Narrative:

No sunspot activity or other HF communications issues noted in briefing. Returned to cockpit from break 10 minutes after dapak. Other crew had previously received and tuned icelandic HF frequencies and were logged onto czeg controller pilot datalink communications (cpdlc). They also had received and preselected murmansk HF frequencies and had noted a second secondary HF frequency and a satellite phone number for murmansk on the flight plan. They noted no previous communications difficulties during the crew change briefing. And the captain also advised us to switch to the [other satellite phone service] satellite phone when the normal satvoice EICAS message became frequent; and confirmed we knew the bulletin to follow when changing from the sat phone to [the other satellite phone network] phone. About 15 minutes later czeg logged off cpdlc; and datalink and satvoice EICAS messages were frequently flashing as we were losing those means of communication; around 81 degrees north; prior to apsin. We followed the bulletin steps to log off satvoice and log on to [satellite phone service] satellite. No log off or log on problems noted. No more satvoice EICAS messages. Made subsequent position reports by HF; and changed HF frequencies at ravul with no problems noted. At ravul and motem murmansk would SELCAL immediately for the position report as we were crossing the fix; practically at the same time I was already picking up the microphone to make the report. HF transmission quality was one of the best heard in a while. No report required by murmansk at kutet. Binta was the next reporting point they requested; and also the krasnoyarsk fir crossing; but no HF frequencies received. First problem here: no position data received by company over 90 minutes when released B343 via polar route from after dapak to vedot even though we made the voice position reports.binta report is where communications difficulties began. I'll describe the communications difficulties encountered in this event but the equipment issues with the [satellite phone service] are similar and consistent with a previous flight communications problem over the same route. The first time was viewed as a usually expected polar ops communications problem that you just work around. But happening again; maybe there's something else involved.two minutes prior to binta I began contacting murmansk to make the position report on HF. No contact. Tried a couple times again. Tried secondary HF frequency. No contact. Dialed in the second secondary HF frequency. Now a SELCAL from murmansk on the primary HF frequency was received as we crossed binta but they didn't hear when either pilot flying (PF) or I tried transmitting. Then they transmitted HF frequencies in the blind; but [we] could only barely understand what the primary frequency was because their transmission quality was rapidly deteriorating and the secondary frequency was garbled. Attempted HF contact with murmansk again on the three HF frequencies we had with no success. Tuned the new HF frequency and attempted multiple contacts with no success. Thoughts of concern were running through my mind about no communications or position report in russian airspace problems that have been highlighted in past months; and especially more so with the previous immediate selcals from murmansk for position reports as we were passing over the fixes. As datalink lost EICAS was becoming intermittent again; attempted a message to dispatch to have them forward our position report; but it didn't show as being sent. In case [satellite phone service] was a problem; logged off it and logged onto satvoice. In the midst of this the other crew was contacted by the PF for the end of their regular break period.now to the [satellite phone service] satellite communications problems. I had previously preselected murmansk from the menu of presets when originally logging onto [satellite phone service]. I now began the call to murmansk; but after a short period of time a voice in english says 'I'm sorry we are unable to complete your call as dialed'. On the page where there are manual entry boxes I entered the phone number previously received; but immediately the satellite scratchpad message has 'manual entry not allowed'. I looked up and selected a preset dispatch sector; of which none matched the flight plan sector; but there was no call completion. This is very frustrating. This system is touted as solving the lack of communications on polar routes; but if the presets for the control agencies are not kept up to date; or there is no flight plan matching dispatch sector; it may as well not be installed on the plane.not being able to dial a number manually in an area of the world where theoretically [satellite phone service] could be the only means of communication; particularly with an agency not listed as a preset; is a serious restriction; especially if there really is an emergency. Given my two experiences I am concerned that [satellite phone service] use in an emergency may be considerably less successful than expectations. Frankly; I don't trust it now. I did have a higher level of comfort on polar routes when [satellite phone service] was first installed.in the previous similar situation I was in; we could hear ground stations but our HF transmissions could not be heard by ground stations. But there was a nearby flight behind us on the same route that could hear us and relayed our position reports via HF because we couldn't contact anyone by [satellite phone service] or any other means. The [other] flight apparently received and dialed a satellite phone number different from what we had received and forwarded it to us to try; but because we are not able to manually dial a number; it was worthless to us.relieving crew was thoroughly briefed on communications issues and attempts and within a few minutes of crew change all normal communications was restored.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B777 First Officer reported communication difficulties with the satellite phone system on an international polar flight.

