Narrative:

Aircraft in ord approach airspace, followed ATC instructions to turn to 270 heading in preparation for the visual approach to runway 4R ord. At 7000 ft, ATC said to hurry down to 4000 ft, and he would slow us later. Meanwhile, the frequency was busy, and xmissions were being blocked. This seemed to agitate the controller, based on some of his comments and his tone of voice. On our way down, we heard him clear us to turn to heading 320 degrees, and we were quite sure that we read this 320 degrees back to him. In the turn, he asked us our heading. We told him we were through 310 degrees on our way to 320 degree heading. Meanwhile, we had a TCASII TA on traffic about 500 ft below at 10 O'clock position. First officer got a visual on the traffic. ATC called the traffic to us and said to stop at whatever altitude we were at, and stop the turn. He then made a comment that he had cleared us to heading 220 degrees, not 320 degrees. We are quite sure we read back the clearance to say 320 degree heading. He then said we were being set up for a left traffic pattern to runway 4R, and cleared us to turn left to 140 degree heading, and descend to 4000 ft. Then he further cleared us to heading 070 degrees to set up to intercept the final. As we were in the turn, he came back again and asked us what heading we were through. We replied, and he made a comment something to the effect of come on guys, fly the airplane. And further cleared us to heading 60 and speed 190 KTS. We had the airport in sight, and he cleared us for the approach. He did not swap us to the tower frequency at the marker. Inside the marker, a different controller came on and switched us to tower. We landed without incident. Throughout this entire approach, we followed the controller's instructions, and read back his clrncs as he gave them to us. He seemed tense and very quick to make non-standard comments about blocked xmissions and our ability to fly the airplane. Our turn to the 320 degree heading was a normal and usual turn for this visual approach on the right downwind to runway 4R, so we were actually expecting the 320 degree turn. The controller claims he cleared us to a 220 degree heading, which is not so usual for the 'slam dunk' visual approach that we thought we were being set up for. In any event, whether he cleared us to 220 degree heading or 320 degree heading, we are certain we read back 320 degree heading, and he should have caught the fact that the readback was in error. His tone of voice gave me the impression that he was agitated with the busy frequency. The WX was VFR, and we had all the traffic in sight. We followed his instructions as best as we could, as we heard him issue them and read back everything. I don't think a traffic conflict was an issue, because we saw the TA traffic visually. The fact that a new controller came on the frequency after we were not switched to the tower frequency indicated to me that this particular controller may have been the one that was confused, not us.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMJ FLT CREW EXPERIENCED A TENSE AND UNPROFESSIONAL CTLR AT ORD.

Narrative: ACFT IN ORD APCH AIRSPACE, FOLLOWED ATC INSTRUCTIONS TO TURN TO 270 HDG IN PREPARATION FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 4R ORD. AT 7000 FT, ATC SAID TO HURRY DOWN TO 4000 FT, AND HE WOULD SLOW US LATER. MEANWHILE, THE FREQ WAS BUSY, AND XMISSIONS WERE BEING BLOCKED. THIS SEEMED TO AGITATE THE CTLR, BASED ON SOME OF HIS COMMENTS AND HIS TONE OF VOICE. ON OUR WAY DOWN, WE HEARD HIM CLR US TO TURN TO HDG 320 DEGS, AND WE WERE QUITE SURE THAT WE READ THIS 320 DEGS BACK TO HIM. IN THE TURN, HE ASKED US OUR HDG. WE TOLD HIM WE WERE THROUGH 310 DEGS ON OUR WAY TO 320 DEG HDG. MEANWHILE, WE HAD A TCASII TA ON TFC ABOUT 500 FT BELOW AT 10 O'CLOCK POS. FO GOT A VISUAL ON THE TFC. ATC CALLED THE TFC TO US AND SAID TO STOP AT WHATEVER ALT WE WERE AT, AND STOP THE TURN. HE THEN MADE A COMMENT THAT HE HAD CLRED US TO HDG 220 DEGS, NOT 320 DEGS. WE ARE QUITE SURE WE READ BACK THE CLRNC TO SAY 320 DEG HDG. HE THEN SAID WE WERE BEING SET UP FOR A L TFC PATTERN TO RWY 4R, AND CLRED US TO TURN L TO 140 DEG HDG, AND DSND TO 4000 FT. THEN HE FURTHER CLRED US TO HDG 070 DEGS TO SET UP TO INTERCEPT THE FINAL. AS WE WERE IN THE TURN, HE CAME BACK AGAIN AND ASKED US WHAT HDG WE WERE THROUGH. WE REPLIED, AND HE MADE A COMMENT SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF COME ON GUYS, FLY THE AIRPLANE. AND FURTHER CLRED US TO HDG 60 AND SPD 190 KTS. WE HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT, AND HE CLRED US FOR THE APCH. HE DID NOT SWAP US TO THE TWR FREQ AT THE MARKER. INSIDE THE MARKER, A DIFFERENT CTLR CAME ON AND SWITCHED US TO TWR. WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE APCH, WE FOLLOWED THE CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS, AND READ BACK HIS CLRNCS AS HE GAVE THEM TO US. HE SEEMED TENSE AND VERY QUICK TO MAKE NON-STANDARD COMMENTS ABOUT BLOCKED XMISSIONS AND OUR ABILITY TO FLY THE AIRPLANE. OUR TURN TO THE 320 DEG HDG WAS A NORMAL AND USUAL TURN FOR THIS VISUAL APCH ON THE R DOWNWIND TO RWY 4R, SO WE WERE ACTUALLY EXPECTING THE 320 DEG TURN. THE CTLR CLAIMS HE CLRED US TO A 220 DEG HDG, WHICH IS NOT SO USUAL FOR THE 'SLAM DUNK' VISUAL APCH THAT WE THOUGHT WE WERE BEING SET UP FOR. IN ANY EVENT, WHETHER HE CLRED US TO 220 DEG HDG OR 320 DEG HDG, WE ARE CERTAIN WE READ BACK 320 DEG HDG, AND HE SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THE FACT THAT THE READBACK WAS IN ERROR. HIS TONE OF VOICE GAVE ME THE IMPRESSION THAT HE WAS AGITATED WITH THE BUSY FREQ. THE WX WAS VFR, AND WE HAD ALL THE TFC IN SIGHT. WE FOLLOWED HIS INSTRUCTIONS AS BEST AS WE COULD, AS WE HEARD HIM ISSUE THEM AND READ BACK EVERYTHING. I DON'T THINK A TFC CONFLICT WAS AN ISSUE, BECAUSE WE SAW THE TA TFC VISUALLY. THE FACT THAT A NEW CTLR CAME ON THE FREQ AFTER WE WERE NOT SWITCHED TO THE TWR FREQ INDICATED TO ME THAT THIS PARTICULAR CTLR MAY HAVE BEEN THE ONE THAT WAS CONFUSED, NOT US.

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.