Partial Com Failure....

StinkBug

StinkBug

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jun 27, 2014
Messages
1,440
Location
San Diego
Display Name
Display name:
Dallas
Just got my IR ticket on Saturday and yesterday I flew my first long flight on an IR flight plan and had a moment of question.

We were on our way back to San Diego from Phoenix on a PilotsnPaws mission and ATC had given us an amendment to our clearance, which we had acknowledged and written down. A little while later we heard them trying to give us another amendment, but they were coming in very broken and fairly unreadable. We responded and apparently they were getting us the same. I also tried COM2 just to see if one radio would work better. I also took a look at the Enroute chart to see if there was a closer center frequency, but the nearest little postage stamp shaped box gave the frequency we were on.

Since we had our clearance and were VFR we continued on our route and a few minutes later reception got better again. They gave us the amendment to our clearance which was just repeating what they had already given, and all was well.

My question is had we not been able to reestablish communication what would have been the best course of action? We didn't actually have a COM failure, both radios were working fine and we were hearing other aircraft just fine. We were VFR at the time, so no problems there, but if we were IFR we were on an airway so Altitude selection would have been easy, and we had a clearance so route is good too, just not communication. How would you reestablish comms?
 
I'd squawk 7600 for a short while (20 seconds or so), then switch to 1200 and continue VFR.
 
IFR procedure in comm failure in VMC, squawk 7600 and land as soon as practicable. In IMC, squawk 7600 and continue according to the clearance.
 
Were you IFR or VFR, you said you were both.
 
EdFred said:
Were you IFR or VFR, you said you were both.
Click to expand...

I think he meant to say he was in VMC….

There is a whole reg on IFR lost comms.

Basically, if in VMC, land VFR. If in IMC, follow clearance unless some reg prevents it (like a new MEA higher than the cleared altitude). If no clearance, follow expected clearance or filed flight plan (in that order). Only real obvious gotcha is to start (not end) an approach at the ETA if there is no EFC time.

14 CFR 91.185

That reg also confuses VFR with VMC.
 
SbestCFII said:
IFR procedure in comm failure in VMC, squawk 7600 and land as soon as practicable. In IMC, squawk 7600 and continue according to the clearance.
Click to expand...
I would not squawk 7600 for any length of time if conditions permit continuing VFR because several controllers have said that it causes alarms to sound. Just long enough to get their attention, then 1200. Technically you should land as soon as "practicable", but then of course you could just take off again and go on with your trip VFR. So I don't see why you couldn't just switch to 1200 as an effective IFR cancellation and continue on without landing.

The other solution, since the OP said there was no issue with the radios, is to look up the frequency for the next sector on the enroute chart and try that one, if he wanted to stay IFR.
 
Sorry I got the terms wrong, I was on an IFR flight plan in VMC. Since I didn't actually have a radio failure 7600 and continuing VFR doesn't seem like it should be the first reaction. I'm quite familiar with the lost comms procedures as I was just tested on them, but to me this doesn't really seem like a full lost comms scenario as much as simply losing reception.

As mentioned I checked the enroute chart and the only frequency box near me was the one I was already on. I was at my assigned altitude, well above MEA and on course as cleared. We were out of "clear" communication for maybe 5 min, during which time I could hear broken transmissions from ATC and clear transmissions from other planes. When we reestablished clear communication ATC reported that we had been coming in broken to them as well then gave us our amended clearance (which we had already gotten a long time before). It wasn't a big deal at all, I'm just curious what the first reaction would be for some of you if the lack of reception had continued.

Personally I think I would have tried getting another plane to relay for me before squawking 7600 or 1200 and going VFR. In fact earlier on this same flight ATC had asked us to relay a call to an Embry Riddle plane that wasn't picking them up.
 
StinkBug said:
Personally I think I would have tried getting another plane to relay for me before squawking 7600 or 1200 and going VFR. In fact earlier on this same flight ATC had asked us to relay a call to an Embry Riddle plane that wasn't picking them up.
Click to expand...
Relay would have been my first thought given those circumstances, and I've done it before (both as the relay requestor and the relay provider). I certainly would not have either squawked 7600 or landed "as soon as practicable" in those circumstances before trying that.
 
azure said:
So I don't see why you couldn't just switch to 1200 as an effective IFR cancellation and continue on without landing.
Click to expand...

