BE36 landing mhr experienced confusion with ATC instruction.

Attributes
ACN	579537
Time
Date	200304
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mhr.airport
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl single value : 2700
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : nct.tracon
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Bonanza 36
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 22r
Flight Phase	descent : intermediate altitude descent : approach
Route In Use	arrival : on vectors
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : private pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 410 flight time type : 97
ASRS Report	579537
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude altitude deviation : overshoot inflight encounter : weather non adherence : clearance
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance flight crew : exited adverse environment
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance Weather ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

After switching frequencys to approach, the controller asked what approach I wanted, and what my intentions were. I replied that, because I was above the cloud deck, I would like the ILS runway 22R approach to a full stop landing. The controller continued me on a previously assigned radar vector of 340 degrees, and requested I descend and maintain 3000 ft. After breaking through the base of clouds at approximately 4000 ft, I informed the controller that I was below the clouds and had the airport in sight. I was then assigned a new heading, with a comment something like, 'turn left, heading of 310 degrees to join the traffic pattern for mather airport.' I was in VMC and had the impression from the controller's comment about joining the traffic pattern that I was cleared for a visual approach to mather. I did not, however, hear the magic words, 'cleared for the visual approach, mather airport,' until after the controller questioned my altitude. I replied '2700 ft.' I did not think I still had the altitude restr, but apparently that was the controller's intention, as he clarified on frequency. Instead, I had been continuing a 500 FPM VFR descent into mather. When I replied that I would correct my altitude to 3000 ft, the controller replied that he was ready to clear me for the visual anyway. I found the language, 'to join the traffic pattern' misleading. In the context of routine IFR flight, I receive radar vectors to 'join' victor xyz. The implication is that I am to fly the assigned heading to that airway and then continue flight on the airway. In my mind, getting a vector in VMC to join the traffic pattern at mather meant I should continue on the assigned heading and join the traffic pattern at 1000 ft. I also found the controller's apparent desire to avoid an ILS approach compromised safety of flight. I am not familiar with the area, making identify of the field with low ceilings difficult. If I had been given vectors to join the ILS runway 22R approach, we would not have had this confusion.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE36 LNDG MHR EXPERIENCED CONFUSION WITH ATC INSTRUCTION.

Narrative: AFTER SWITCHING FREQS TO APCH, THE CTLR ASKED WHAT APCH I WANTED, AND WHAT MY INTENTIONS WERE. I REPLIED THAT, BECAUSE I WAS ABOVE THE CLOUD DECK, I WOULD LIKE THE ILS RWY 22R APCH TO A FULL STOP LNDG. THE CTLR CONTINUED ME ON A PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED RADAR VECTOR OF 340 DEGS, AND REQUESTED I DSND AND MAINTAIN 3000 FT. AFTER BREAKING THROUGH THE BASE OF CLOUDS AT APPROX 4000 FT, I INFORMED THE CTLR THAT I WAS BELOW THE CLOUDS AND HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT. I WAS THEN ASSIGNED A NEW HDG, WITH A COMMENT SOMETHING LIKE, 'TURN L, HDG OF 310 DEGS TO JOIN THE TFC PATTERN FOR MATHER ARPT.' I WAS IN VMC AND HAD THE IMPRESSION FROM THE CTLR'S COMMENT ABOUT JOINING THE TFC PATTERN THAT I WAS CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO MATHER. I DID NOT, HOWEVER, HEAR THE MAGIC WORDS, 'CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH, MATHER ARPT,' UNTIL AFTER THE CTLR QUESTIONED MY ALT. I REPLIED '2700 FT.' I DID NOT THINK I STILL HAD THE ALT RESTR, BUT APPARENTLY THAT WAS THE CTLR'S INTENTION, AS HE CLARIFIED ON FREQ. INSTEAD, I HAD BEEN CONTINUING A 500 FPM VFR DSCNT INTO MATHER. WHEN I REPLIED THAT I WOULD CORRECT MY ALT TO 3000 FT, THE CTLR REPLIED THAT HE WAS READY TO CLR ME FOR THE VISUAL ANYWAY. I FOUND THE LANGUAGE, 'TO JOIN THE TFC PATTERN' MISLEADING. IN THE CONTEXT OF ROUTINE IFR FLT, I RECEIVE RADAR VECTORS TO 'JOIN' VICTOR XYZ. THE IMPLICATION IS THAT I AM TO FLY THE ASSIGNED HDG TO THAT AIRWAY AND THEN CONTINUE FLT ON THE AIRWAY. IN MY MIND, GETTING A VECTOR IN VMC TO JOIN THE TFC PATTERN AT MATHER MEANT I SHOULD CONTINUE ON THE ASSIGNED HDG AND JOIN THE TFC PATTERN AT 1000 FT. I ALSO FOUND THE CTLR'S APPARENT DESIRE TO AVOID AN ILS APCH COMPROMISED SAFETY OF FLT. I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, MAKING IDENT OF THE FIELD WITH LOW CEILINGS DIFFICULT. IF I HAD BEEN GIVEN VECTORS TO JOIN THE ILS RWY 22R APCH, WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD THIS CONFUSION.

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.