Narrative:

While being vectored ILS approach to runway 22L at jfk, approach cleared us for descent from 4000' to 3000'. First officer (not flying) read back clearance. During descent through 3300', ATC advised us to maintain 3000' and said he did not remember clearing us to 3000'. Jfk ATIS reported a ceiling or about 3000 overcast and ILS runway 22L in use. On initial contact with final controller, no approach was specified, so we anticipated ILS 22L and briefed the procedure and set up the radios. Approach then told us to descend to 2000', turn left to 250 degree to intercept the localizer, cleared for the approach. We intercepted and started approach. The controller then called and said he had cleared us for ILS 22R. Not once had we been told to expect ILS 22R, nor were we set up for it. Being that we were still in IMC conditions, the controller's misleading directions could have led to a potentially hazardous situation. I don't know if the controller thought he had cleared us for ILS 22R or just was not listening to our readback. It was a very busy evening, but controllers should pay more attention to readbacks. In this case it would have avoided the misunderstandings and clarified what the controller wanted us to do. It is possible that he had wanted us on the ILS 22R, but mistakenly cleared us for ILS 22L, in which case more attention to readbacks would have avoided the whole thing.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TRACK DEVIATION. ACR FLT INTERCEPTED WRONG ILS APCH IN IMC.

Narrative: WHILE BEING VECTORED ILS APCH TO RWY 22L AT JFK, APCH CLRED US FOR DSCNT FROM 4000' TO 3000'. F/O (NOT FLYING) READ BACK CLRNC. DURING DSCNT THROUGH 3300', ATC ADVISED US TO MAINTAIN 3000' AND SAID HE DID NOT REMEMBER CLEARING US TO 3000'. JFK ATIS REPORTED A CEILING OR ABOUT 3000 OVCST AND ILS RWY 22L IN USE. ON INITIAL CONTACT WITH FINAL CTLR, NO APCH WAS SPECIFIED, SO WE ANTICIPATED ILS 22L AND BRIEFED THE PROC AND SET UP THE RADIOS. APCH THEN TOLD US TO DSND TO 2000', TURN LEFT TO 250 DEG TO INTERCEPT THE LOC, CLRED FOR THE APCH. WE INTERCEPTED AND STARTED APCH. THE CTLR THEN CALLED AND SAID HE HAD CLRED US FOR ILS 22R. NOT ONCE HAD WE BEEN TOLD TO EXPECT ILS 22R, NOR WERE WE SET UP FOR IT. BEING THAT WE WERE STILL IN IMC CONDITIONS, THE CTLR'S MISLEADING DIRECTIONS COULD HAVE LED TO A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SITUATION. I DON'T KNOW IF THE CTLR THOUGHT HE HAD CLRED US FOR ILS 22R OR JUST WAS NOT LISTENING TO OUR READBACK. IT WAS A VERY BUSY EVENING, BUT CTLRS SHOULD PAY MORE ATTN TO READBACKS. IN THIS CASE IT WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND CLARIFIED WHAT THE CTLR WANTED US TO DO. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT HE HAD WANTED US ON THE ILS 22R, BUT MISTAKENLY CLRED US FOR ILS 22L, IN WHICH CASE MORE ATTN TO READBACKS WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THE WHOLE THING.

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.