Narrative:

On sunday I flew from addison airport in the dallas area to houston hobby. Before departing ads I requested VFR flight following into the hobby airport hou. Approximately 5 mi from the houston class B airspace I was told to remain clear of the class B airspace. I made a turn to heading 270 degrees and remained clear of the class B as per ATC request. I was told by ATC to 'stand by.' after not hearing back from ATC for a considerable amount of time I called again and requested service to hobby as per my VFR flight following request. Again I was told to 'stand by' and approximately 5 mins later had still not heard back from ATC. On my third call to ATC I told them that I was new to the area and that I was becoming unsure of my position? I finally received vectors and class B clearance to hobby airport. Approximately 5 mi from the airport ATC requested that I make a tight 1 mi left base leg for runway 4. I found this to be an unusual request since I had made it clear to ATC that I was new to the area. I did nevertheless confirm the request. Upon nearing the final approach path to runway 4 I contacted hobby tower and was cleared to land on runway 4. My very next transmission to tower was that I was new to the area and I needed confirmation that I was indeed on a correct base leg for runway 4. The reason for this request was that upon getting a visual of all the different runways at hobby (6 different runways) I felt a little unsure of my position and I did not want to take any chances as to whether I was indeed aligning with the correct runway. I received 'no response' from hobby tower? And after several attempts to make contact realized that I must be having a problem with my radio? During the process of problem solving and switching to my second radio I realized that I had passed the final approach path for runway 4. Since I had already been cleared to land I made a slow right turn back to the final for runway 4. About 3/4 way through my turn I resolved my communication issue by dialing in tower frequency on my second communication radio. After reestablishing communications I advised tower that I had runway 4 in sight and I had another aircraft in front of me and was now #2 for landing. Tower confirmed I was #2 for landing and I was cleared to land. Tower informed me that evasive action was taken through communication by tower and the other aircraft on final approach. This was done in order to prevent a conflict between myself and the aircraft on final approach. Upon discussing this situation with an ATC supervisor on the ground; I was told by him that a potentially serious situation was avoided and he told me that I should be more prepared when coming into a new area especially a large airport like hou. I also told the ATC supervisor that I felt disappointed by the ATC service that I had received as a VFR pilot that was in the system on flight following and that I was new to the area and had made that clear to ATC. He told me that they had got unusually busy for a sunday morning and the push lasted approximately 1 hour. The request by ATC to keep a tight base leg to runway 4 together with my radio failure were contributing factors towards my deviation from a normal procedure approach to land. As a VFR pilot into the hou area I felt that I did not receive the attention that I deserved. Especially since I had made it clear that I was in unfamiliar territory. I feel that in order to increase the level of safety standards that closer attention should be paid to VFR pilots flying in to larger airports.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: M20 PLT OVERSHOOTS RWY 4 AT HOU WHILE HAVING COM PROBS; THIS RESULTS IN EVASIVE ACTION BEING TAKEN TO AVOID A CONFLICT.