In my experience with this situation (once IFR, once FF), ATC doesn't take it as a cancellation and they will track you down. In one case the airport manager found me just after I had called Flight Service after landing. ATC had called the manager and asked him to find me. When I lost comms while IFR, ATC initiated a relay from another aircraft. There are numerous areas where VHF comms are difficult from the altitudes we frequent. ATC knows where they are but sometimes we don't. Anyway, the advise to try a relay is good.

The subject of relayed comms is a good one. There are some very good controllers out there who really can work with people to get things done at remote airports on busy IFR days. I've been asked to relay IFR cancellations so a controller could get aircraft in to airports sooner rather than having to wait on a phone call. It probably helps that I fly relatively high and slow so the controller knew I'd be able to relay for awhile.
 
StinkBug said:
Just got my IR ticket on Saturday and yesterday I flew my first long flight on an IR flight plan and had a moment of question.

We were on our way back to San Diego from Phoenix on a PilotsnPaws mission and ATC had given us an amendment to our clearance, which we had acknowledged and written down. A little while later we heard them trying to give us another amendment, but they were coming in very broken and fairly unreadable. We responded and apparently they were getting us the same. I also tried COM2 just to see if one radio would work better. I also took a look at the Enroute chart to see if there was a closer center frequency, but the nearest little postage stamp shaped box gave the frequency we were on.

Since we had our clearance and were VFR we continued on our route and a few minutes later reception got better again. They gave us the amendment to our clearance which was just repeating what they had already given, and all was well.

My question is had we not been able to reestablish communication what would have been the best course of action? We didn't actually have a COM failure, both radios were working fine and we were hearing other aircraft just fine. We were VFR at the time, so no problems there, but if we were IFR we were on an airway so Altitude selection would have been easy, and we had a clearance so route is good too, just not communication. How would you reestablish comms?
Click to expand...

"They gave us the amendment to our clearance which was just repeating what they had already given..."

To know that, they must not have been all that unreadable. What were you showing as your "last clearance received"? The first amendment, or the second amendment that they attempted to give you when they were broken and fairly unreadable? Did you read it back? Did they get it? It's pretty important that pilot and controller are on the same page about what the last clearance received was.
 
StinkBug said:
Just got my IR ticket on Saturday and yesterday I flew my first long flight on an IR flight plan and had a moment of question.

We were on our way back to San Diego from Phoenix on a PilotsnPaws mission and ATC had given us an amendment to our clearance, which we had acknowledged and written down. A little while later we heard them trying to give us another amendment, but they were coming in very broken and fairly unreadable. We responded and apparently they were getting us the same. I also tried COM2 just to see if one radio would work better. I also took a look at the Enroute chart to see if there was a closer center frequency, but the nearest little postage stamp shaped box gave the frequency we were on.

Since we had our clearance and were VFR we continued on our route and a few minutes later reception got better again. They gave us the amendment to our clearance which was just repeating what they had already given, and all was well.

My question is had we not been able to reestablish communication what would have been the best course of action? We didn't actually have a COM failure, both radios were working fine and we were hearing other aircraft just fine. We were VFR at the time, so no problems there, but if we were IFR we were on an airway so Altitude selection would have been easy, and we had a clearance so route is good too, just not communication. How would you reestablish comms?
Click to expand...

Nit: You weren't in VFR, you were IFR in VMC.

You say you were hearing other aircraft just fine, so use one of them as a relay.
 
SbestCFII said:
IFR procedure in comm failure in VMC, squawk 7600 and land as soon as practicable. In IMC, squawk 7600 and continue according to the clearance.
Click to expand...

That's a bad procedure. The aural alarm in many facilities is loud, annoying, can't be shut off, and does nothing to help the situation once it's been established that the aircraft is NORDO. That takes about thirty seconds, max.
 
roncachamp said:
That's a bad procedure. The aural alarm in many facilities is loud, annoying, can't be shut off, and does nothing to help the situation once it's been established that the aircraft is NORDO. That takes about thirty seconds, max.
Click to expand...

