Narrative:

Bay approach cleared us for a visual approach to runway 29 at san jose and told us to turn a 5 mi final. He pointed out company traffic for 30R and small aircraft Y traffic 'IFR on the ILS 30L.' on base we reported the 2 aircraft in sight and he again cleared us for the visual approach for 29 and told us to maintain visual contact with the small aircraft. He switched us to tower, and tower told us to position ourself between the small aircraft and the air carrier small transport. We told him we were cleared for 29, and he told us to start an immediate climb to 1000 ft and execute a go around. He told us the small aircraft was for 29. Visual contact and separation was maintained at all times, and we circled around to land without further incidence. From our position on base, it was impossible to tell which runway the small aircraft was lined up for. Approach had made it very clear several different times which runway the small aircraft was for, and which runway we were for. A miscom must have occurred between tower and approach. There was never any danger of a collision. Tower later informed us that the small aircraft had been tagged on radar for runway 29 9 mi out.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR SMT IS RESEQUENCED BY TWR AFTER BASE LEG RESULTING IN A GAR BECAUSE OF AN SMA FOR THE SAME RWY.

Narrative: BAY APCH CLRED US FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 29 AT SAN JOSE AND TOLD US TO TURN A 5 MI FINAL. HE POINTED OUT COMPANY TFC FOR 30R AND SMA Y TFC 'IFR ON THE ILS 30L.' ON BASE WE RPTED THE 2 ACFT IN SIGHT AND HE AGAIN CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL APCH FOR 29 AND TOLD US TO MAINTAIN VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE SMA. HE SWITCHED US TO TWR, AND TWR TOLD US TO POS OURSELF BTWN THE SMA AND THE ACR SMT. WE TOLD HIM WE WERE CLRED FOR 29, AND HE TOLD US TO START AN IMMEDIATE CLB TO 1000 FT AND EXECUTE A GAR. HE TOLD US THE SMA WAS FOR 29. VISUAL CONTACT AND SEPARATION WAS MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES, AND WE CIRCLED AROUND TO LAND WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENCE. FROM OUR POS ON BASE, IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL WHICH RWY THE SMA WAS LINED UP FOR. APCH HAD MADE IT VERY CLR SEVERAL DIFFERENT TIMES WHICH RWY THE SMA WAS FOR, AND WHICH RWY WE WERE FOR. A MISCOM MUST HAVE OCCURRED BTWN TWR AND APCH. THERE WAS NEVER ANY DANGER OF A COLLISION. TWR LATER INFORMED US THAT THE SMA HAD BEEN TAGGED ON RADAR FOR RWY 29 9 MI OUT.

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.