Narrative:

While on approach with center we were cleared to descend to 4000; and after reporting the field in sight; cleared the visual. Then we were handed of to tower. We checked in and were told to report mid field. Prior to the midfield point for runway xx we were asked to call cessna traffic on a left two mile base to runway xx. We called visual on the traffic and then tower said cleared the visual to runway xx. Then my copilot started to maneuver the aircraft and it became clear that we were going to be sequenced behind the cessna 172. I requested if we could be sequenced in front of the cessna. I then told the tower controller while we were level at 4000 feet MSL (2800 AGL) and 8NM from the airport that we were at 240 KTS. I said the airspeed to enhance the tower controllers situational awareness; because I thought him sequencing a cessna 172 in front of an rj was not a good idea. He then said negative to the sequence request and cleared us the visual behind the cessna. Then when my co-pilot started his turn to a left base the tower controller said to extend our downwind. This confused us because he asked me to call visual on my sequence to land which was the cessna 172 and then cleared us the visual. This clearance placed aircraft separation criteria as our primary responsibility. So I asked the controller if we were cleared for the visual. He said yes. Then he issued us more instructions. This confused us again. I then requested to have our visual approach clearance cancelled. He responded with negative we are not going to cancel your IFR clearance. This confused us again. At this point we did not know weather to maneuver the aircraft at our own will in order to execute the visual approach or to wait for more instructions. We finally sorted it out; but the tower controller told us to call him. We spoke on the phone and the tower supervisor provided me with remedial far training about class D airspace that we were already in compliance with. He did not like the fact that I requested traffic priority. The request was made based on major airspeed incompatibilities coupled with the fact that we were running late and I was trying to get the passengers as close to on time as possible because of a delay out of ZZZ. Likewise we did not know as a crew if we were cleared the visual approach or not. We finished our discussion; addressed the issues professionally and ended the conversation. No rules or fars were broken in this situation; however; the confusion in ATC terminology relative to 'cleared the visual' could have gotten to a point where are attention was distracted; causing channelized attention and having us miss something important. Confusion as to what 'cleared the visual to runway xx' means. Clearer language in the ATC guide as to what 'cleared the visual 'means and allows the crew to do or not do for that matter. If the tower controller wants to control us with additional instructions because an event has unfolded or is unfolding unbenounced to us; then being cleared the visual is not the best approach to that problem. It would have been clear as day to us if the controller cancelled our visual approach clearance; gave us additional instructions to correct the issue; which in this case was spacing; and then gave us our visual approach clearance once the situation was resolved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier cleared for a visual approach was instructed to contact the tower who then asked the flight crew to sight a Cessna. The Cessna was reported in sight and visual approach clearance re-issued. The flight crew reported confusion regarding sequencing; visual approach procedures and ATC phraseology.

Narrative: While on approach with Center we were cleared to descend to 4000; and after reporting the field in sight; cleared the visual. Then we were handed of to Tower. We checked in and were told to report mid field. Prior to the midfield point for Runway XX we were asked to call Cessna traffic on a left two mile base to Runway XX. We called visual on the traffic and then tower said cleared the visual to Runway XX. Then my copilot started to maneuver the aircraft and it became clear that we were going to be sequenced behind the Cessna 172. I requested if we could be sequenced in front of the Cessna. I then told the Tower Controller while we were level at 4000 feet MSL (2800 AGL) and 8NM from the airport that we were at 240 KTS. I said the airspeed to enhance the tower controllers situational awareness; because I thought him sequencing a Cessna 172 in front of an RJ was not a good Idea. He then said negative to the sequence request and cleared us the visual behind the Cessna. Then when my Co-pilot started his turn to a left base the Tower Controller said to extend our downwind. This confused us because he asked me to call visual on my sequence to land which was the Cessna 172 and then cleared us the visual. This clearance placed aircraft separation criteria as our primary responsibility. So I asked the Controller if we were cleared for the visual. He said yes. Then he issued us more instructions. This confused us again. I then requested to have our visual approach clearance cancelled. He responded with negative we are not going to cancel your IFR clearance. This confused us again. At this point we did not know weather to maneuver the aircraft at our own will in order to execute the visual approach or to wait for more instructions. We finally sorted it out; but the Tower Controller told us to call him. We spoke on the phone and the Tower Supervisor provided me with remedial FAR training about Class D airspace that we were already in compliance with. He did not like the fact that I requested traffic priority. The request was made based on major airspeed incompatibilities coupled with the fact that we were running late and I was trying to get the passengers as close to on time as possible because of a delay out of ZZZ. Likewise we did not know as a crew if we were cleared the visual approach or not. We finished our discussion; addressed the issues professionally and ended the conversation. No rules or FARs were broken in this situation; however; the confusion in ATC terminology relative to 'cleared the visual' could have gotten to a point where are attention was distracted; causing channelized attention and having us miss something important. Confusion as to what 'Cleared the Visual to Runway XX' means. Clearer language in the ATC guide as to what 'Cleared the visual 'means and allows the crew to do or not do for that matter. If the Tower Controller wants to control us with additional instructions because an event has unfolded or is unfolding unbenounced to us; then being cleared the visual is not the best approach to that problem. It would have been clear as day to us if the Controller cancelled our visual approach clearance; gave us additional instructions to correct the issue; which in this case was spacing; and then gave us our visual approach clearance once the situation was resolved.

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.