Narrative:

Flight was cleared into position and hold on runway 34R, slc, by slc tower on frequency 119.05. Aircraft was a B737-800, using number 1 VHF radio which uses lower antenna. We did not hear takeoff clearance due to an apparent dead spot for the lower antenna. This forced a go around of a landing aircraft. My company has a NOTAM for runway 16R on this aircraft, but not runway 34R. The loss of communication at unexpected times on the ground using VHF number 1 is a big problem on the B737-800. This is a known problem that needs to be fixed before it causes an accident. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter is concerned that the B737-800 fleet has two different communication antenna locations. Those utilizing the lower antenna experience loss of communication during some ground operations. Further, working around this known problem requires the PF's attention to be directed to the aft portion of the pedestal to use the number 2 communication radio during the critical phase of the takeoff. Recent aircraft are being delivered with the number 1 radio utilizing the upper antenna which solves the loss of communication. For reasons unknown there has been no effort made to placard the aircraft as to which antenna site is being used. The reporter believes this would be most beneficial to the flcs. On the second callback on feb/xa/00, the reporter clarified what he meant by placarding the aircraft as to which antenna the number 1 VHF radio is connected to. This is because their fleet of B737-800's consist of old and newer models of the aircraft. The reporter stated, that because of this, flight crew's may have difficulty in distinguishing between the models as to which antenna the number 1 VHF radio is using. The reporter also claims the loss of communication happens at other airports as well.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-800 FLC WAS UNABLE TO RECEIVE COMS FROM THE SLC TWR WHICH FORCED AN ACFT TO GAR.

Narrative: FLT WAS CLRED INTO POS AND HOLD ON RWY 34R, SLC, BY SLC TWR ON FREQ 119.05. ACFT WAS A B737-800, USING NUMBER 1 VHF RADIO WHICH USES LOWER ANTENNA. WE DID NOT HEAR TKOF CLRNC DUE TO AN APPARENT DEAD SPOT FOR THE LOWER ANTENNA. THIS FORCED A GAR OF A LNDG ACFT. MY COMPANY HAS A NOTAM FOR RWY 16R ON THIS ACFT, BUT NOT RWY 34R. THE LOSS OF COM AT UNEXPECTED TIMES ON THE GND USING VHF NUMBER 1 IS A BIG PROB ON THE B737-800. THIS IS A KNOWN PROB THAT NEEDS TO BE FIXED BEFORE IT CAUSES AN ACCIDENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR IS CONCERNED THAT THE B737-800 FLEET HAS TWO DIFFERENT COM ANTENNA LOCATIONS. THOSE UTILIZING THE LOWER ANTENNA EXPERIENCE LOSS OF COM DURING SOME GND OPS. FURTHER, WORKING AROUND THIS KNOWN PROB REQUIRES THE PF'S ATTENTION TO BE DIRECTED TO THE AFT PORTION OF THE PEDESTAL TO USE THE NUMBER 2 COM RADIO DURING THE CRITICAL PHASE OF THE TKOF. RECENT ACFT ARE BEING DELIVERED WITH THE NUMBER 1 RADIO UTILIZING THE UPPER ANTENNA WHICH SOLVES THE LOSS OF COM. FOR REASONS UNKNOWN THERE HAS BEEN NO EFFORT MADE TO PLACARD THE ACFT AS TO WHICH ANTENNA SITE IS BEING USED. THE RPTR BELIEVES THIS WOULD BE MOST BENEFICIAL TO THE FLCS. ON THE SECOND CALLBACK ON FEB/XA/00, THE RPTR CLARIFIED WHAT HE MEANT BY PLACARDING THE ACFT AS TO WHICH ANTENNA THE NUMBER 1 VHF RADIO IS CONNECTED TO. THIS IS BECAUSE THEIR FLEET OF B737-800'S CONSIST OF OLD AND NEWER MODELS OF THE ACFT. THE RPTR STATED, THAT BECAUSE OF THIS, FLC'S MAY HAVE DIFFICULTY IN DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN THE MODELS AS TO WHICH ANTENNA THE NUMBER 1 VHF RADIO IS USING. THE RPTR ALSO CLAIMS THE LOSS OF COM HAPPENS AT OTHER ARPTS AS WELL.

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.