Narrative:

We were given vectors to join the 24 right localizer and subsequently received an approach clearance. The aircraft was in the [right] turn to intercept the localizer when we received instructions from the controller to turn to a heading of 160 degrees. This seemed unusual since it was a left turn and would take us off of the 24 right localizer and cause us to cross the south complex. However due to the volume of traffic and time constraints we read back the clearance and complied. Before the turn was complete a different controller said: 'what are you doing? You are doing the opposite of what we are telling you to do! You're killing us. You flew across the 25's under a descending aircraft.' a few seconds later we received further vectors and a climb clearance. Prior to issuing a second approach clearance the controller asked us if we intended to follow his instructions this time. We complied with all clearances and completed the flight without incident. After some discussion we are still convinced that we were given a 160 degree heading for reasons unknown to us at that moment. We are also convinced that we read back a 160 degree heading. We hypothesized later that what the controller meant to give us was a 260 degree heading because she did not like the intercept picture she saw on her display. This would also explain the second controller's comments about 'doing the opposite of what we are telling you.' this situation was likely a result of a read back/hear back problem by one of the parties at a critical time in the approach environment. Paying more attention at that time by the errant person(s) would help. Additionally the second controller's comments using non-standard terminology such as; 'what are you doing' you're killing us. Do you intend to follow instructions this time?' caused even more tension and anxiety at a critical time. Instead of effectively communicating the problem by telling us we were assigned a 260 heading and we appeared to be flying a 160 heading or something to that effect; we were left wondering if we had navigation problems that would reoccur on the second approach.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air Carrier flight crew reports being issued a 160 degree heading as they are intercepting the Runway 24R localizer at LAX and complies. This is not what ATC intended and the crew is excoriated for crossing the south complex before being vectored back for another approach.

Narrative: We were given vectors to join the 24 right localizer and subsequently received an approach clearance. The aircraft was in the [right] turn to intercept the localizer when we received instructions from the Controller to turn to a heading of 160 degrees. This seemed unusual since it was a left turn and would take us off of the 24 right localizer and cause us to cross the south complex. However due to the volume of traffic and time constraints we read back the clearance and complied. Before the turn was complete a different controller said: 'What are you doing? You are doing the opposite of what we are telling you to do! You're killing us. You flew across the 25's under a descending aircraft.' A few seconds later we received further vectors and a climb clearance. Prior to issuing a second approach clearance the controller asked us if we intended to follow his instructions this time. We complied with all clearances and completed the flight without incident. After some discussion we are still convinced that we were given a 160 degree heading for reasons unknown to us at that moment. We are also convinced that we read back a 160 degree heading. We hypothesized later that what the controller meant to give us was a 260 degree heading because she did not like the intercept picture she saw on her display. This would also explain the second controller's comments about 'Doing the opposite of what we are telling you.' This situation was likely a result of a read back/hear back problem by one of the parties at a critical time in the approach environment. Paying more attention at that time by the errant person(s) would help. Additionally the second controller's comments using non-standard terminology such as; 'What are you doing' you're killing us. Do you intend to follow instructions this time?' caused even more tension and anxiety at a critical time. Instead of effectively communicating the problem by telling us we were assigned a 260 heading and we appeared to be flying a 160 heading or something to that effect; we were left wondering if we had navigation problems that would reoccur on the second approach.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.