Narrative:

We were at 2500 ft on a base leg heading of 270 degree for landing on runway 36L at cvg. We were just below the bases, reluctant to call for a visual. When passing through the approach course I called approach control twice to remind him of our position. He finally reacted, startled, and told us to turn to a heading of 030 degrees to intercept the approach course. Bad idea. I requested a 270 degree turn to the left to reintercept the approach course outside the FAF. No response. I called 3 times, then told my first officer to make the turn anyway. The controller finally came back on, upset that we didn't turn to 030 degrees, which would have taken us past the airport before reintercepting, a stupid vector. In retrospect, we should have taken the crummy vector. Although it was clear below the overcast, we could have encountered someone descending out of it by turning back out.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HDG DEV.

Narrative: WE WERE AT 2500 FT ON A BASE LEG HDG OF 270 DEG FOR LNDG ON RWY 36L AT CVG. WE WERE JUST BELOW THE BASES, RELUCTANT TO CALL FOR A VISUAL. WHEN PASSING THROUGH THE APCH COURSE I CALLED APCH CTL TWICE TO REMIND HIM OF OUR POS. HE FINALLY REACTED, STARTLED, AND TOLD US TO TURN TO A HDG OF 030 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE APCH COURSE. BAD IDEA. I REQUESTED A 270 DEG TURN TO THE L TO REINTERCEPT THE APCH COURSE OUTSIDE THE FAF. NO RESPONSE. I CALLED 3 TIMES, THEN TOLD MY FO TO MAKE THE TURN ANYWAY. THE CTLR FINALLY CAME BACK ON, UPSET THAT WE DIDN'T TURN TO 030 DEGS, WHICH WOULD HAVE TAKEN US PAST THE ARPT BEFORE REINTERCEPTING, A STUPID VECTOR. IN RETROSPECT, WE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN THE CRUMMY VECTOR. ALTHOUGH IT WAS CLR BELOW THE OVCST, WE COULD HAVE ENCOUNTERED SOMEONE DSNDING OUT OF IT BY TURNING BACK 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.