Narrative:

I am a captain and I have done nothing wrong. Rather I ask your help in addressing a problem I encounter daily which has caused and will continue to cause violation after violation until it is finally cured. The problem is the failure of ATC to use complete call signs when clearing aircraft. Today I flew 6 hours and heard literally over a hundred clrncs with a call sign number but no company prefix, almost all of which were accepted by pilots! This problem has 3 different causes. The 1ST is the failure of a center controller to allow a half second after he keys his microphone for the remote transmitter to being transmitting. The 2ND cause of incomplete call signs is a controller, who simply omits the company name and says only the number. I hear this mostly on approach control facilities. They get extremely congested so the controller takes the short-cut. This usually happens at airports where (company) has hubs. Since (company) has the worst radio discipline in the domestic industry and frequently omits the company name from their own call signs, I think they may infect ATC with the disease. Other airlines YYY included are not perfect, but they are all a lot better than (company). The 3RD cause is a controller starting to talk before he keys his microphone. I think being very busy is also usually the cause of this one. Let me be the first to admit that, while not perfect, ATC's radio procedures are better than the pilots' with whom they deal. They are not better than mine, but they are better than the average pilot's. I have adopted every suggestion I ever read about how to improve radio communications and consider myself to be totally immune to ever being charged with a violation because of a miscom if ATC will abide by its own procedures. About now you are probably thinking, 'well, if he would just clarify whether a clearance with an incomplete call sign was actually for him he would be immune whether ATC did it right or not.' not so, and here's why. An incomplete call sign on a congested frequency presents me with 3 options, all lousy. They are: 1) accept the clearance and hopethere's not another company's airplane on that frequency with the same flight number. This puts me in the same league with everyone else who will eventually land in a hearing. 2) ignore the transmission and wait for one with a complete call sign. This gums up the works on a busy frequency and really angers the controller if you do it more than once. You also run the risk that the controller will assume you are not on his frequency. 3) tell the controller that there was no company in that call sign and to confirm our clearance to do such- and-such. This is my normal tactic, but on a busy frequency it too gums up the works and angers not only the controller but the other pilots who were trying to get a word in edgewise while I take 3 times as long to communicate as other pilots. Do you see that I must decide to be a problem in order to protect myself? And I don't want to be a problem. I want the system to operate smoothly and I want to fly like the professional I am. But the busier the frequency is the less likely I am to have the time to clarify one of these clrncs without being a jerk. As a frequency gets busier and busier I find it harder and harder to throw a monkey wrench into the machinery of a controller who is helping me while being pleasant and working as hard and fast as he can. But some day I will get hammered for doing it and it is not fair! I am trying my very best to both avoid miscom and allow the system to work and I cannot do both. Over the yrs I have reported this problem to YYY's ATC coordinator more than once, called several ATC facilities after I got on the ground, and filed a report with YYY which was forwarded to salt lake center and reportedly incorporated into their training program, yet the problem is more common today than ever before. And the last time I went into salt lake city the problem there was still pervasive (company hub at slc). Please help me avoid being charged with a violation. I am extremely frustrated! My next steps will be to write to the FAA administrator, and finally to file a NASA report after every flight. I need your help. Callbackconversation with reporter revealed the following information: called reporter to see if there were any particular ATC facilities that he was addressing. He said no, but in particular, he noticed that en route facilities were more prone to phraseology deviations than tracons and towers. He also stated that pilots are guilty of sloppy radio procedures that can lead to serious deviations or hazardous conditions. En route facilities who use remote site and have the 1 or 2 second delays in xmissions are dropping prefixes most very transmission. In closing, the reporter stated he had high praise for ASRS and was particularly elated that we took his report seriously. He also mentioned that he had been addressing the phraseology problem though his company magazine.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC PLT COM PROCS.

