Narrative:

On descent into ord, we were sent over to ord approach controller. He sounded very busy with absolutely no breaks in the radio xmissions. He was coping quite well considering the workload. We were told to descend to 3000 ft and intercept localizer runway 14R, we complied. His approach clrncs were the same for all aircraft in the IFR pattern, conveying a lot of information in one long transmission. We had leveled off at 3000 ft and intercepted the localizer and were expecting our clearance next. The frequency sounded pretty saturated at this point and some xmissions were being blocked. We heard clearance instructions with no callsign, which were blocked by another transmission. I then asked if the last call was for our flight number. When I finished my transmission I could hear clearance instructions again being issued. But I missed the callsign because I was transmitting my question when approach was reissuing the clearance. After approach finished he went on directing other aircraft and we couldn't get a word in edgewise. Without a clear approach clearance we continued inbound at 3000 ft on the localizer for 14R. Finally, we gave up on trying to contact approach and near the marker we went to tower and asked if we were cleared for the approach. He said we were. We began a rapid descent to localizer minimums and broke out of the clouds. We were quite high on the approach and tower advised us to go around, which we did. We believe a major factor was the amount of radio chatter. It was solid talking with no breaks and absolutely no room for error or clarification if required. Perhaps the workload on the approach controller or the way he issued clrncs (in a long drawn out transmission containing more information than normal) should be looked at. It's a good example of the strain of increased traffic on our ATC system.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG HAS FREQ CONGESTION PROB, UNABLE TO VERIFY CLRNC.

Narrative: ON DSCNT INTO ORD, WE WERE SENT OVER TO ORD APCH CTLR. HE SOUNDED VERY BUSY WITH ABSOLUTELY NO BREAKS IN THE RADIO XMISSIONS. HE WAS COPING QUITE WELL CONSIDERING THE WORKLOAD. WE WERE TOLD TO DSND TO 3000 FT AND INTERCEPT LOC RWY 14R, WE COMPLIED. HIS APCH CLRNCS WERE THE SAME FOR ALL ACFT IN THE IFR PATTERN, CONVEYING A LOT OF INFO IN ONE LONG XMISSION. WE HAD LEVELED OFF AT 3000 FT AND INTERCEPTED THE LOC AND WERE EXPECTING OUR CLRNC NEXT. THE FREQ SOUNDED PRETTY SATURATED AT THIS POINT AND SOME XMISSIONS WERE BEING BLOCKED. WE HEARD CLRNC INSTRUCTIONS WITH NO CALLSIGN, WHICH WERE BLOCKED BY ANOTHER XMISSION. I THEN ASKED IF THE LAST CALL WAS FOR OUR FLT NUMBER. WHEN I FINISHED MY XMISSION I COULD HEAR CLRNC INSTRUCTIONS AGAIN BEING ISSUED. BUT I MISSED THE CALLSIGN BECAUSE I WAS XMITTING MY QUESTION WHEN APCH WAS REISSUING THE CLRNC. AFTER APCH FINISHED HE WENT ON DIRECTING OTHER ACFT AND WE COULDN'T GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE. WITHOUT A CLR APCH CLRNC WE CONTINUED INBOUND AT 3000 FT ON THE LOC FOR 14R. FINALLY, WE GAVE UP ON TRYING TO CONTACT APCH AND NEAR THE MARKER WE WENT TO TWR AND ASKED IF WE WERE CLRED FOR THE APCH. HE SAID WE WERE. WE BEGAN A RAPID DSCNT TO LOC MINIMUMS AND BROKE OUT OF THE CLOUDS. WE WERE QUITE HIGH ON THE APCH AND TWR ADVISED US TO GAR, WHICH WE DID. WE BELIEVE A MAJOR FACTOR WAS THE AMOUNT OF RADIO CHATTER. IT WAS SOLID TALKING WITH NO BREAKS AND ABSOLUTELY NO ROOM FOR ERROR OR CLARIFICATION IF REQUIRED. PERHAPS THE WORKLOAD ON THE APCH CTLR OR THE WAY HE ISSUED CLRNCS (IN A LONG DRAWN OUT XMISSION CONTAINING MORE INFO THAN NORMAL) SHOULD BE LOOKED AT. IT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE STRAIN OF INCREASED TFC ON OUR ATC SYS.

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.