed a new route which would have taken him 8 NM to the boundary of airspace; and it too probed green. It wasn't until I probed a track within 4 NM of the airspace boundary that it showed the aircraft was in conflict with the aircraft. Looking at this and questioning why the airspace did not probe against the aircraft correctly; I asked my supervisor for help. She seemed to believe it was due to a software glitch where the airspace might have been probing for radar-based separation vs our needed oceanic separation. We also had our area representative; and ATOPS specialist come over to check it and he confirmed that the issue must be the software.Thinking that the airspace was not working correctly; and that approximate location of the aircraft indicated about 65 NM from the airspace; I gave him a clearance to proceed direct 42N126W; to increase the angle away from the missile airspace and ensure that he remained 50 NM away from the airspace. This added an extra 80 NM to 100 NM to his already elongated route; but gave me extra time to analyze the situation and ensure his safety. I intended to adjust it later once we got everything else squared away with him and other aircraft that were in conflict; but my supervisor also gave me paperwork to fill out on position to report the situation with the 'glitch'. As a result; I never got back to him to shorten his route again.It wasn't until about XB:10z I realized why the airspace was not showing the conflict with the aircraft until about. As it turned out; the airspace did not go active until XB:15z; even though the airspace was depicted on my map as hot. This led to the relieving controller to brief it as hot; for my supervisor to think it was active; for our ATOPS specialist to think it was active; and myself. The routes that probed green would have allowed him to exit the protected airspace of the ATCAA in time where as the one that was 4 NM from the airspace would have had him remain inside the protected airspace. From all of us thinking that the airspace was active at that time due to its depiction on the map; rather than checking the time; I ended up giving the aircraft a much longer route than needed to keep him safe.To avoid this potential issue from happening again; perhaps using a different color for the airspace that is pending vs airspace that is currently active. Additionally; when the aircraft shows in conflict with that airspace; the whole airspace would light up as part of the conflict. Possibly adding which segment of his flight was specifically in conflict would have helped prevent any confusion on why the probe was not working. On a slightly separate note; we have a similar issue with aircraft that are crossing in the ocean where they need 15 min to clear. At 15 min 01 seconds it probes green; but if there is a bad time update and it goes to 14 min 59 seconds; it instantly becomes a conflict/loss. As there is only a tool to check crossing distance and not time; having a 'yellow alert' where the conflict would change color to show aircraft crossing at more than 15 min but less than 17 min would help prevent further headaches.




Synopsis: ZOA Oceanic Controller reported a problem with ATC equipment that did not probe the airspace correctly.