Narrative:

We were flying into idaho falls, tower closed, 1700 overcast, 3 mi, snowcovered runway, braking reported fair, wind 0405. We called ahead to idaho falls radio, CTAF, and got the WX including that runway 02 was the 'runway of preference.' as we approached idaho falls salt lake center clrd us for what we thought was the approach to runway 02. We were high and fast so we requested a 360 degree turn to get down and slow down. We thought salt lake center said, 'you're clrd, clrd approach, go to advisory.' we went to idaho falls radio, CTAF, told him we were doing a 360 degree turn and approach to 02. He acknowledged. As we completed a tight 360 degree turn, radio said, 'go back to center.' we did and he informed us we were not clrd for a 360 degree turn and were not clrd for the approach to 02, but 20. We told center we couldn't accept a landing on runway 20 with braking fair and a tailwind. We were reclred for runway 02. After landing we discussed the whole situation at length with salt lake center and fortunately there were no traffic conflict. What we learned was that at uncontrolled airports where center is providing approach clearance we should have requested the approach we wanted based on the conditions rather than assuming there was coordination between CTAF and center about the 'runway of preference.' that would have prevented the confusion and our hearing 02, because it was the logical runway for us, when in fact the controller was saying 20. Supplemental information from acn 80178: as air carrier pilots we're not accustomed to operations at uncontrolled airports. Strange airport to both pilots, with potentially hazardous runway conditions at a high field elevation. We assumed that center would be coordinating with the ida FSS.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC DURING DESCENT AND APCH TO A NON TWR ARPT.

Narrative: WE WERE FLYING INTO IDAHO FALLS, TWR CLOSED, 1700 OVERCAST, 3 MI, SNOWCOVERED RWY, BRAKING RPTED FAIR, WIND 0405. WE CALLED AHEAD TO IDAHO FALLS RADIO, CTAF, AND GOT THE WX INCLUDING THAT RWY 02 WAS THE 'RWY OF PREFERENCE.' AS WE APCHED IDAHO FALLS SALT LAKE CENTER CLRD US FOR WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE APCH TO RWY 02. WE WERE HIGH AND FAST SO WE REQUESTED A 360 DEG TURN TO GET DOWN AND SLOW DOWN. WE THOUGHT SALT LAKE CENTER SAID, 'YOU'RE CLRD, CLRD APCH, GO TO ADVISORY.' WE WENT TO IDAHO FALLS RADIO, CTAF, TOLD HIM WE WERE DOING A 360 DEG TURN AND APCH TO 02. HE ACKNOWLEDGED. AS WE COMPLETED A TIGHT 360 DEG TURN, RADIO SAID, 'GO BACK TO CENTER.' WE DID AND HE INFORMED US WE WERE NOT CLRD FOR A 360 DEG TURN AND WERE NOT CLRD FOR THE APCH TO 02, BUT 20. WE TOLD CENTER WE COULDN'T ACCEPT A LNDG ON RWY 20 WITH BRAKING FAIR AND A TAILWIND. WE WERE RECLRED FOR RWY 02. AFTER LNDG WE DISCUSSED THE WHOLE SITUATION AT LENGTH WITH SALT LAKE CENTER AND FORTUNATELY THERE WERE NO TFC CONFLICT. WHAT WE LEARNED WAS THAT AT UNCONTROLLED ARPTS WHERE CENTER IS PROVIDING APCH CLRNC WE SHOULD HAVE REQUESTED THE APCH WE WANTED BASED ON THE CONDITIONS RATHER THAN ASSUMING THERE WAS COORD BTWN CTAF AND CENTER ABOUT THE 'RWY OF PREFERENCE.' THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THE CONFUSION AND OUR HEARING 02, BECAUSE IT WAS THE LOGICAL RWY FOR US, WHEN IN FACT THE CTLR WAS SAYING 20. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM ACN 80178: AS AIR CARRIER PLTS WE'RE NOT ACCUSTOMED TO OPERATIONS AT UNCONTROLLED ARPTS. STRANGE ARPT TO BOTH PLTS, WITH POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS RWY CONDITIONS AT A HIGH FIELD ELEVATION. WE ASSUMED THAT CENTER WOULD BE COORDINATING WITH THE IDA FSS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.