Narrative:

Whiteman (whp) tower operator did not respond to my VFR reporting points on approach in a timely manner nearly causing me to bust burbank (class C). When he finally did respond he was offensive, asking me why I didn't hear his instructions for all traffic to hold transmission. He never addressed my aircraft. Furthermore, it is unsafe practice for an airport to tell all incoming to hold transmission unless that airport is declaring an emergency. Other pilots have had trouble at (whp) due to the deteriorating visibility from minimum 3 miles reported on takeoff to between 1-2 miles on approach to landing at (whp) I was reluctant to continue north bound (the only route available without busting van nuys airspace class D to the west or burbank to the east and south.) I continued on a base leg approach to (whp) without any contact with the tower ready to fly over the airport at pattern altitude ready to squawk radio failure (I assumed) when whiteman finally responded, asking me why I hadn't heard the first transmission for all traffic to 'hold' transmission. (Which I hadn't.) this I thought was an unreasonable request by the tower in the face of the poor visibility. Response time by the tower should not have taken more than 10 seconds. It never has in the past. If the airport is getting busier, they need to hire more controllers and possibly upgrade to a radar transponder facility.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT INBOUND TO LAND WHP, A CONTRACT TWR, HAS DIFFICULTY ESTABLISHING CONTACT WITH THE LOCAL CTLR.

Narrative: WHITEMAN (WHP) TWR OPERATOR DID NOT RESPOND TO MY VFR REPORTING POINTS ON APCH IN A TIMELY MANNER NEARLY CAUSING ME TO BUST BURBANK (CLASS C). WHEN HE FINALLY DID RESPOND HE WAS OFFENSIVE, ASKING ME WHY I DIDN'T HEAR HIS INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL TFC TO HOLD XMISSION. HE NEVER ADDRESSED MY ACFT. FURTHERMORE, IT IS UNSAFE PRACTICE FOR AN ARPT TO TELL ALL INCOMING TO HOLD XMISSION UNLESS THAT ARPT IS DECLARING AN EMER. OTHER PLTS HAVE HAD TROUBLE AT (WHP) DUE TO THE DETERIORATING VISIBILITY FROM MINIMUM 3 MILES RPTED ON TKOF TO BTWN 1-2 MILES ON APCH TO LNDG AT (WHP) I WAS RELUCTANT TO CONTINUE NORTH BOUND (THE ONLY RTE AVAILABLE WITHOUT BUSTING VAN NUYS AIRSPACE CLASS D TO THE WEST OR BURBANK TO THE E AND S.) I CONTINUED ON A BASE LEG APCH TO (WHP) WITHOUT ANY CONTACT WITH THE TWR READY TO FLY OVER THE ARPT AT PATTERN ALTITUDE READY TO SQUAWK RADIO FAILURE (I ASSUMED) WHEN WHITEMAN FINALLY RESPONDED, ASKING ME WHY I HADN'T HEARD THE FIRST XMISSION FOR ALL TFC TO 'HOLD' XMISSION. (WHICH I HADN'T.) THIS I THOUGHT WAS AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST BY THE TWR IN THE FACE OF THE POOR VISIBILITY. RESPONSE TIME BY THE TWR SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN MORE THAN 10 SECS. IT NEVER HAS IN THE PAST. IF THE ARPT IS GETTING BUSIER, THEY NEED TO HIRE MORE CTLRS AND POSSIBLY UPGRADE TO A RADAR TRANSPONDER FACILITY.

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.