Narrative:

Prior to horsi intersection; the controller advised me to contact anchorage in 5 mins. I was level 10000 ft going direct poyok intersection. I tried several times to communicate with center; and was unable. I did get through once to hear partial WX; but was not completely readable; and I understood that it was 1 hour old. I continued for the approach (and tried to check WX on #2 radio). I called 10 mi prior to poyok and request approach clearance and advised that I would need a through clearance. I had no reply. The controller seemed busy. I called 3 mi prior to IAF; no reply. I called 30 seconds from IAF; no reply. (During this time; I tried using both radios and it made no difference which one I used.) I was still at 10000 ft. I passed the IAF and continued on the approach path. Just prior to the intermediate fix; I could barely make out that the controller was clearing me for an approach. I stated I was unable from this altitude; and requested a diversion to gal. (This was due to poor communication; and not able to receive the AWOS at rby. I could; however; received the gal AWOS on both radios.) suggestions: 1) the best solution would be to provide an rco (either FSS or center) on galena mtn. 2) failing this; a procedure could be put into place for aircraft in and out of rby. Controllers should expect that a through clearance will be required. I commonly place the words 'anticipate through clearance' in the remarks section; and depending on the controller I may or may not get one. For aircraft coming from fairbanks; the controller needs to speak with the next controller and coordination a) the approach clearance; and B) the through clearance. Pilots can provide very accurate arrival times with GPS and estimated ground times to assist the controllers in this as I realize it increases their workloads. Also; if a controller cannot clear the aircraft to an airport (such as gal) due to other traffic; it should generally be accepted that they clear us to a fix (such as zomby); etc. Alternatively they can clear us to an altitude above departing aircraft. All said and done; the real solution is an rco. With the future advent of surface based class east around rby; this type of reporting will become more and more common. Alternatively pilots may decide to fly below WX minimums because it is 'easier.' this unfortunate reality could be the cause of a major accident; which could be resolved by somebody spending a relatively small amount of money for an rco.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA PILOT DESCRIBED COMMUNICATIONS PROBLEMS WITH ZAN DURING AN APPROACH ATTEMPT TO RBY; RECOMMENDING ADDITIONAL REMOTE RADIO SITES BE DEVELOPED.

Narrative: PRIOR TO HORSI INTXN; THE CTLR ADVISED ME TO CONTACT ANCHORAGE IN 5 MINS. I WAS LEVEL 10000 FT GOING DIRECT POYOK INTXN. I TRIED SEVERAL TIMES TO COMMUNICATE WITH CTR; AND WAS UNABLE. I DID GET THROUGH ONCE TO HEAR PARTIAL WX; BUT WAS NOT COMPLETELY READABLE; AND I UNDERSTOOD THAT IT WAS 1 HR OLD. I CONTINUED FOR THE APCH (AND TRIED TO CHK WX ON #2 RADIO). I CALLED 10 MI PRIOR TO POYOK AND REQUEST APCH CLRNC AND ADVISED THAT I WOULD NEED A THROUGH CLRNC. I HAD NO REPLY. THE CTLR SEEMED BUSY. I CALLED 3 MI PRIOR TO IAF; NO REPLY. I CALLED 30 SECONDS FROM IAF; NO REPLY. (DURING THIS TIME; I TRIED USING BOTH RADIOS AND IT MADE NO DIFFERENCE WHICH ONE I USED.) I WAS STILL AT 10000 FT. I PASSED THE IAF AND CONTINUED ON THE APCH PATH. JUST PRIOR TO THE INTERMEDIATE FIX; I COULD BARELY MAKE OUT THAT THE CTLR WAS CLEARING ME FOR AN APCH. I STATED I WAS UNABLE FROM THIS ALT; AND REQUESTED A DIVERSION TO GAL. (THIS WAS DUE TO POOR COM; AND NOT ABLE TO RECEIVE THE AWOS AT RBY. I COULD; HOWEVER; RECEIVED THE GAL AWOS ON BOTH RADIOS.) SUGGESTIONS: 1) THE BEST SOLUTION WOULD BE TO PROVIDE AN RCO (EITHER FSS OR CTR) ON GALENA MTN. 2) FAILING THIS; A PROC COULD BE PUT INTO PLACE FOR ACFT IN AND OUT OF RBY. CTLRS SHOULD EXPECT THAT A THROUGH CLRNC WILL BE REQUIRED. I COMMONLY PLACE THE WORDS 'ANTICIPATE THROUGH CLRNC' IN THE REMARKS SECTION; AND DEPENDING ON THE CTLR I MAY OR MAY NOT GET ONE. FOR ACFT COMING FROM FAIRBANKS; THE CTLR NEEDS TO SPEAK WITH THE NEXT CTLR AND COORD A) THE APCH CLRNC; AND B) THE THROUGH CLRNC. PLTS CAN PROVIDE VERY ACCURATE ARR TIMES WITH GPS AND ESTIMATED GND TIMES TO ASSIST THE CTLRS IN THIS AS I REALIZE IT INCREASES THEIR WORKLOADS. ALSO; IF A CTLR CANNOT CLR THE ACFT TO AN ARPT (SUCH AS GAL) DUE TO OTHER TFC; IT SHOULD GENERALLY BE ACCEPTED THAT THEY CLR US TO A FIX (SUCH AS ZOMBY); ETC. ALTERNATIVELY THEY CAN CLR US TO AN ALT ABOVE DEPARTING ACFT. ALL SAID AND DONE; THE REAL SOLUTION IS AN RCO. WITH THE FUTURE ADVENT OF SURFACE BASED CLASS E AROUND RBY; THIS TYPE OF RPTING WILL BECOME MORE AND MORE COMMON. ALTERNATIVELY PLTS MAY DECIDE TO FLY BELOW WX MINIMUMS BECAUSE IT IS 'EASIER.' THIS UNFORTUNATE REALITY COULD BE THE CAUSE OF A MAJOR ACCIDENT; WHICH COULD BE RESOLVED BY SOMEBODY SPENDING A RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR AN RCO.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.