Narrative:

45 NM southeast of ind at 4000 ft, sdf approach handed off to ZID. After initial contact, I questioned controller which approach to expect, runway 23L or runway 23R. He verified runway 23R since I was inbound to the FBO adjacent the runway 23R. After a couple of frequency changes which each included verification of runway 23R, I was switched over to final approach control (at this time I was east and north of ind) who issued approach clearance (maintain altitude till established, fly heading 240 degrees till established, keep speed up to 150 KIAS until marker, cleared ILS runway 23R approach). I read this back and the controller acknowledged it was correct and advised me to switch to tower on 120.9. I contacted tower about 10 NM from the threshold of runway 23R established on the localizer. He asked me to verify I was on runway 23L. I advised him I was established on runway 23R (110.9 localizer) as advised by approach control. He said stand by while he checked it out. He came back on and asked me to switch to runway 23L because he had faster traffic to follow (B-737) on runway 23R. I said ok, switched to runway 23L, advised tower I was established, and asked what speed he needed if any particular. I then landed without further confusion. On rollout, tower thanked me for my help and gave me ground frequency and turnoff instructions. Obviously there was some confusion and misunderstanding regarding the approach clearance between myself, approach control and/or tower. Perhaps more clarity would have been in order to prevent the misunderstandings that obviously existed between at least 2 of us. I could have misinterpreted the instructions but I believe I executed the approach as I read it back. Fortunately in this case, everything worked out without incident.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RWY CHANGE ASSIGNMENT MADE WHILE RPTR'S ACFT WAS ON FINAL APCH.

Narrative: 45 NM SE OF IND AT 4000 FT, SDF APCH HANDED OFF TO ZID. AFTER INITIAL CONTACT, I QUESTIONED CTLR WHICH APCH TO EXPECT, RWY 23L OR RWY 23R. HE VERIFIED RWY 23R SINCE I WAS INBOUND TO THE FBO ADJACENT THE RWY 23R. AFTER A COUPLE OF FREQ CHANGES WHICH EACH INCLUDED VERIFICATION OF RWY 23R, I WAS SWITCHED OVER TO FINAL APCH CTL (AT THIS TIME I WAS E AND N OF IND) WHO ISSUED APCH CLRNC (MAINTAIN ALT TILL ESTABLISHED, FLY HDG 240 DEGS TILL ESTABLISHED, KEEP SPD UP TO 150 KIAS UNTIL MARKER, CLRED ILS RWY 23R APCH). I READ THIS BACK AND THE CTLR ACKNOWLEDGED IT WAS CORRECT AND ADVISED ME TO SWITCH TO TWR ON 120.9. I CONTACTED TWR ABOUT 10 NM FROM THE THRESHOLD OF RWY 23R ESTABLISHED ON THE LOC. HE ASKED ME TO VERIFY I WAS ON RWY 23L. I ADVISED HIM I WAS ESTABLISHED ON RWY 23R (110.9 LOC) AS ADVISED BY APCH CTL. HE SAID STAND BY WHILE HE CHKED IT OUT. HE CAME BACK ON AND ASKED ME TO SWITCH TO RWY 23L BECAUSE HE HAD FASTER TFC TO FOLLOW (B-737) ON RWY 23R. I SAID OK, SWITCHED TO RWY 23L, ADVISED TWR I WAS ESTABLISHED, AND ASKED WHAT SPD HE NEEDED IF ANY PARTICULAR. I THEN LANDED WITHOUT FURTHER CONFUSION. ON ROLLOUT, TWR THANKED ME FOR MY HELP AND GAVE ME GND FREQ AND TURNOFF INSTRUCTIONS. OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AND MISUNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE APCH CLRNC BTWN MYSELF, APCH CTL AND/OR TWR. PERHAPS MORE CLARITY WOULD HAVE BEEN IN ORDER TO PREVENT THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS THAT OBVIOUSLY EXISTED BTWN AT LEAST 2 OF US. I COULD HAVE MISINTERPRETED THE INSTRUCTIONS BUT I BELIEVE I EXECUTED THE APCH AS I READ IT BACK. FORTUNATELY IN THIS CASE, EVERYTHING WORKED OUT WITHOUT INCIDENT.

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.