Narrative:

I had filed an IFR flight plan for the part 91 flight to anchorage and the flight was uneventful until the approach phase of the flight. On the descent; center had me switch to approach control and I received radar vectors initially for the right downwind to runway 15. After several radar vectors; I was instructed to precede direct cardd; the initial approach fix on the ILS 15. Approximately 8 miles from cardd; I received a vector toward the approach course and a second vector onto it but because of the close proximity I passed through it. Approach control asked if I would like a re-vector and I requested it. The instruction was; 'right one eighty to re-intercept'. I interpreted this instruction as a right 180 degree turn off the approach course to be re-vectored back onto it. After beginning the turn; approach quickly noticed the error and assigned a heading of 140 to maintain with the instruction to 'call the airport'. I turned to heading 140; but in the confusion of the moment; I misunderstood the instruction about calling the airport and called the tower frequency without approach control specifically authorizing me to do so. In hindsight; I should not have accepted the flight to anchorage. I was worn-out from 14 days of heavy flying with mostly poor IFR weather. The fatigue was to the point where I was not fit for the flight; especially with the effects of the 12000 ft MSL altitude required for the route prior to descending into anchorage. In that state; normal ATC instructions seemed ambiguous and confusing. In the future; I will give much more careful consideration to fatigue; flying near part 91 limits without use of supplemental oxygen; and ensure clarification of ATC instructions.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: King air pilot reported the difficulties he had trying to comply with ATC instructions during a visual approach; due to extreme fatigue and flying at 12000 feet.

Narrative: I had filed an IFR flight plan for the part 91 flight to Anchorage and the flight was uneventful until the approach phase of the flight. On the descent; center had me switch to approach control and I received radar vectors initially for the right downwind to runway 15. After several radar vectors; I was instructed to precede direct CARDD; the initial approach fix on the ILS 15. Approximately 8 miles from CARDD; I received a vector toward the approach course and a second vector onto it but because of the close proximity I passed through it. Approach control asked if I would like a re-vector and I requested it. The instruction was; 'Right one eighty to re-intercept'. I interpreted this instruction as a right 180 degree turn off the approach course to be re-vectored back onto it. After beginning the turn; approach quickly noticed the error and assigned a heading of 140 to maintain with the instruction to 'Call the airport'. I turned to heading 140; but in the confusion of the moment; I misunderstood the instruction about calling the airport and called the tower frequency without approach control specifically authorizing me to do so. In hindsight; I should not have accepted the flight to Anchorage. I was worn-out from 14 days of heavy flying with mostly poor IFR weather. The fatigue was to the point where I was not fit for the flight; especially with the effects of the 12000 ft MSL altitude required for the route prior to descending into Anchorage. In that state; normal ATC instructions seemed ambiguous and confusing. In the future; I will give much more careful consideration to fatigue; flying near part 91 limits without use of supplemental oxygen; and ensure clarification of ATC instructions.

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.