Narrative:

We were at 5000 ft on a radar vector to intercept runway 36L localizer at tpa and descend down to 2600 ft MSL. We normally receive a clearance similar to this to cross macdill AFB at or above 2600 ft MSL and cleared for the localizer runway 36L. This is why I believe the first officer understood we were cleared below 2600 ft MSL once we were north of macdill. (English is also his second language.) when I realized he was at 2300 ft, 1 DOT high on the GS, I stopped him from descending. This is when it took me 3 xmissions to request a visual from approach. Approach asked me for my altitude, then told us 'never mind, I know what altitude you're at. You are the second one today from your company to do this, cleared for the visual runway 36L.' there was no conflict with any traffic noted visually or on our TCASII. I thought he just plain forgot about us. Had the descent been delayed any longer, we would have been out of position to land the aircraft on the designated runway. I believe the 2 main contributing factors to this slight deviation were: 1) it was almost identical to the clearance we normally receive. 2) it was not until we would have been well north (too high on the GS) before we would receive a descent clearance. This is why I feel a previous company aircraft made the same mistake.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN SF340 FLC DSNDS BELOW 2600 FT DURING THE APCH TO TPA. THE ACFT WAS ON APCH TO RWY LOC APCH 36L WHICH CROSSES MCF AFB AT 2600 FT AND PLACES IT HIGH ON THE GS.

Narrative: WE WERE AT 5000 FT ON A RADAR VECTOR TO INTERCEPT RWY 36L LOC AT TPA AND DSND DOWN TO 2600 FT MSL. WE NORMALLY RECEIVE A CLRNC SIMILAR TO THIS TO CROSS MACDILL AFB AT OR ABOVE 2600 FT MSL AND CLRED FOR THE LOC RWY 36L. THIS IS WHY I BELIEVE THE FO UNDERSTOOD WE WERE CLRED BELOW 2600 FT MSL ONCE WE WERE N OF MACDILL. (ENGLISH IS ALSO HIS SECOND LANGUAGE.) WHEN I REALIZED HE WAS AT 2300 FT, 1 DOT HIGH ON THE GS, I STOPPED HIM FROM DSNDING. THIS IS WHEN IT TOOK ME 3 XMISSIONS TO REQUEST A VISUAL FROM APCH. APCH ASKED ME FOR MY ALT, THEN TOLD US 'NEVER MIND, I KNOW WHAT ALT YOU'RE AT. YOU ARE THE SECOND ONE TODAY FROM YOUR COMPANY TO DO THIS, CLRED FOR THE VISUAL RWY 36L.' THERE WAS NO CONFLICT WITH ANY TFC NOTED VISUALLY OR ON OUR TCASII. I THOUGHT HE JUST PLAIN FORGOT ABOUT US. HAD THE DSCNT BEEN DELAYED ANY LONGER, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN OUT OF POS TO LAND THE ACFT ON THE DESIGNATED RWY. I BELIEVE THE 2 MAIN CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS SLIGHT DEV WERE: 1) IT WAS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE CLRNC WE NORMALLY RECEIVE. 2) IT WAS NOT UNTIL WE WOULD HAVE BEEN WELL N (TOO HIGH ON THE GS) BEFORE WE WOULD RECEIVE A DSCNT CLRNC. THIS IS WHY I FEEL A PREVIOUS COMPANY ACFT MADE THE SAME MISTAKE.

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.