Narrative:

Air carrier X departed tus and during climb out to 17000 ft departure control made handoff to ZAB. After contact we received further climb clearance from ZAB. During our climb we heard little or no communication for several mins. We then heard center controller in a lengthy conversation with military aircraft discussing route changes regarding an active MOA. The discussion lasted several mins during which time the controller and military pilot argued over proper flight plan filing procedures. Then the controller very sharply chastised us for not listening to our radio. I am concerned that there may be a blind spot for radio communication ese of tus. Our radios functioned perfectly for the remainder of our flight. Supplemental information from acn 311080: departed tus and switched to ZAB by tus departure. After check-in and given a climb, nothing heard for 5-7 mins, then a conversation between ZAB and a military aircraft concerning an air refueling clearance. The discussion was somewhat heated and ended abruptly when center called us. After answering, we were chastised for not listening and told several attempts to call on several frequencys went unanswered. We attempted to explain that we heard her conversation with the military aircraft but nothing for us. Controller still argued we were in error. We explained maybe the transmitter for the area was inoperative. We were given another frequency and switched with no further problems. We pilots have been known to make mistakes, but to be reprimanded for a problem clearly not ours and to have explanations rebuked in such a manner is irrational and unprofessional behavior. Callback conversation with reporter acn #311081 revealed the following information: center procedures specialist stated the center does have blind spots not only around tus but other areas. This occurred after power output on the transmitters was reduced from 10 watts to 5 watts.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X COM FAILURE WITH ZAB. ATC EQUIP PROB COM XMITTER'S BLIND SPOTS.

Narrative: ACR X DEPARTED TUS AND DURING CLBOUT TO 17000 FT DEP CTL MADE HDOF TO ZAB. AFTER CONTACT WE RECEIVED FURTHER CLB CLRNC FROM ZAB. DURING OUR CLB WE HEARD LITTLE OR NO COM FOR SEVERAL MINS. WE THEN HEARD CTR CTLR IN A LENGTHY CONVERSATION WITH MIL ACFT DISCUSSING RTE CHANGES REGARDING AN ACTIVE MOA. THE DISCUSSION LASTED SEVERAL MINS DURING WHICH TIME THE CTLR AND MIL PLT ARGUED OVER PROPER FLT PLAN FILING PROCS. THEN THE CTLR VERY SHARPLY CHASTISED US FOR NOT LISTENING TO OUR RADIO. I AM CONCERNED THAT THERE MAY BE A BLIND SPOT FOR RADIO COM ESE OF TUS. OUR RADIOS FUNCTIONED PERFECTLY FOR THE REMAINDER OF OUR FLT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 311080: DEPARTED TUS AND SWITCHED TO ZAB BY TUS DEP. AFTER CHK-IN AND GIVEN A CLB, NOTHING HEARD FOR 5-7 MINS, THEN A CONVERSATION BTWN ZAB AND A MIL ACFT CONCERNING AN AIR REFUELING CLRNC. THE DISCUSSION WAS SOMEWHAT HEATED AND ENDED ABRUPTLY WHEN CTR CALLED US. AFTER ANSWERING, WE WERE CHASTISED FOR NOT LISTENING AND TOLD SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO CALL ON SEVERAL FREQS WENT UNANSWERED. WE ATTEMPTED TO EXPLAIN THAT WE HEARD HER CONVERSATION WITH THE MIL ACFT BUT NOTHING FOR US. CTLR STILL ARGUED WE WERE IN ERROR. WE EXPLAINED MAYBE THE XMITTER FOR THE AREA WAS INOP. WE WERE GIVEN ANOTHER FREQ AND SWITCHED WITH NO FURTHER PROBS. WE PLTS HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO MAKE MISTAKES, BUT TO BE REPRIMANDED FOR A PROB CLRLY NOT OURS AND TO HAVE EXPLANATIONS REBUKED IN SUCH A MANNER IS IRRATIONAL AND UNPROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN #311081 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: CTR PROCS SPECIALIST STATED THE CTR DOES HAVE BLIND SPOTS NOT ONLY AROUND TUS BUT OTHER AREAS. THIS OCCURRED AFTER PWR OUTPUT ON THE XMITTERS WAS REDUCED FROM 10 WATTS TO 5 WATTS.

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.