Have you sent in a suggestion for a change in the AIM?
 
Could you ask someone else on the frequency to give a relay (like airliners) or call a nearby control tower to contact the facility and ask? I had a situation where I was unable to reach center while I was IFR and just called a nearby tower to relay the message that I was canceling IFR and tower came back a few minutes later saying my IFR cancellation was received.
 
MAKG1 said:
Or perhaps sent a complaint up the chain?

An alarm that can't be silenced is an operational problem.
Click to expand...

Oh, it can be silenced. Until the next sweep of the radar detects the 7600 code again.
 
roncachamp said:
Oh, it can be silenced. Until the next sweep of the radar detects the 7600 code again.
Click to expand...

Does that really count as silencing?

Still an operational problem.

There are circumstances where that is called for, but they generally involve imminent and very likely death. A 7600 seems well short of that, even in IMC. Maybe if there were two 7600s on a collision course….
 
MAKG1 said:
Does that really count as silencing?
Click to expand...

It does to the FAA.

Still an operational problem.
Click to expand...

Not as far as the FAA is concerned.

There are circumstances where that is called for, but they generally involve imminent and very likely death. A 7600 seems well short of that, even in IMC. Maybe if there were two 7600s on a collision course….
Click to expand...

If you had two 7600 codes on a collision course which one would you turn?
 
roncachamp said:
If you had two 7600 codes on a collision course which one would you turn?
Click to expand...
The one the Air Force can intercept first. Or else you just hope they can see each other and alert the AFRCC about where to find the wreckage if they can't.
 
MAKG1 said:
The one the Air Force can intercept first. Or else you just hope they can see each other and alert the AFRCC about where to find the wreckage if they can't.
Click to expand...

They're NORDO. You can't turn either one.
 
StinkBug said:
.........but if we were IFR we were on an airway so Altitude selection would have been easy, and we had a clearance so route is good too, just not communication. How would you reestablish comms?
Click to expand...

Return to your last assigned frequency. Try FSS. Is there a VOR with voice anywhere close by. Any Towers around (avoid using Ground Control at altitude.) Other aircraft on frequency.
 
roncachamp said:
ATC can't communicate with NORDO aircraft.
Click to expand...

Yup, stuck on the wrong detail, as usual.

You have a landline. You have a connection to AFRCC. You can solve this problem without someone dying. Yes, NORDO. You'll just have to ask the Air Force for help.
 
MAKG1 said:
Yup, stuck on the wrong detail, as usual.

You have a landline. You have a connection to AFRCC. You can solve this problem without someone dying. Yes, NORDO. You'll just have to ask the Air Force for help.
Click to expand...

Of course. ATC can have an aircraft destroyed in short order. How silly of me.
 
When it was noticed that two lost comm aircraft were on a collision course, I have a hard time seeing how it would be possible to get an intercepting aircraft in position soon enough.
 
roncachamp said:
Of course. ATC can have an aircraft destroyed in short order. How silly of me.
Click to expand...

You do understand that the Air Force does other things, too, right?

If you don't know what AFRCC does, what do you do when an ELT is reported to you? Nothing? That would be unconscionable.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
You do understand that the Air Force does other things, too, right?
Click to expand...

Right. Which of those other things might a controller find useful when he has two 7600 codes on a collision course?

If you don't know what AFRCC does, what do you do when an ELT is reported to you? Nothing? That would be unconscionable.
Click to expand...
 
The rules exist and need to be followed, regardless of personal opinions or beliefs as to whether or not it's a good procedure, or because of whatever "several controllers" have said. If you can relay radio communications, then you have not experienced communications failure and that's not the scenario. The comms failure procedure = no radio comms with ATC. If you're on an IFR flight plan and have already received your clearance then and cannot establish communications with ATC, then you 7600 and proceed (in IMC) or land (in VMC and can remain VMC) because that's what is REQUIRED until you can establish contact and cancel IFR. In VMC, you land, contact ATC and then you can change your plan. If IFR, you proceed according to your clearance or flight plan. You don't just squawk 1200, "assume" that will be taken as a cancellation, and then do what you want. The safety in IFR flying only exists when everyone is following the rules. If you can't follow the rules, then stick to flying on nice days and don't file and fly IFR.
 
