Narrative:

Our flight was uneventful with good VFR en route until traveling south from oklahoma city crossing into tx we encountered marginal VFR with low ceilings and low visibility in rain showers. These conditions varied but after passing the red river, conditions seemed to be improving. About 35 mi north of dfw I tuned dal ATIS and copied ceiling 1400' overcast and visibility of 10 mi, temperature 65 degrees, dew point 63. I continued southbound remaining below the overcast and avoiding the rain shower areas. At 20 DME northeast from dal, I contacted regl approach and reported altitude of 2200' MSL. The approach controller told em to contact addison tower for clearance through their airspace. He gave me a frequency and I switched over. It was the wrong frequency. I began to circle so as not to violate the addison air traffic area while I looked up the correct tower frequency for addition. Before I called addison tower they called me and asked my intentions (the approach controller must have realized his error and called addison tower). I requested clearance through their airspace VFR to love field. The tower controller requested I contact him 1 mi north of addison for traffic advisories. Before I reached the call-in position, addition tower handed me off to an approach controller who grumbled a bit and gave me a heading of 130 degrees, which was 90 degrees to the left of what I was flying (a direct course to dal) and said he was taking me around traffic. The ceiling and visibility continued to become lower. I continued a gradual descent to remain below the overcast. I was again handed off to another sour approach controller. He acknowledged my existence and did nothing more. I requested a heading and was told to fly 170 degrees and report the field in sight. I continued to descend down to about 1200' MSL (the field elevation at dal is 487') in order to remain below the overcast. We were encountering light to moderate rain at this time. It is questionable whether or not I maintained proper cloud separates and visibility's required for operations under visual flight rules. I then picked out the airport at my 2-3 O'clock position about 5 mi away. However, I also had a tall building approaching at my 1-2 O'clock position. I decided to go around the tall bldg in a clockwise direction circling the bldg to my right. In doing so I passed closely enough to the bldg to make myself uncomfortable. While trying to stay below the overcast, avoid the lowest visibility areas and look for the airport, I got too close to this bldg. I made the turn from this modified base to final to runway 31L. I contacted approach and said I had the field in sight and approach replied 'contact the tower now and they will help you find the airport.' this was a rather interesting statement since he had done very little in the way of helping me and I had just told him I had the field in sight. However, I called tower immediately and I could tell he had not received any kind of handoff from the approach controller. I told him where I was at and he cleared me to land on runway 31L. After all the mixups and confusion I was determined to confirm I was heading for the correct runway. I asked the tower controller if the left runway was the one with the sequential flashers. He told me there were no flashers operating on either runway--just the regular runway lights. I continued my final approach. In a few more seconds the tower controller said he had me in sight and the sequential flashers were operating for the left runway and to turn left slightly to align myself for the left runway. I feel the major contributing factor to the problem was continuing into deteriorating marginal VFR WX in unfamiliar surroundings. I look at going into an unfamiliar airport at night as totally more difficult than day. And now, I realize that going into an unfamiliar airport in low ceiling/visibility conditions can present many problems which I don't care to encounter again. Another contributing factor was the poor performance on the part of the approach controllers. Aside from issuing the wrong frequency and numerous clumsy handoffs, I was never told 'the airport is 2 O'clock and 6 mi. Do you have it in sight?' this is the type of service I am accustomed to in a radar environment. It should also be noted that none of the controllers seemed to be handling a lot of traffic. It seemed quiet onthe radar nearly all the time. The ATIS report of 1400' overcast and 10 mi was somewhat optimistic also.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA ENCOUNTERS INFLT WX WITH PROBABLE VFR IN IMC AND LOW ALT FLT TO AVOID OVERCAST.