Narrative: ON SUNDAY I FLEW FROM ADDISON ARPT IN THE DALLAS AREA TO HOUSTON HOBBY. BEFORE DEPARTING ADS I REQUESTED VFR FLT FOLLOWING INTO THE HOBBY ARPT HOU. APPROX 5 MI FROM THE HOUSTON CLASS B AIRSPACE I WAS TOLD TO REMAIN CLR OF THE CLASS B AIRSPACE. I MADE A TURN TO HDG 270 DEGS AND REMAINED CLR OF THE CLASS B AS PER ATC REQUEST. I WAS TOLD BY ATC TO 'STAND BY.' AFTER NOT HEARING BACK FROM ATC FOR A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME I CALLED AGAIN AND REQUESTED SVC TO HOBBY AS PER MY VFR FLT FOLLOWING REQUEST. AGAIN I WAS TOLD TO 'STAND BY' AND APPROX 5 MINS LATER HAD STILL NOT HEARD BACK FROM ATC. ON MY THIRD CALL TO ATC I TOLD THEM THAT I WAS NEW TO THE AREA AND THAT I WAS BECOMING UNSURE OF MY POS? I FINALLY RECEIVED VECTORS AND CLASS B CLRNC TO HOBBY ARPT. APPROX 5 MI FROM THE ARPT ATC REQUESTED THAT I MAKE A TIGHT 1 MI L BASE LEG FOR RWY 4. I FOUND THIS TO BE AN UNUSUAL REQUEST SINCE I HAD MADE IT CLR TO ATC THAT I WAS NEW TO THE AREA. I DID NEVERTHELESS CONFIRM THE REQUEST. UPON NEARING THE FINAL APCH PATH TO RWY 4 I CONTACTED HOBBY TWR AND WAS CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 4. MY VERY NEXT XMISSION TO TWR WAS THAT I WAS NEW TO THE AREA AND I NEEDED CONFIRMATION THAT I WAS INDEED ON A CORRECT BASE LEG FOR RWY 4. THE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST WAS THAT UPON GETTING A VISUAL OF ALL THE DIFFERENT RWYS AT HOBBY (6 DIFFERENT RWYS) I FELT A LITTLE UNSURE OF MY POS AND I DID NOT WANT TO TAKE ANY CHANCES AS TO WHETHER I WAS INDEED ALIGNING WITH THE CORRECT RWY. I RECEIVED 'NO RESPONSE' FROM HOBBY TWR? AND AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CONTACT REALIZED THAT I MUST BE HAVING A PROB WITH MY RADIO? DURING THE PROCESS OF PROB SOLVING AND SWITCHING TO MY SECOND RADIO I REALIZED THAT I HAD PASSED THE FINAL APCH PATH FOR RWY 4. SINCE I HAD ALREADY BEEN CLRED TO LAND I MADE A SLOW R TURN BACK TO THE FINAL FOR RWY 4. ABOUT 3/4 WAY THROUGH MY TURN I RESOLVED MY COM ISSUE BY DIALING IN TWR FREQ ON MY SECOND COM RADIO. AFTER REESTABLISHING COMS I ADVISED TWR THAT I HAD RWY 4 IN SIGHT AND I HAD ANOTHER ACFT IN FRONT OF ME AND WAS NOW #2 FOR LNDG. TWR CONFIRMED I WAS #2 FOR LNDG AND I WAS CLRED TO LAND. TWR INFORMED ME THAT EVASIVE ACTION WAS TAKEN THROUGH COM BY TWR AND THE OTHER ACFT ON FINAL APCH. THIS WAS DONE IN ORDER TO PREVENT A CONFLICT BTWN MYSELF AND THE ACFT ON FINAL APCH. UPON DISCUSSING THIS SITUATION WITH AN ATC SUPVR ON THE GND; I WAS TOLD BY HIM THAT A POTENTIALLY SERIOUS SITUATION WAS AVOIDED AND HE TOLD ME THAT I SHOULD BE MORE PREPARED WHEN COMING INTO A NEW AREA ESPECIALLY A LARGE ARPT LIKE HOU. I ALSO TOLD THE ATC SUPVR THAT I FELT DISAPPOINTED BY THE ATC SVC THAT I HAD RECEIVED AS A VFR PLT THAT WAS IN THE SYS ON FLT FOLLOWING AND THAT I WAS NEW TO THE AREA AND HAD MADE THAT CLR TO ATC. HE TOLD ME THAT THEY HAD GOT UNUSUALLY BUSY FOR A SUNDAY MORNING AND THE PUSH LASTED APPROX 1 HR. THE REQUEST BY ATC TO KEEP A TIGHT BASE LEG TO RWY 4 TOGETHER WITH MY RADIO FAILURE WERE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TOWARDS MY DEV FROM A NORMAL PROC APCH TO LAND. AS A VFR PLT INTO THE HOU AREA I FELT THAT I DID NOT RECEIVE THE ATTN THAT I DESERVED. ESPECIALLY SINCE I HAD MADE IT CLR THAT I WAS IN UNFAMILIAR TERRITORY. I FEEL THAT IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF SAFETY STANDARDS THAT CLOSER ATTN SHOULD BE PAID TO VFR PLTS FLYING IN TO LARGER ARPTS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.