CL65 landing mdw is confused with ATC's circle-to-land clearance.

Attributes
ACN	585592
Time
Date	200306
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mdw.airport
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl single value : 2000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mdw.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	ils localizer & glide slope : 31c
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : multi engine
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 4000 flight time type : 2770
ASRS Report	585592
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance non adherence other other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance

Narrative:

On flight to kmdw we had a discrepancy with the tower. The airport was operating ILS runway 31C circle to land runway 22L. On check in with tower we were joined up on the ILS runway 31C outside runtz intersection. Tower instructed us to continue 'inbound,' descend to 2000 ft or lower at our discretion. Both my first officer and I felt the instruction to continue inbound was intended to get us closer in before turning downwind for runway 22L. At about 3 mi out we tried to get on with tower, but did not succeed. At about 1 mi out we did and asked if we could turn downwind. They replied with 'fly overhead and make right traffic.' landing was uneventful. I feel the instruction to continue inbound was vague and confusing. 'Inbound' to us meant straight to the airport. On downwind you are no longer inbound. Other aircraft that day were being told to circle east at their discretion, or # 2 circle for runway 22L. I believe the tower controller may have been trying to get us in closer to make room for departures and then forgot us. Obviously, the problem was a result of confusion over the instruction to continue inbound, and that instruction should not be used if tower wants an aircraft to circle.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL65 LNDG MDW IS CONFUSED WITH ATC'S CIRCLE-TO-LAND CLRNC.

Narrative: ON FLT TO KMDW WE HAD A DISCREPANCY WITH THE TWR. THE ARPT WAS OPERATING ILS RWY 31C CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 22L. ON CHK IN WITH TWR WE WERE JOINED UP ON THE ILS RWY 31C OUTSIDE RUNTZ INTXN. TWR INSTRUCTED US TO CONTINUE 'INBOUND,' DSND TO 2000 FT OR LOWER AT OUR DISCRETION. BOTH MY FO AND I FELT THE INSTRUCTION TO CONTINUE INBOUND WAS INTENDED TO GET US CLOSER IN BEFORE TURNING DOWNWIND FOR RWY 22L. AT ABOUT 3 MI OUT WE TRIED TO GET ON WITH TWR, BUT DID NOT SUCCEED. AT ABOUT 1 MI OUT WE DID AND ASKED IF WE COULD TURN DOWNWIND. THEY REPLIED WITH 'FLY OVERHEAD AND MAKE R TFC.' LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. I FEEL THE INSTRUCTION TO CONTINUE INBOUND WAS VAGUE AND CONFUSING. 'INBOUND' TO US MEANT STRAIGHT TO THE ARPT. ON DOWNWIND YOU ARE NO LONGER INBOUND. OTHER ACFT THAT DAY WERE BEING TOLD TO CIRCLE E AT THEIR DISCRETION, OR # 2 CIRCLE FOR RWY 22L. I BELIEVE THE TWR CTLR MAY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET US IN CLOSER TO MAKE ROOM FOR DEPS AND THEN FORGOT US. OBVIOUSLY, THE PROB WAS A RESULT OF CONFUSION OVER THE INSTRUCTION TO CONTINUE INBOUND, AND THAT INSTRUCTION SHOULD NOT BE USED IF TWR WANTS AN ACFT TO CIRCLE.

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.