Narrative:

I was pilot flying and second pilot was handling communications. On approximately a 4 mile final approach for runway 9 right; after being cleared to land; we received instruction to slow down. Immediately after; he instructed us to 'turn left; left turn for spacing.' we acknowledged by repeating the instruction and turned left to the north as instructed. This instruction would make us cross the final approach for runway 9L which is tightly spaced from runway 9R. Both the pilot flying and I believed we had received the instruction because there was no traffic on final for runway 9L. We also did not see any traffic on final for runway 9L on our TCAS (this other runway 9L is handled by a different frequency which we were not monitoring). After we turned we contemplated calling for confirmation that we could cross runway 9L's approach but we were unable due to the busy frequency. Even though concerned; we to deviate from the instruction to fly north and potentially create other conflict. We continued and crossed the final approach did not want or runway 9L. Afterwards a slight left turn towards the west was made to avoid birds and seconds later corrected back to the north. At this time the controller asked us if we had made a 360. We replied we were traveling north for spacing as instructed. He incorrectly informed us that we had made a 360 and that we were supposed to be on final for runway 9R. He added that he only wanted us to go north and then back south. This was never stated in the original instruction. We made a right to the south and joined the final for runway 9R. We attempted to confirm that we were cleared to land a couple of times but the controller was at the time complaining on the busy frequency about other pilots not listening. We finally received conformation and landed without incident. We believe there was no conflict with other traffic.it is worth noting that during the incident the same controller had instructed an airplane that had called in for landing 9 miles east of the field to go north on the shoreline. He later instructed the airplane to turn right to the west. The pilot attempted to correct the controller by stating he was east of the field. Meaning that a turn to the right would not be a turn to the west but a turn to the east instead. Instead of accepting the error the controller became confrontational and repeated the instruction without correcting it. Telling the airplane that he knew he had turned him to the north; but now he wanted him to turn right to the west. Again compounding on the erroneous instruction. Similar incidents of giving pilots instructions to turn to the wrong direction were heard since we began to monitor the frequency.it is also worth noting that the area was busy with what was apparently heavy student traffic having trouble repeating and complying with instructions. This was in addition to unusually heavy traffic arriving and departing.in summary; we learned from the incident and have decided to increase our CRM communication skills. Next time we will be more insistent in receiving clarifications and expressing our concerns when given an instruction that would make us cross an active approach path to another runway. Also see other crew member's pilots report.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA pilot reported a communication breakdown and unprofessional conduct by ATC.

Narrative: I was Pilot Flying and second pilot was handling communications. On approximately a 4 mile final approach for Runway 9 right; after being cleared to land; we received instruction to slow down. Immediately after; he instructed us to 'turn left; left turn for spacing.' We acknowledged by repeating the instruction and turned left to the north as instructed. This instruction would make us cross the final approach for Runway 9L which is tightly spaced from Runway 9R. Both the Pilot Flying and I believed we had received the instruction because there was no traffic on final for Runway 9L. We also did not see any traffic on final for Runway 9L on our TCAS (this other Runway 9L is handled by a different frequency which we were not monitoring). After we turned we contemplated calling for confirmation that we could cross Runway 9L's approach but we were unable due to the busy frequency. Even though concerned; we to deviate from the instruction to fly north and potentially create other conflict. We continued and crossed the final approach did not want or Runway 9L. Afterwards a slight left turn towards the west was made to avoid birds and seconds later corrected back to the north. At this time the Controller asked us if we had made a 360. We replied we were traveling north for spacing as instructed. He incorrectly informed us that we had made a 360 and that we were supposed to be on final for Runway 9R. He added that he only wanted us to go north and then back south. This was never stated in the original instruction. We made a right to the south and joined the final for Runway 9R. We attempted to confirm that we were cleared to land a couple of times but the Controller was at the time complaining on the busy frequency about other pilots not listening. We finally received conformation and landed without incident. We believe there was no conflict with other traffic.It is worth noting that during the incident the same Controller had instructed an airplane that had called in for landing 9 miles east of the field to go north on the shoreline. He later instructed the airplane to turn right to the west. The pilot attempted to correct the Controller by stating he was east of the field. Meaning that a turn to the right would not be a turn to the west but a turn to the east instead. Instead of accepting the error the Controller became confrontational and repeated the instruction without correcting it. Telling the airplane that he knew he had turned him to the north; but now he wanted him to turn right to the west. Again compounding on the erroneous instruction. Similar incidents of giving pilots instructions to turn to the wrong direction were heard since we began to monitor the frequency.It is also worth noting that the area was busy with what was apparently heavy student traffic having trouble repeating and complying with instructions. This was in addition to unusually heavy traffic arriving and departing.In summary; we learned from the incident and have decided to increase our CRM communication skills. Next time we will be more insistent in receiving clarifications and expressing our concerns when given an instruction that would make us cross an active approach path to another runway. Also see other crew member's pilots report.

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.