Narrative:

We were on a test flight and had completed the high altitude conditions. 2 approachs were required and since the field was VMC; we canceled our IFR plan once we descended below class a airspace with the intent of conducting both approachs to ict. Ict informed us that they were unable to accommodate our first approach (VOR 14 ict) and suggested we divert to hut; which we did. We stayed with ict approach control en route to hut and they cleared us for the VOR 4 hut approach. At that point I thought we were IFR again. Hut did have 1200 ft overcast with tops at 3200 ft. We conducted the approach and were given missed instructions. Hut tower asked for PIREP of cloud on the missed; then handed us back to ict approach. When checking in to ict approach; the clearance he gave us caught my attention; 'climb and maintain 4500 ft VFR.' I didn't question ict approach at that point but the copilot accepted and we complied. We were able to work out with ict to get our second approach to ict; so en route I called back to hut tower to inquire with him as to whether he showed us IFR or VFR for the approach. He confirmed VFR. Second approach to full stop landing was uneventful. Other items: 1) when we switched approachs from ict to hut; the time to make the switch was short -- probably less than 2 mins; since we were coming in from northeast over hut to ict when the switch occurred. I didn't feel rushed to make the switch; but I think my copilot was a bit behind. 2) in thinking about the initial approach afterwards; I couldn't recall clearly hearing the words 'cleared to hut via radar vectors...' to have clearly gone back to the IFR flight plan. 3) not hearing those words and assuming we were again IFR was my bad. 4) we flew the approach to hut (VOR 4 hut) as published except for the missed; which was provided by ict approach so no safety issues were a factor.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MDT ACFT ON TEST FLIGHT CANCELED IFR THEN REQUESTED VOR APCH; CLRED BUT THEN EXPERIENCED SOME CONFUSION AS FP STATUS VFR OR IFR.

Narrative: WE WERE ON A TEST FLT AND HAD COMPLETED THE HIGH ALT CONDITIONS. 2 APCHS WERE REQUIRED AND SINCE THE FIELD WAS VMC; WE CANCELED OUR IFR PLAN ONCE WE DSNDED BELOW CLASS A AIRSPACE WITH THE INTENT OF CONDUCTING BOTH APCHS TO ICT. ICT INFORMED US THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE OUR FIRST APCH (VOR 14 ICT) AND SUGGESTED WE DIVERT TO HUT; WHICH WE DID. WE STAYED WITH ICT APCH CTL ENRTE TO HUT AND THEY CLRED US FOR THE VOR 4 HUT APCH. AT THAT POINT I THOUGHT WE WERE IFR AGAIN. HUT DID HAVE 1200 FT OVCST WITH TOPS AT 3200 FT. WE CONDUCTED THE APCH AND WERE GIVEN MISSED INSTRUCTIONS. HUT TWR ASKED FOR PIREP OF CLOUD ON THE MISSED; THEN HANDED US BACK TO ICT APCH. WHEN CHKING IN TO ICT APCH; THE CLRNC HE GAVE US CAUGHT MY ATTN; 'CLB AND MAINTAIN 4500 FT VFR.' I DIDN'T QUESTION ICT APCH AT THAT POINT BUT THE COPLT ACCEPTED AND WE COMPLIED. WE WERE ABLE TO WORK OUT WITH ICT TO GET OUR SECOND APCH TO ICT; SO ENRTE I CALLED BACK TO HUT TWR TO INQUIRE WITH HIM AS TO WHETHER HE SHOWED US IFR OR VFR FOR THE APCH. HE CONFIRMED VFR. SECOND APCH TO FULL STOP LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. OTHER ITEMS: 1) WHEN WE SWITCHED APCHS FROM ICT TO HUT; THE TIME TO MAKE THE SWITCH WAS SHORT -- PROBABLY LESS THAN 2 MINS; SINCE WE WERE COMING IN FROM NE OVER HUT TO ICT WHEN THE SWITCH OCCURRED. I DIDN'T FEEL RUSHED TO MAKE THE SWITCH; BUT I THINK MY COPLT WAS A BIT BEHIND. 2) IN THINKING ABOUT THE INITIAL APCH AFTERWARDS; I COULDN'T RECALL CLEARLY HEARING THE WORDS 'CLRED TO HUT VIA RADAR VECTORS...' TO HAVE CLEARLY GONE BACK TO THE IFR FLT PLAN. 3) NOT HEARING THOSE WORDS AND ASSUMING WE WERE AGAIN IFR WAS MY BAD. 4) WE FLEW THE APCH TO HUT (VOR 4 HUT) AS PUBLISHED EXCEPT FOR THE MISSED; WHICH WAS PROVIDED BY ICT APCH SO NO SAFETY ISSUES WERE A FACTOR.

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.