Narrative: I AM A CAPT AND I HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG. RATHER I ASK YOUR HELP IN ADDRESSING A PROB I ENCOUNTER DAILY WHICH HAS CAUSED AND WILL CONTINUE TO CAUSE VIOLATION AFTER VIOLATION UNTIL IT IS FINALLY CURED. THE PROB IS THE FAILURE OF ATC TO USE COMPLETE CALL SIGNS WHEN CLRING ACFT. TODAY I FLEW 6 HRS AND HEARD LITERALLY OVER A HUNDRED CLRNCS WITH A CALL SIGN NUMBER BUT NO COMPANY PREFIX, ALMOST ALL OF WHICH WERE ACCEPTED BY PLTS! THIS PROB HAS 3 DIFFERENT CAUSES. THE 1ST IS THE FAILURE OF A CTR CTLR TO ALLOW A HALF SECOND AFTER HE KEYS HIS MIC FOR THE REMOTE XMITTER TO BEING XMITTING. THE 2ND CAUSE OF INCOMPLETE CALL SIGNS IS A CTLR, WHO SIMPLY OMITS THE COMPANY NAME AND SAYS ONLY THE NUMBER. I HEAR THIS MOSTLY ON APCH CTL FACILITIES. THEY GET EXTREMELY CONGESTED SO THE CTLR TAKES THE SHORT-CUT. THIS USUALLY HAPPENS AT ARPTS WHERE (COMPANY) HAS HUBS. SINCE (COMPANY) HAS THE WORST RADIO DISCIPLINE IN THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY AND FREQUENTLY OMITS THE COMPANY NAME FROM THEIR OWN CALL SIGNS, I THINK THEY MAY INFECT ATC WITH THE DISEASE. OTHER AIRLINES YYY INCLUDED ARE NOT PERFECT, BUT THEY ARE ALL A LOT BETTER THAN (COMPANY). THE 3RD CAUSE IS A CTLR STARTING TO TALK BEFORE HE KEYS HIS MIC. I THINK BEING VERY BUSY IS ALSO USUALLY THE CAUSE OF THIS ONE. LET ME BE THE FIRST TO ADMIT THAT, WHILE NOT PERFECT, ATC'S RADIO PROCS ARE BETTER THAN THE PLTS' WITH WHOM THEY DEAL. THEY ARE NOT BETTER THAN MINE, BUT THEY ARE BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE PLT'S. I HAVE ADOPTED EVERY SUGGESTION I EVER READ ABOUT HOW TO IMPROVE RADIO COMS AND CONSIDER MYSELF TO BE TOTALLY IMMUNE TO EVER BEING CHARGED WITH A VIOLATION BECAUSE OF A MISCOM IF ATC WILL ABIDE BY ITS OWN PROCS. ABOUT NOW YOU ARE PROBABLY THINKING, 'WELL, IF HE WOULD JUST CLARIFY WHETHER A CLRNC WITH AN INCOMPLETE CALL SIGN WAS ACTUALLY FOR HIM HE WOULD BE IMMUNE WHETHER ATC DID IT RIGHT OR NOT.' NOT SO, AND HERE'S WHY. AN INCOMPLETE CALL SIGN ON A CONGESTED FREQ PRESENTS ME WITH 3 OPTIONS, ALL LOUSY. THEY ARE: 1) ACCEPT THE CLRNC AND HOPETHERE'S NOT ANOTHER COMPANY'S AIRPLANE ON THAT FREQ WITH THE SAME FLT NUMBER. THIS PUTS ME IN THE SAME LEAGUE WITH EVERYONE ELSE WHO WILL EVENTUALLY LAND IN A HEARING. 2) IGNORE THE XMISSION AND WAIT FOR ONE WITH A COMPLETE CALL SIGN. THIS GUMS UP THE WORKS ON A BUSY FREQ AND REALLY ANGERS THE CTLR IF YOU DO IT MORE THAN ONCE. YOU ALSO RUN THE RISK THAT THE CTLR WILL ASSUME YOU ARE NOT ON HIS FREQ. 3) TELL THE CTLR THAT THERE WAS NO COMPANY IN THAT CALL SIGN AND TO CONFIRM OUR CLRNC TO DO SUCH- AND-SUCH. THIS IS MY NORMAL TACTIC, BUT ON A BUSY FREQ IT TOO GUMS UP THE WORKS AND ANGERS NOT ONLY THE CTLR BUT THE OTHER PLTS WHO WERE TRYING TO GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE WHILE I TAKE 3 TIMES AS LONG TO COMMUNICATE AS OTHER PLTS. DO YOU SEE THAT I MUST DECIDE TO BE A PROB IN ORDER TO PROTECT MYSELF? AND I DON'T WANT TO BE A PROB. I WANT THE SYS TO OPERATE SMOOTHLY AND I WANT TO FLY LIKE THE PROFESSIONAL I AM. BUT THE BUSIER THE FREQ IS THE LESS LIKELY I AM TO HAVE THE TIME TO CLARIFY ONE OF THESE CLRNCS WITHOUT BEING A JERK. AS A FREQ GETS BUSIER AND BUSIER I FIND IT HARDER AND HARDER TO THROW A MONKEY WRENCH INTO THE MACHINERY OF A CTLR WHO IS HELPING ME WHILE BEING PLEASANT AND WORKING AS HARD AND FAST AS HE CAN. BUT SOME DAY I WILL GET HAMMERED FOR DOING IT AND IT IS NOT FAIR! I AM TRYING MY VERY BEST TO BOTH AVOID MISCOM AND ALLOW THE SYS TO WORK AND I CANNOT DO BOTH. OVER THE YRS I HAVE RPTED THIS PROB TO YYY'S ATC COORDINATOR MORE THAN ONCE, CALLED SEVERAL ATC FACILITIES AFTER I GOT ON THE GND, AND FILED A RPT WITH YYY WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO SALT LAKE CTR AND REPORTEDLY INCORPORATED INTO THEIR TRAINING PROGRAM, YET THE PROB IS MORE COMMON TODAY THAN EVER BEFORE. AND THE LAST TIME I WENT INTO SALT LAKE CITY THE PROB THERE WAS STILL PERVASIVE (COMPANY HUB AT SLC). PLEASE HELP ME AVOID BEING CHARGED WITH A VIOLATION. I AM EXTREMELY FRUSTRATED! MY NEXT STEPS WILL BE TO WRITE TO THE FAA ADMINISTRATOR, AND FINALLY TO FILE A NASA RPT AFTER EVERY FLT. I NEED YOUR HELP. CALLBACKCONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: CALLED RPTR TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY PARTICULAR ATC FACILITIES THAT HE WAS ADDRESSING. HE SAID NO, BUT IN PARTICULAR, HE NOTICED THAT ENRTE FACILITIES WERE MORE PRONE TO PHRASEOLOGY DEVS THAN TRACONS AND TWRS. HE ALSO STATED THAT PLTS ARE GUILTY OF SLOPPY RADIO PROCS THAT CAN LEAD TO SERIOUS DEVS OR HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. ENRTE FACILITIES WHO USE REMOTE SITE AND HAVE THE 1 OR 2 SECOND DELAYS IN XMISSIONS ARE DROPPING PREFIXES MOST VERY XMISSION. IN CLOSING, THE RPTR STATED HE HAD HIGH PRAISE FOR ASRS AND WAS PARTICULARLY ELATED THAT WE TOOK HIS RPT SERIOUSLY. HE ALSO MENTIONED THAT HE HAD BEEN ADDRESSING THE PHRASEOLOGY PROB THOUGH HIS COMPANY MAGAZINE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.