Narrative:

While cleared for the approach and on final into runway 16R sacramento, ca, on 6/90 our flight was just outside the OM (approximately 1 mi); I requested a 360 degree right turn I order to lose a little altitude. This request was denied due to following traffic. We were then given a traffic advisory of another aircraft in the pattern at about our 2 O'clock position, I called the traffic in sight and was immediately given a heading of 250 degree which I refused because I perceived it would have put us on a direct collision course with the traffic. (I later was informed there was also an altitude clearance with the heading of 2000') I did not acknowledge that in the readback but would not have accepted that change as it would have descended us even closer than just the heading. After refusing the course change we were directed to continue the approach. I kept the other aircraft under observation and observed it was now clearly closing on a perpendicular course, shortly after passing the OM I turned left off the extended centerline and increased the descent rate. This was only a precautionary move because I felt the other aircraft had affected my 'comfort zone'. (About a 1000' horizontal sep). I believe this was soley a breakdown of communication between the other aircraft and what the tower thought his intentions were.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TWO ACFT COME IN CLOSE PROX.

Narrative: WHILE CLRED FOR THE APCH AND ON FINAL INTO RWY 16R SACRAMENTO, CA, ON 6/90 OUR FLT WAS JUST OUTSIDE THE OM (APPROX 1 MI); I REQUESTED A 360 DEG R TURN I ORDER TO LOSE A LITTLE ALT. THIS REQUEST WAS DENIED DUE TO FOLLOWING TFC. WE WERE THEN GIVEN A TFC ADVISORY OF ANOTHER ACFT IN THE PATTERN AT ABOUT OUR 2 O'CLOCK POS, I CALLED THE TFC IN SIGHT AND WAS IMMEDIATELY GIVEN A HDG OF 250 DEG WHICH I REFUSED BECAUSE I PERCEIVED IT WOULD HAVE PUT US ON A DIRECT COLLISION COURSE WITH THE TFC. (I LATER WAS INFORMED THERE WAS ALSO AN ALT CLRNC WITH THE HDG OF 2000') I DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IN THE READBACK BUT WOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THAT CHANGE AS IT WOULD HAVE DSNDED US EVEN CLOSER THAN JUST THE HDG. AFTER REFUSING THE COURSE CHANGE WE WERE DIRECTED TO CONTINUE THE APCH. I KEPT THE OTHER ACFT UNDER OBSERVATION AND OBSERVED IT WAS NOW CLRLY CLOSING ON A PERPENDICULAR COURSE, SHORTLY AFTER PASSING THE OM I TURNED L OFF THE EXTENDED CTRLINE AND INCREASED THE DSNT RATE. THIS WAS ONLY A PRECAUTIONARY MOVE BECAUSE I FELT THE OTHER ACFT HAD AFFECTED MY 'COMFORT ZONE'. (ABOUT A 1000' HORIZ SEP). I BELIEVE THIS WAS SOLEY A BREAKDOWN OF COM BTWN THE OTHER ACFT AND WHAT THE TWR THOUGHT HIS INTENTIONS WERE.

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.