SbestCFII said:
The rules exist and need to be followed, regardless of personal opinions or beliefs as to whether or not it's a good procedure, or because of whatever "several controllers" have said. If you can relay radio communications, then you have not experienced communications failure and that's not the scenario. The comms failure procedure = no radio comms with ATC. If you're on an IFR flight plan and have already received your clearance then and cannot establish communications with ATC, then you 7600 and proceed (in IMC) or land (in VMC and can remain VMC) because that's what is REQUIRED until you can establish contact and cancel IFR. In VMC, you land, contact ATC and then you can change your plan. If IFR, you proceed according to your clearance or flight plan. You don't just squawk 1200, "assume" that will be taken as a cancellation, and then do what you want. The safety in IFR flying only exists when everyone is following the rules. If you can't follow the rules, then stick to flying on nice days and don't file and fly IFR.
Click to expand...

There is no rule that requires a continuous 7600 squawk in the event of a communications failure.
 
If everyone is following the clearance received before comm failure, then the likelihood of any two aircraft being on a collision course becomes extremely unlikely.
 
SbestCFII said:
If everyone is following the clearance received before comm failure, then the likelihood of any two aircraft being on a collision course becomes extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...

What do you base that on?
 
luvflyin said:
"They gave us the amendment to our clearance which was just repeating what they had already given..."

To know that, they must not have been all that unreadable. What were you showing as your "last clearance received"? The first amendment, or the second amendment that they attempted to give you when they were broken and fairly unreadable? Did you read it back? Did they get it? It's pretty important that pilot and controller are on the same page about what the last clearance received was.
Click to expand...

Seems you're the one not receiving clearly. They gave us an amendment, which we acknowledged, noted and read back. quite a while later they tried to give us another amendment, which we couldn't hear. Once we regained communication they gave it again, and it was the same as the original amendment which we had acknowledged, noted and read back.

In case that's too confusing, there was only ever one change to our clearance. It was given 3 times and heard twice.
 
StinkBug said:
Seems you're the one not receiving clearly. They gave us an amendment, which we acknowledged, noted and read back. quite a while later they tried to give us another amendment, which we couldn't hear. Once we regained communication they gave it again, and it was the same as the original amendment which we had acknowledged, noted and read back.

In case that's too confusing, there was only ever one change to our clearance. It was given 3 times and heard twice.
Click to expand...

OK, got it. The way I read it was when you re-established com and they gave you the amendment again and it was the same, is it was the same as the last amendment they attempted to give you, that you referred to as another amendment, when the com was going bad. I didn't catch that the attempted second amendment was just a repeat of the first amendment. Sorry for the confusion. Reading my reply again I see it has an accusing tone to it. My bad.
Where were you when the Com started breaking up?
 
IIRC we were along V16 between BLH and PSP, closer to BLH and we were talking on 128.15. Flying at 10,000'. It's pretty desolate out there.
 
roncachamp said:
ATC can't communicate with NORDO aircraft.
Click to expand...

Sometimes they do ...

1. AC can received but not transmit - IDENT used to confirm
2. NAV radio used to receive and IDENT to confirm

Years ago on a slow weekday, ATC asked us to meet them on 121.5. They were testing transmitters across southern NM (our route) on 121.5 as well as talking to us on NAV frequencies. We joked if they wanted to try a DR steer ...
 
StinkBug said:
IIRC we were along V16 between BLH and PSP, closer to BLH and we were talking on 128.15. Flying at 10,000'. It's pretty desolate out there.
Click to expand...

To try and re-establish com I think my first choice would have been to go back to the last frequency I was on, probably Albuquerque Center. That's usually a good first thing to try even though you're probably getting farther from them. You're still pretty far from Palm Springs but I'd have probably tried Approach there next. If you can get through to another ATC facility, especially one that works with the Center sector you're trying to raise that's better than a non ATC facility. I'd have tried FSS next, there are a few frequencies around there that might have worked. Having another pilot tell the Center you're having trouble reading them could be a good choice to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top