Narrative:

While on an IFR flight plan from esn to isp, being handled by ny approach, radar vectors for ILS 6 (isp) following the controllers last instruction 3000 ft, heading 030 intercept localizer. After intercepting the localizer and beginning descent (in marginal VFR in haze) another controller issued an instruction for an immediate right turn to a heading of 180 degrees which was performed. During the approach my passenger (also a rated pilot) observed an small aircraft type of aircraft crossing the localizer and called out traffic which we both had in sight. When I inquired (to the first controller) 'who' issued the instruction for the turn to 180 she was unable to reply and the second controller came back and said 'I did' in a booming voice with no explanation. It was clear that a certain amount of confusion existed (on the part of the controllers) as to the position of our 2 aircraft. I feel that my aircraft, on the approach, within 2 mi of the OM, and on an IFR flight plan, was inadvertently placed on a conflicting course with another aircraft crossing the localizer (for some unknown purpose) by possibly a trainee controller, and then had to divert due to the inattn of the supervisor.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA BEING TURNED ONTO FINAL APCH IFR IS ISSUED A VECTOR TO ALLOW ANOTHER ACFT TO PASS. PLT FEELS CTLR CONFUSION AT FAULT.

Narrative: WHILE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM ESN TO ISP, BEING HANDLED BY NY APCH, RADAR VECTORS FOR ILS 6 (ISP) FOLLOWING THE CTLRS LAST INSTRUCTION 3000 FT, HDG 030 INTERCEPT LOC. AFTER INTERCEPTING THE LOC AND BEGINNING DSCNT (IN MARGINAL VFR IN HAZE) ANOTHER CTLR ISSUED AN INSTRUCTION FOR AN IMMEDIATE R TURN TO A HDG OF 180 DEGS WHICH WAS PERFORMED. DURING THE APCH MY PAX (ALSO A RATED PLT) OBSERVED AN SMA TYPE OF ACFT XING THE LOC AND CALLED OUT TFC WHICH WE BOTH HAD IN SIGHT. WHEN I INQUIRED (TO THE FIRST CTLR) 'WHO' ISSUED THE INSTRUCTION FOR THE TURN TO 180 SHE WAS UNABLE TO REPLY AND THE SECOND CTLR CAME BACK AND SAID 'I DID' IN A BOOMING VOICE WITH NO EXPLANATION. IT WAS CLR THAT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF CONFUSION EXISTED (ON THE PART OF THE CTLRS) AS TO THE POS OF OUR 2 ACFT. I FEEL THAT MY ACFT, ON THE APCH, WITHIN 2 MI OF THE OM, AND ON AN IFR FLT PLAN, WAS INADVERTENTLY PLACED ON A CONFLICTING COURSE WITH ANOTHER ACFT XING THE LOC (FOR SOME UNKNOWN PURPOSE) BY POSSIBLY A TRAINEE CTLR, AND THEN HAD TO DIVERT DUE TO THE INATTN OF THE SUPVR.

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.