This is an excerpt from a report made to the Aviation Safety Reporting System. The narrative is written by the pilot, rather than FAA or NTSB officials. To maintain anonymity, many details, such as aircraft model or airport, are often scrubbed from the reports.
I was preparing for takeoff, and noticed that I had not heard the tower talk to the previous airplane that took off.
I announced to tower on 120.7 that I was ready in sequence for takeoff, and I heard a voice (I believe from another aircraft,) “wrong frequency.”
I switched to ground, and informed them that I was ready for takeoff. They told me to contact tower on 118.1. I did that, and was cleared for takeoff, and flew to ZZZ without incident.
After arriving at ZZZ, I was embarrassed about using the wrong frequency, and looked more carefully at the taxi diagram.
The taxi diagram shows only 120.7 as the Tower frequency. I looked at the AFD, and again, only 120.7 listed. I checked the NOTAMs, and no mention of 118.1. I looked at the two approach charts for the runway, and they both list 120.7. I utilized the internet, and listened to ATIS again, and again, no mention of 118.1.
I spoke to someone who regularly flies out of Daytona Beach International Airport (KDAB) in Florida, and he acknowledged that “everyone knows about 118.1, but no one knows where it’s listed — sometimes it’s on the ATIS, and some ground controllers will mention the frequency, but to his knowledge it’s written nowhere.”
If this is a commonly used frequency, why in the world isn’t it listed anywhere? I was told that Daytona Tower has been using this frequency for years, and flight schools will tell students, but transient pilots are left out of the equation.
If somehow I missed something, and it is indeed listed somewhere, I would love to know where I could find this, and why every other publication, lists only 120.7.
Primary Problem: Chart
ACN: 2014946
Very possibly a temporary frequency, that hasn’t been officially published since it is new. I know my local airport typically uses the main freq of xxx.0 in most situations. However with increased traffic, the double runways have been split for Local Control. Local East(Tower East) now works the east runway only and uses xxx.1. Local West(Tower West) is now open and uses yyy.2 and only works the west runway. This allows for more traffic overall, and increased safety as it reduces the workload of each controller.
This whole process is very new though. Only implemented within the last 2 months. It’s above my paygrade as to how it gets distributed and updated for everyone. I don’t think it is on the charts yet. The atis simply gets updated, and corrections are sent out in CPDLC. Pilots are supposed to be told before they reach the runway to expect the West frequency.
Flying school said “Maybe”. That is official.
Those were my words. The flight school was helpful with explaining operations at KDAB. There is a huge amount of activity there and this is the first time I have read of a communication issue there. Generally their system apparently works ok as a controller advises the pilot what frequency to use, so technically there isn’t actually a necessity for all frequencies to be published. But that requires that the pilot always listens to ALL instructions, which is part of the lesson learned. I originally was based at an airport with multiple tower and ground frequencies, all published. Even with that there may be times when the tower would have to advise the pilot of what frequency to use, as when the pilot was making a unusually long taxi from one sector to the other, and the pilot would change to the other frequency on the roll, but only after being instructed to do so. There are other situations with towers where the usual frequency is not used, like when a controller goes on break, or there is an equipment problem. Reviewing information in publications, even when they are 100% accurate, isn’t going to avert all communication issues – the instructions from ATC are going to override anything you find in the Chart Supplement or anywhere else. But you have to listen, and maybe this pilot didn’t – don’t know without hearing the archive.
Funny, not so much, that you need a “current” chart by date, but the chart is not current.
An airport by me that has been closed for years is still on the chart and in ForeFlight. A big racetrack east of Denver, been there for several years, not on the chart. A major road just east of Greeley Co, been there for years, missing
This article don’t surprise me at all.
Fly by google earth or google maps, they are more current.
I checked NOTAMs as well for this airport.While there were 27 NOTAMS for the airport DAB, none identified a different frequency that I could see.
Any idea how long this has been this way? If it were just a temporary issue, lasting no more than 30 days?
This is unacceptable FAA. This is not a tiny airport in the middle of nowhere. We all know the FAA is big bureaucratic mess, but the local ATCT has point on this and should have at minimum a NOTAM at the time it started.
Come guys, you can do better than this.
I couldn’t let this go without some explanation so I called a flight school at Daytona Beach. Maybe this is what happened. 120.7 is the only tower frequency in the Chart Supplement and other publications. However, with this being a very busy airport, a tower frequency other than what is published may be assigned by approach control on an arrival or by clearance delivery on a departure. The person at the flight school said a lot of information may be given very quickly for the departure, and maybe the tower frequency assignment of 118.1 (if it was in fact included) was missed. The NASA report writer sounds like he studied all available information very thoroughly, but that also may have conditioned him to miss an assigned unpublished tower frequency (expectation bias) by clearance delivery.
I don’t buy it. That is a poor answer from the school.
The FAA ATCT needs to fix this. At least with a NOTAM. After all they have NOTAMs for several Letter of Agreements, including how to ask for a Practice Approach. They can do better.
Well, the school wouldn’t be responsible. On the other hand, as you say, a fix is needed. I had also left a message with the airport office and received a prompt return call after my first comment was added. They are now aware of this NASA report via the GAN website and indicated the issue is being reviewed by tower management for possible changes to the Chart Supplement. I.e. the airport where I was originally based (KMEM) has multiple frequencies in the Chart Supplement for both tower and ground.
Weird!!!!
Nope! 118.1 is NOT published on any procedure, including the airport diagram depicting the airport runways. It might be stated on the ATIS but the pilot who wrote the story said he checked and it was not. It’s very possible it’s a temp freq, which in that case would be, or should be noted on the ATIS.
By Local, I mean regional procedures like those found in Table 1, DAB ATCT Operational Positions, published in Jacksonville ARTCC, DAB ATCT/TRACON Standard Operating Procedures Doc #ZJX-5, Version B, dated 02/23/2020. Tower freq broken out by arrival sector and runway assignment, to wit: DAB_N_TWR 120.700, DAB_S_TWR 118.100.
Not in the FAA ADIP. Other alternate frequencies ARE listed there.
https://adip.faa.gov/agis/public/#/airportData/dab
I did find and see it in the “Jacksonville ARTCC DAB ATCT/TRACON Standard Operating Procedures” document. Of course that is great for ATC but it is not a normal resource for pilots.
They can, and should do better.
You are correct about publication. 118.1 is, however, runway specific in ATIS and local DAB procedure publications.
And the “local DAB procedure publications” are where?
Yep. Tower freq is published 120.7. Nowhere is 118.1 to be found. Best kept secret. Go figure.