Narrative:

On descent into el salvador (CAT VOR) our WX radar indicated a line of thunderstorms north of runways 7/25. Approach control cleared us to descend to 10000 ft MSL. (We had requested and received approval for WX deviation from 13000 ft.) the runway in use was runway 25. We requested permission to intercept the VOR/DME arc to runway 25. This request was denied and approach told us to climb back up to 13000 ft and go direct to the CAT VOR. We climbed back to 13000 ft, but said that we could not turn directly to the VOR, as this would put us into the WX. We advised that from our position we had the runway in sight and we were in VMC. We requested a VMC descent from our position out over the water to pattern altitude and come back in to land on runway 25 (the field was reporting VFR). We were then cleared for this. After descent to 1300 ft we advised our position and told by approach to now maintain 4000 ft and cleared to the VOR for runway 7 ILS circle to land runway 25. Again, we told approach we were VMC, but we climbed to 4000 ft and went direct to the VOR. (We did not know why we were issued this clearance.) we again asked for a VMC descent. Approach asked if we had the field in sight. We said yes and were then cleared for a visual approach. There was obvious confusion during this entire episode. We were uncertain why approach kept issuing us different clrncs or which one we were to be cleared for! Contributing factors: non radar environment, language difficulties (not being able to understand our request for VMC approach). Corrective actions: radar! Standardization terms.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT CREW SUFFERS THROUGH A PERIOD OF CONFUSION IN ATTEMPTS TO MAKE A VISUAL APCH TO ARPT IN A WX AVOIDANCE PLAN.

Narrative: ON DSCNT INTO EL SALVADOR (CAT VOR) OUR WX RADAR INDICATED A LINE OF TSTMS N OF RWYS 7/25. APCH CTL CLRED US TO DSND TO 10000 FT MSL. (WE HAD REQUESTED AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FOR WX DEV FROM 13000 FT.) THE RWY IN USE WAS RWY 25. WE REQUESTED PERMISSION TO INTERCEPT THE VOR/DME ARC TO RWY 25. THIS REQUEST WAS DENIED AND APCH TOLD US TO CLB BACK UP TO 13000 FT AND GO DIRECT TO THE CAT VOR. WE CLBED BACK TO 13000 FT, BUT SAID THAT WE COULD NOT TURN DIRECTLY TO THE VOR, AS THIS WOULD PUT US INTO THE WX. WE ADVISED THAT FROM OUR POS WE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT AND WE WERE IN VMC. WE REQUESTED A VMC DSCNT FROM OUR POS OUT OVER THE WATER TO PATTERN ALT AND COME BACK IN TO LAND ON RWY 25 (THE FIELD WAS RPTING VFR). WE WERE THEN CLRED FOR THIS. AFTER DSCNT TO 1300 FT WE ADVISED OUR POS AND TOLD BY APCH TO NOW MAINTAIN 4000 FT AND CLRED TO THE VOR FOR RWY 7 ILS CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 25. AGAIN, WE TOLD APCH WE WERE VMC, BUT WE CLBED TO 4000 FT AND WENT DIRECT TO THE VOR. (WE DID NOT KNOW WHY WE WERE ISSUED THIS CLRNC.) WE AGAIN ASKED FOR A VMC DSCNT. APCH ASKED IF WE HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT. WE SAID YES AND WERE THEN CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH. THERE WAS OBVIOUS CONFUSION DURING THIS ENTIRE EPISODE. WE WERE UNCERTAIN WHY APCH KEPT ISSUING US DIFFERENT CLRNCS OR WHICH ONE WE WERE TO BE CLRED FOR! CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: NON RADAR ENVIRONMENT, LANGUAGE DIFFICULTIES (NOT BEING ABLE TO UNDERSTAND OUR REQUEST FOR VMC APCH). CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: RADAR! STANDARDIZATION TERMS.

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.