Narrative:

Local visual approachs were in progress at txk. While 5-10 NM from the airport ZFW seemed confused about what traffic we were following on approach. On a clearance of direct to the airport and maintain 2500 ft MSL, we were setting up for a right base. At a 4 mi right base we were still several thousand ft AGL. Believing I had been cleared for a visual I descended 400 ft. At 2100 ft MSL we were cleared to 2000 ft MSL. Now on a 3 NM right base we were quite high. ZFW told us we were to follow an aircraft on final but they seemed unsure of its position/intention. When cleared for the visual we asked if we should execute a 360 degrees. They responded clear for straight in. We turned inbound on a 2.5 NM final. After switching to tower, tower informed of the C182 on a 1.5 NM final. Our TCASII did not show this traffic. We immediately spotted the aircraft after tower mentioned it and were told to go around. We executed an uneventful go around. 4 chain of events played out here: 1) at a 4-5 mi proximity from the airport ZFW seemed confused about what instructions to issue for us. 2) my belief that at this close proximity to the airport we were cleared for a visual and descending 400 ft below last clearance. 3) no TCASII -- apparently the C182 transponder was not on. 4) poor sequencing by ZFW, contributing to our go around.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: H25B LNDG TXK ISSUED VISUAL APCH CLRNC TO FOLLOW TFC IN THE PATTERN AND RESULTED IN GAR.

Narrative: LCL VISUAL APCHS WERE IN PROGRESS AT TXK. WHILE 5-10 NM FROM THE ARPT ZFW SEEMED CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT TFC WE WERE FOLLOWING ON APCH. ON A CLRNC OF DIRECT TO THE ARPT AND MAINTAIN 2500 FT MSL, WE WERE SETTING UP FOR A R BASE. AT A 4 MI R BASE WE WERE STILL SEVERAL THOUSAND FT AGL. BELIEVING I HAD BEEN CLRED FOR A VISUAL I DSNDED 400 FT. AT 2100 FT MSL WE WERE CLRED TO 2000 FT MSL. NOW ON A 3 NM R BASE WE WERE QUITE HIGH. ZFW TOLD US WE WERE TO FOLLOW AN ACFT ON FINAL BUT THEY SEEMED UNSURE OF ITS POS/INTENTION. WHEN CLRED FOR THE VISUAL WE ASKED IF WE SHOULD EXECUTE A 360 DEGS. THEY RESPONDED CLR FOR STRAIGHT IN. WE TURNED INBOUND ON A 2.5 NM FINAL. AFTER SWITCHING TO TWR, TWR INFORMED OF THE C182 ON A 1.5 NM FINAL. OUR TCASII DID NOT SHOW THIS TFC. WE IMMEDIATELY SPOTTED THE ACFT AFTER TWR MENTIONED IT AND WERE TOLD TO GO AROUND. WE EXECUTED AN UNEVENTFUL GAR. 4 CHAIN OF EVENTS PLAYED OUT HERE: 1) AT A 4-5 MI PROX FROM THE ARPT ZFW SEEMED CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT INSTRUCTIONS TO ISSUE FOR US. 2) MY BELIEF THAT AT THIS CLOSE PROX TO THE ARPT WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL AND DSNDING 400 FT BELOW LAST CLRNC. 3) NO TCASII -- APPARENTLY THE C182 XPONDER WAS NOT ON. 4) POOR SEQUENCING BY ZFW, CONTRIBUTING TO OUR GAR.

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.