Narrative:

I was returning from the southwest with my wife (a student pilot) who was talking and communicating with ATC as I flew and watched for traffic, which was heavy at that time. ATC vectored us to a heading of 310 degrees and advised us of other traffic near us and someone overtaking us from the right. A few mins later we were cleared as #3 for the right base for runway 17 and the traffic we were following was at our 12 O'clock position and 2 mi. We spotted what we thought to be the traffic and started in a northeast direction. About 15 seconds later, ATC queried our direction. We told her northeast and she responded that we were supposed to be on 310 degree heading and make an immediate turn to 270 degrees and follow that traffic. We spotted a plane heading north with no other visible traffic and responded 'traffic in sight.' we were then instructed to make an immediate emergency climb and the traffic we were following was not the plane ATC wanted us to follow. We were then instructed to fly heading 090 degrees and contact tower. We did, and were told to land 230 degrees, not 170 degrees. There was a lot of confusion on the radios. ATC was issuing a lot of clrncs very rapidly. Some people would not respond. ATC was getting stepped on and the ground lights and strobes of the city at dusk made identing targets very difficult. I think the extra workload on ATC allowed this situation to develop as well as the confusion created in the air. We were having a difficult time getting a break on the radio to question ATC. Additional controller and radio frequency could have reduced this confusion and potential problem.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 PLT FOLLOWED THE WRONG TFC POINTED OUT BY ATC AT AZO, TWICE.

Narrative: I WAS RETURNING FROM THE SW WITH MY WIFE (A STUDENT PLT) WHO WAS TALKING AND COMMUNICATING WITH ATC AS I FLEW AND WATCHED FOR TFC, WHICH WAS HVY AT THAT TIME. ATC VECTORED US TO A HDG OF 310 DEGS AND ADVISED US OF OTHER TFC NEAR US AND SOMEONE OVERTAKING US FROM THE R. A FEW MINS LATER WE WERE CLRED AS #3 FOR THE R BASE FOR RWY 17 AND THE TFC WE WERE FOLLOWING WAS AT OUR 12 O'CLOCK POS AND 2 MI. WE SPOTTED WHAT WE THOUGHT TO BE THE TFC AND STARTED IN A NE DIRECTION. ABOUT 15 SECONDS LATER, ATC QUERIED OUR DIRECTION. WE TOLD HER NE AND SHE RESPONDED THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE ON 310 DEG HDG AND MAKE AN IMMEDIATE TURN TO 270 DEGS AND FOLLOW THAT TFC. WE SPOTTED A PLANE HDG N WITH NO OTHER VISIBLE TFC AND RESPONDED 'TFC IN SIGHT.' WE WERE THEN INSTRUCTED TO MAKE AN IMMEDIATE EMER CLB AND THE TFC WE WERE FOLLOWING WAS NOT THE PLANE ATC WANTED US TO FOLLOW. WE WERE THEN INSTRUCTED TO FLY HDG 090 DEGS AND CONTACT TWR. WE DID, AND WERE TOLD TO LAND 230 DEGS, NOT 170 DEGS. THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION ON THE RADIOS. ATC WAS ISSUING A LOT OF CLRNCS VERY RAPIDLY. SOME PEOPLE WOULD NOT RESPOND. ATC WAS GETTING STEPPED ON AND THE GND LIGHTS AND STROBES OF THE CITY AT DUSK MADE IDENTING TARGETS VERY DIFFICULT. I THINK THE EXTRA WORKLOAD ON ATC ALLOWED THIS SIT TO DEVELOP AS WELL AS THE CONFUSION CREATED IN THE AIR. WE WERE HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING A BREAK ON THE RADIO TO QUESTION ATC. ADDITIONAL CTLR AND RADIO FREQ COULD HAVE REDUCED THIS CONFUSION AND POTENTIAL PROB.

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.