Narrative: No sunspot activity or other HF communications issues noted in briefing. Returned to cockpit from break 10 minutes after DAPAK. Other crew had previously received and tuned Icelandic HF frequencies and were logged onto CZEG Controller Pilot Datalink Communications (CPDLC). They also had received and preselected Murmansk HF frequencies and had noted a second secondary HF frequency and a satellite phone number for Murmansk on the flight plan. They noted no previous communications difficulties during the crew change briefing. And the Captain also advised us to switch to the [other satellite phone service] satellite phone when the normal satvoice EICAS message became frequent; and confirmed we knew the bulletin to follow when changing from the sat phone to [the other satellite phone network] phone. About 15 minutes later CZEG logged off CPDLC; and datalink and satvoice EICAS messages were frequently flashing as we were losing those means of communication; around 81 degrees north; prior to APSIN. We followed the bulletin steps to log off satvoice and log on to [Satellite phone service] satellite. No log off or log on problems noted. No more satvoice EICAS messages. Made subsequent position reports by HF; and changed HF frequencies at RAVUL with no problems noted. At RAVUL and MOTEM Murmansk would SELCAL immediately for the position report as we were crossing the fix; practically at the same time I was already picking up the microphone to make the report. HF Transmission quality was one of the best heard in a while. No report required by Murmansk at KUTET. BINTA was the next reporting point they requested; and also the Krasnoyarsk FIR crossing; but no HF frequencies received. First problem here: No position data received by company over 90 minutes when released B343 via polar route from after DAPAK to VEDOT even though we made the voice position reports.BINTA report is where communications difficulties began. I'll describe the communications difficulties encountered in this event but the equipment issues with the [Satellite phone service] are similar and consistent with a previous flight communications problem over the same route. The first time was viewed as a usually expected polar ops communications problem that you just work around. But happening again; maybe there's something else involved.Two minutes prior to BINTA I began contacting Murmansk to make the position report on HF. No contact. Tried a couple times again. Tried secondary HF frequency. No contact. Dialed in the second secondary HF frequency. Now a SELCAL from Murmansk on the primary HF frequency was received as we crossed BINTA but they didn't hear when either Pilot Flying (PF) or I tried transmitting. Then they transmitted HF frequencies in the blind; but [we] could only barely understand what the primary frequency was because their transmission quality was rapidly deteriorating and the secondary frequency was garbled. Attempted HF contact with Murmansk again on the three HF frequencies we had with no success. Tuned the new HF frequency and attempted multiple contacts with no success. Thoughts of concern were running through my mind about no communications or position report in Russian airspace problems that have been highlighted in past months; and especially more so with the previous immediate SELCALs from Murmansk for position reports as we were passing over the fixes. As Datalink Lost EICAS was becoming intermittent again; attempted a message to Dispatch to have them forward our position report; but it didn't show as being Sent. In case [Satellite phone service] was a problem; logged off it and logged onto satvoice. In the midst of this the other crew was contacted by the PF for the end of their regular break period.Now to the [Satellite phone service] satellite communications problems. I had previously preselected Murmansk from the menu of presets when originally logging onto [Satellite phone service]. I now began the call to Murmansk; but after a short period of time a voice in English says 'I'm sorry we are unable to complete your call as dialed'. On the page where there are manual entry boxes I entered the phone number previously received; but immediately the satellite scratchpad message has 'Manual entry not allowed'. I looked up and selected a preset dispatch sector; of which none matched the flight plan sector; but there was no call completion. This is very frustrating. This system is touted as solving the lack of communications on polar routes; but if the presets for the control agencies are not kept up to date; or there is no flight plan matching dispatch sector; it may as well not be installed on the plane.Not being able to dial a number manually in an area of the world where theoretically [Satellite phone service] could be the only means of communication; particularly with an agency not listed as a preset; is a serious restriction; especially if there really is an emergency. Given my two experiences I am concerned that [Satellite phone service] use in an emergency may be considerably less successful than expectations. Frankly; I don't trust it now. I did have a higher level of comfort on polar routes when [Satellite phone service] was first installed.In the previous similar situation I was in; we could hear ground stations but our HF transmissions could not be heard by ground stations. But there was a nearby flight behind us on the same route that could hear us and relayed our position reports via HF because we couldn't contact anyone by [Satellite phone service] or any other means. The [other] flight apparently received and dialed a satellite phone number different from what we had received and forwarded it to us to try; but because we are not able to manually dial a number; it was worthless to us.Relieving crew was thoroughly briefed on communications issues and attempts and within a few minutes of crew change all normal communications was restored.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.