Narrative:

Clearance was then received to cross 30 DME northwest of stl at 10000' and 250 KTS. Approach control later cleared us to a heading of 220 degrees, slow to 210 KTS and descend to 8000'. Clearance was then received to slow to 170 KTS and then descend to (I believe) 7000', speed first. We were advised that the 220 degree heading would be a wide base for a 12R approach. During this time we were switched to final controller on frequency 119.75. We were listening to and heard communications between approach control and other flts which all sounded normal, but heard no attempt to contact our flight further until we were flown through the 12R localizer. The next contact heard from the controller was, 'if you read squawk identify,' given in a very terse manner. Identify was given and approach was advised that we did read them. We were then given a heading and cleared to 5000'. I mistakenly read back 4000'. Approach control's response was, 'the altitude was 5000' and if this is going to become a habit I'd rather change you to someone else's frequency.' after further vectoring we were cleared for and made the 12R approach. Upon contacting tower we were #2 on approach and we were cleared to land. Landing clearance was read back with no response from the tower. Landing clearance was again read back and again no response from tower. In reference to the alleged communication problems on approach, I then asked tower if they read us. They said they did. I asked for acknowledgement of our landing clearance. Tower's response was, 'well, I don't normally acknowledge your acknowledgement.' I then referenced our problem on approach control and they had other ideas about that. Tower stated that, 'we'll talk about approach when you get on the ground.' after landing and contacting ground control, I was informed that I would contact the tower. Upon contacting the tower, I asked to speak to a supervisor. The response was, 'I'm one of them.' I told him who I was and I was then informed that they had not been able to contact us and that we had caused great disruption and extensive vectoring in the approach area. He stated that they had already called ny flight operations and that they were going to review the tapes and go from there. His tone was irritated, curt and uncooperative to discuss the situation. The above events are reported to the best of my recollection. We were never off frequency and have no knowledge of any clrncs not complied with. I have learned that ATC still plans to review the tapes and are going to try to file a violation. As of yet, ATC has been unable or unwilling to advise what the alleged violation was. In view of the fact that numerous flight crews encountered problems with stl ATC that day, it is my belief that stl ATC picked that day to harass the pilots in a backlash to union request that the pilots get full route clrncs and avoid accepting visibility approachs. I believe that day stl ATC created unnecessary problems and unwarranted situations, consequently leaving me in the position of trying to defend myself against some unknown alleged violation of their choosing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CONFUSION OCCURRED WHEN REPORTER WAS INSTRUCTED TO CHANGE FREQ BUT FAILED TO CALL IN ON NEW FREQ.

Narrative: CLRNC WAS THEN RECEIVED TO CROSS 30 DME NW OF STL AT 10000' AND 250 KTS. APCH CTL LATER CLRED US TO A HDG OF 220 DEGS, SLOW TO 210 KTS AND DSND TO 8000'. CLRNC WAS THEN RECEIVED TO SLOW TO 170 KTS AND THEN DSND TO (I BELIEVE) 7000', SPD FIRST. WE WERE ADVISED THAT THE 220 DEG HDG WOULD BE A WIDE BASE FOR A 12R APCH. DURING THIS TIME WE WERE SWITCHED TO FINAL CTLR ON FREQ 119.75. WE WERE LISTENING TO AND HEARD COMS BTWN APCH CTL AND OTHER FLTS WHICH ALL SOUNDED NORMAL, BUT HEARD NO ATTEMPT TO CONTACT OUR FLT FURTHER UNTIL WE WERE FLOWN THROUGH THE 12R LOC. THE NEXT CONTACT HEARD FROM THE CTLR WAS, 'IF YOU READ SQUAWK IDENT,' GIVEN IN A VERY TERSE MANNER. IDENT WAS GIVEN AND APCH WAS ADVISED THAT WE DID READ THEM. WE WERE THEN GIVEN A HDG AND CLRED TO 5000'. I MISTAKENLY READ BACK 4000'. APCH CTL'S RESPONSE WAS, 'THE ALT WAS 5000' AND IF THIS IS GOING TO BECOME A HABIT I'D RATHER CHANGE YOU TO SOMEONE ELSE'S FREQ.' AFTER FURTHER VECTORING WE WERE CLRED FOR AND MADE THE 12R APCH. UPON CONTACTING TWR WE WERE #2 ON APCH AND WE WERE CLRED TO LAND. LNDG CLRNC WAS READ BACK WITH NO RESPONSE FROM THE TWR. LNDG CLRNC WAS AGAIN READ BACK AND AGAIN NO RESPONSE FROM TWR. IN REF TO THE ALLEGED COM PROBS ON APCH, I THEN ASKED TWR IF THEY READ US. THEY SAID THEY DID. I ASKED FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF OUR LNDG CLRNC. TWR'S RESPONSE WAS, 'WELL, I DON'T NORMALLY ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.' I THEN REFERENCED OUR PROB ON APCH CTL AND THEY HAD OTHER IDEAS ABOUT THAT. TWR STATED THAT, 'WE'LL TALK ABOUT APCH WHEN YOU GET ON THE GND.' AFTER LNDG AND CONTACTING GND CTL, I WAS INFORMED THAT I WOULD CONTACT THE TWR. UPON CONTACTING THE TWR, I ASKED TO SPEAK TO A SUPVR. THE RESPONSE WAS, 'I'M ONE OF THEM.' I TOLD HIM WHO I WAS AND I WAS THEN INFORMED THAT THEY HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO CONTACT US AND THAT WE HAD CAUSED GREAT DISRUPTION AND EXTENSIVE VECTORING IN THE APCH AREA. HE STATED THAT THEY HAD ALREADY CALLED NY FLT OPS AND THAT THEY WERE GOING TO REVIEW THE TAPES AND GO FROM THERE. HIS TONE WAS IRRITATED, CURT AND UNCOOPERATIVE TO DISCUSS THE SITUATION. THE ABOVE EVENTS ARE RPTED TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION. WE WERE NEVER OFF FREQ AND HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY CLRNCS NOT COMPLIED WITH. I HAVE LEARNED THAT ATC STILL PLANS TO REVIEW THE TAPES AND ARE GOING TO TRY TO FILE A VIOLATION. AS OF YET, ATC HAS BEEN UNABLE OR UNWILLING TO ADVISE WHAT THE ALLEGED VIOLATION WAS. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NUMEROUS FLT CREWS ENCOUNTERED PROBS WITH STL ATC THAT DAY, IT IS MY BELIEF THAT STL ATC PICKED THAT DAY TO HARASS THE PLTS IN A BACKLASH TO UNION REQUEST THAT THE PLTS GET FULL ROUTE CLRNCS AND AVOID ACCEPTING VIS APCHS. I BELIEVE THAT DAY STL ATC CREATED UNNECESSARY PROBS AND UNWARRANTED SITUATIONS, CONSEQUENTLY LEAVING ME IN THE POS OF TRYING TO DEFEND MYSELF AGAINST SOME UNKNOWN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THEIR CHOOSING.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.