Narrative:

In my 14 yrs of working, I have never found myself writing about such a subject. In general, 99.9% of all FAA ATC personnel are friendly, cooperative and professional. We were ready to push at XX17Z, the radios were very busy on ground 121.75. We waited and waited patiently attempting to get our request in for the push. We tried once and were not sure if the ground controller received our request. Finally after waiting about 6 mins, I (the captain) decided to make the radio transmission, since we could not seem to get in a transmission. I asked first officer to communicate our difficulties to ramp in hopes that they could call ground on a landline. I was patient and polite and finally found a break and requested a push once -- got not acknowledgement. Requested again. As all I wanted was to know was that they had received our request. The ground controller responded 'yeah, I heard you. You have traffic behind you.' I asked ramp personnel if they saw anyone. They confirmed that there was little, if any, traffic. The entire time we were patient and professional in our xmissions. At XP25Z, the ground controller made an obviously belligerent statement to the B767 that wanted our gate, 'he's not going to push for a while,' referring to our flight. We sat. Finally, about XP32Z, we were given push clearance after an airbus. We got back about 30 yards and ground controller told us to pull back to the gate and wait for the airbus. I couldn't confirm which airbus the ramp personnel thought they saw, but the first officer confirmed one had passed our 6 O'clock position. Finally at about XP35, we pushed again and were assigned runway 24L. I fly this trip regularly and have never utilized runway 24L for this flight. We missed our estimated departure clearance time of XP34 during this entire time of waiting to get push clearance. We finally finished pushing back at XP38. We sat patiently attempting to make a taxi request from XP38 until XP45. The radio was unbelievably busy. We never were able to transmit one request for taxi when the ground controller belligerently asked, 'air carrier X, are you ready to go?' my first officer was very, very polite and professional. At XP38, there was a change in personnel on the frequency. Just prior to the shift change, the controller made the statement 'now everybody stand by.' an important point is that there are moments when a response to an aircraft's request is not possible, but eventually it must be provided. When a frequency is so busy that you have to wait to get a transmission through for the amount of time we waited, the system is not working and needs to be corrected. The safety issue here is that if we had an engine fire on startup or some other emergency on the ground, we would be significantly impeded from getting a response. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter suggests development and creation of another ground control frequency at lax. Reporter states it's 'almost impossible' to obtain clearance clarification or requests.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 FLC CONCERNED WITH LAX FREQ CONGESTION AND LAX GND CTL RESPONSE. RPTR SUGGESTS DEVELOPMENT OF ANOTHER GND CTL FREQ.

Narrative: IN MY 14 YRS OF WORKING, I HAVE NEVER FOUND MYSELF WRITING ABOUT SUCH A SUBJECT. IN GENERAL, 99.9% OF ALL FAA ATC PERSONNEL ARE FRIENDLY, COOPERATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL. WE WERE READY TO PUSH AT XX17Z, THE RADIOS WERE VERY BUSY ON GND 121.75. WE WAITED AND WAITED PATIENTLY ATTEMPTING TO GET OUR REQUEST IN FOR THE PUSH. WE TRIED ONCE AND WERE NOT SURE IF THE GND CTLR RECEIVED OUR REQUEST. FINALLY AFTER WAITING ABOUT 6 MINS, I (THE CAPT) DECIDED TO MAKE THE RADIO XMISSION, SINCE WE COULD NOT SEEM TO GET IN A XMISSION. I ASKED FO TO COMMUNICATE OUR DIFFICULTIES TO RAMP IN HOPES THAT THEY COULD CALL GND ON A LANDLINE. I WAS PATIENT AND POLITE AND FINALLY FOUND A BREAK AND REQUESTED A PUSH ONCE -- GOT NOT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. REQUESTED AGAIN. AS ALL I WANTED WAS TO KNOW WAS THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED OUR REQUEST. THE GND CTLR RESPONDED 'YEAH, I HEARD YOU. YOU HAVE TFC BEHIND YOU.' I ASKED RAMP PERSONNEL IF THEY SAW ANYONE. THEY CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS LITTLE, IF ANY, TFC. THE ENTIRE TIME WE WERE PATIENT AND PROFESSIONAL IN OUR XMISSIONS. AT XP25Z, THE GND CTLR MADE AN OBVIOUSLY BELLIGERENT STATEMENT TO THE B767 THAT WANTED OUR GATE, 'HE'S NOT GOING TO PUSH FOR A WHILE,' REFERRING TO OUR FLT. WE SAT. FINALLY, ABOUT XP32Z, WE WERE GIVEN PUSH CLRNC AFTER AN AIRBUS. WE GOT BACK ABOUT 30 YARDS AND GND CTLR TOLD US TO PULL BACK TO THE GATE AND WAIT FOR THE AIRBUS. I COULDN'T CONFIRM WHICH AIRBUS THE RAMP PERSONNEL THOUGHT THEY SAW, BUT THE FO CONFIRMED ONE HAD PASSED OUR 6 O'CLOCK POS. FINALLY AT ABOUT XP35, WE PUSHED AGAIN AND WERE ASSIGNED RWY 24L. I FLY THIS TRIP REGULARLY AND HAVE NEVER UTILIZED RWY 24L FOR THIS FLT. WE MISSED OUR ESTIMATED DEP CLRNC TIME OF XP34 DURING THIS ENTIRE TIME OF WAITING TO GET PUSH CLRNC. WE FINALLY FINISHED PUSHING BACK AT XP38. WE SAT PATIENTLY ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TAXI REQUEST FROM XP38 UNTIL XP45. THE RADIO WAS UNBELIEVABLY BUSY. WE NEVER WERE ABLE TO XMIT ONE REQUEST FOR TAXI WHEN THE GND CTLR BELLIGERENTLY ASKED, 'ACR X, ARE YOU READY TO GO?' MY FO WAS VERY, VERY POLITE AND PROFESSIONAL. AT XP38, THERE WAS A CHANGE IN PERSONNEL ON THE FREQ. JUST PRIOR TO THE SHIFT CHANGE, THE CTLR MADE THE STATEMENT 'NOW EVERYBODY STAND BY.' AN IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT THERE ARE MOMENTS WHEN A RESPONSE TO AN ACFT'S REQUEST IS NOT POSSIBLE, BUT EVENTUALLY IT MUST BE PROVIDED. WHEN A FREQ IS SO BUSY THAT YOU HAVE TO WAIT TO GET A XMISSION THROUGH FOR THE AMOUNT OF TIME WE WAITED, THE SYS IS NOT WORKING AND NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED. THE SAFETY ISSUE HERE IS THAT IF WE HAD AN ENG FIRE ON STARTUP OR SOME OTHER EMER ON THE GND, WE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPEDED FROM GETTING A RESPONSE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SUGGESTS DEVELOPMENT AND CREATION OF ANOTHER GND CTL FREQ AT LAX. RPTR STATES IT'S 'ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE' TO OBTAIN CLRNC CLARIFICATION OR REQUESTS.

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.