Aircraft on visual approach to ism experienced confusion with regard to requested runway; clearance ...

Narrative:

While we were being vectored for a visual approach into kissimmee airport (ism). We were told to expect runway 6. We requested runway 33 due to an additional 1000 ft that would be available for landing. We were told it was on request approximately 3 miles southeast of the airport at 2000 ft; we were told 'keep your speed up; cleared for the visual approach runway 6.' we were instructed to contact ism tower shortly thereafter. When we checked in with tower; we told them we were on 'visual approach for runway 6.' the tower controller replied that we should have been on the approach for runway 33. We advised him that orl approach cleared us for runway 6. He pointed out some traffic for us maneuvering southwest of the field; then it became apparent to us that our request for runway 33 was approved by ism tower; but orl approach gave us the incorrect runway for the approach. I called ism tower after we landed; and the tower manager informed me that it was apparently a communication error from orl approach; and that it was not an issue for us.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Aircraft on visual approach to ISM experienced confusion with regard to requested runway; clearance issued and Tower's expectation; interfacility coordination failure between ISM and MCO TRACON suspected as primary causal factor.

Narrative: While we were being vectored for a visual approach into Kissimmee Airport (ISM). We were told to expect Runway 6. We requested Runway 33 due to an additional 1000 FT that would be available for landing. We were told it was on request Approximately 3 miles southeast of the airport at 2000 FT; we were told 'Keep your speed up; cleared for the visual approach Runway 6.' We were instructed to contact ISM Tower shortly thereafter. When we checked in with Tower; we told them we were on 'Visual approach for Runway 6.' The Tower Controller replied that we should have been on the approach for Runway 33. We advised him that ORL Approach cleared us for Runway 6. He pointed out some traffic for us maneuvering southwest of the field; then it became apparent to us that our request for Runway 33 was approved by ISM Tower; but ORL Approach gave us the incorrect runway for the approach. I called ISM Tower after we landed; and the Tower Manager informed me that it was apparently a communication error from ORL Approach; and that it was not an issue for us.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.

Attributes
ACN	824799
Time
Date	200902
Local Time Of Day	0601-1200
Place
Locale Reference	ISM.Airport
State Reference	FL
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Beechjet 400
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Initial Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Person 1
Function	Pilot Flying Captain
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Person 2
Function	Pilot Not Flying First Officer
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Events
Anomaly	Other Visual Approach Clearance Confusion

Aircraft on visual approach to ism experienced confusion with regard to requested runway; clearance issued and tower's expectation; interfacility coordination failure between ism and mco TRACON suspected as primary causal factor.