Narrative: OUR FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL WITH GOOD VFR ENRTE UNTIL TRAVELING S FROM OKLAHOMA CITY XING INTO TX WE ENCOUNTERED MARGINAL VFR WITH LOW CEILINGS AND LOW VIS IN RAIN SHOWERS. THESE CONDITIONS VARIED BUT AFTER PASSING THE RED RIVER, CONDITIONS SEEMED TO BE IMPROVING. ABOUT 35 MI N OF DFW I TUNED DAL ATIS AND COPIED CEILING 1400' OVCST AND VIS OF 10 MI, TEMP 65 DEGS, DEW POINT 63. I CONTINUED SBND REMAINING BELOW THE OVCST AND AVOIDING THE RAIN SHOWER AREAS. AT 20 DME NE FROM DAL, I CONTACTED REGL APCH AND RPTED ALT OF 2200' MSL. THE APCH CTLR TOLD EM TO CONTACT ADDISON TWR FOR CLRNC THROUGH THEIR AIRSPACE. HE GAVE ME A FREQ AND I SWITCHED OVER. IT WAS THE WRONG FREQ. I BEGAN TO CIRCLE SO AS NOT TO VIOLATE THE ADDISON ATA WHILE I LOOKED UP THE CORRECT TWR FREQ FOR ADDITION. BEFORE I CALLED ADDISON TWR THEY CALLED ME AND ASKED MY INTENTIONS (THE APCH CTLR MUST HAVE REALIZED HIS ERROR AND CALLED ADDISON TWR). I REQUESTED CLRNC THROUGH THEIR AIRSPACE VFR TO LOVE FIELD. THE TWR CTLR REQUESTED I CONTACT HIM 1 MI N OF ADDISON FOR TFC ADVISORIES. BEFORE I REACHED THE CALL-IN POS, ADDITION TWR HANDED ME OFF TO AN APCH CTLR WHO GRUMBLED A BIT AND GAVE ME A HDG OF 130 DEGS, WHICH WAS 90 DEGS TO THE LEFT OF WHAT I WAS FLYING (A DIRECT COURSE TO DAL) AND SAID HE WAS TAKING ME AROUND TFC. THE CEILING AND VIS CONTINUED TO BECOME LOWER. I CONTINUED A GRADUAL DSCNT TO REMAIN BELOW THE OVCST. I WAS AGAIN HANDED OFF TO ANOTHER SOUR APCH CTLR. HE ACKNOWLEDGED MY EXISTENCE AND DID NOTHING MORE. I REQUESTED A HDG AND WAS TOLD TO FLY 170 DEGS AND RPT THE FIELD IN SIGHT. I CONTINUED TO DSND DOWN TO ABOUT 1200' MSL (THE FIELD ELEVATION AT DAL IS 487') IN ORDER TO REMAIN BELOW THE OVCST. WE WERE ENCOUNTERING LIGHT TO MODERATE RAIN AT THIS TIME. IT IS QUESTIONABLE WHETHER OR NOT I MAINTAINED PROPER CLOUD SEPARATES AND VIS'S REQUIRED FOR OPS UNDER VISUAL FLT RULES. I THEN PICKED OUT THE ARPT AT MY 2-3 O'CLOCK POS ABOUT 5 MI AWAY. HOWEVER, I ALSO HAD A TALL BUILDING APCHING AT MY 1-2 O'CLOCK POS. I DECIDED TO GO AROUND THE TALL BLDG IN A CLOCKWISE DIRECTION CIRCLING THE BLDG TO MY RIGHT. IN DOING SO I PASSED CLOSELY ENOUGH TO THE BLDG TO MAKE MYSELF UNCOMFORTABLE. WHILE TRYING TO STAY BELOW THE OVCST, AVOID THE LOWEST VIS AREAS AND LOOK FOR THE ARPT, I GOT TOO CLOSE TO THIS BLDG. I MADE THE TURN FROM THIS MODIFIED BASE TO FINAL TO RWY 31L. I CONTACTED APCH AND SAID I HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT AND APCH REPLIED 'CONTACT THE TWR NOW AND THEY WILL HELP YOU FIND THE ARPT.' THIS WAS A RATHER INTERESTING STATEMENT SINCE HE HAD DONE VERY LITTLE IN THE WAY OF HELPING ME AND I HAD JUST TOLD HIM I HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT. HOWEVER, I CALLED TWR IMMEDIATELY AND I COULD TELL HE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY KIND OF HDOF FROM THE APCH CTLR. I TOLD HIM WHERE I WAS AT AND HE CLRED ME TO LAND ON RWY 31L. AFTER ALL THE MIXUPS AND CONFUSION I WAS DETERMINED TO CONFIRM I WAS HDG FOR THE CORRECT RWY. I ASKED THE TWR CTLR IF THE LEFT RWY WAS THE ONE WITH THE SEQUENTIAL FLASHERS. HE TOLD ME THERE WERE NO FLASHERS OPERATING ON EITHER RWY--JUST THE REGULAR RWY LIGHTS. I CONTINUED MY FINAL APCH. IN A FEW MORE SECS THE TWR CTLR SAID HE HAD ME IN SIGHT AND THE SEQUENTIAL FLASHERS WERE OPERATING FOR THE LEFT RWY AND TO TURN LEFT SLIGHTLY TO ALIGN MYSELF FOR THE LEFT RWY. I FEEL THE MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TO THE PROB WAS CONTINUING INTO DETERIORATING MARGINAL VFR WX IN UNFAMILIAR SURROUNDINGS. I LOOK AT GOING INTO AN UNFAMILIAR ARPT AT NIGHT AS TOTALLY MORE DIFFICULT THAN DAY. AND NOW, I REALIZE THAT GOING INTO AN UNFAMILIAR ARPT IN LOW CEILING/VIS CONDITIONS CAN PRESENT MANY PROBS WHICH I DON'T CARE TO ENCOUNTER AGAIN. ANOTHER CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS THE POOR PERFORMANCE ON THE PART OF THE APCH CTLRS. ASIDE FROM ISSUING THE WRONG FREQ AND NUMEROUS CLUMSY HDOFS, I WAS NEVER TOLD 'THE ARPT IS 2 O'CLOCK AND 6 MI. DO YOU HAVE IT IN SIGHT?' THIS IS THE TYPE OF SVC I AM ACCUSTOMED TO IN A RADAR ENVIRONMENT. IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT NONE OF THE CTLRS SEEMED TO BE HANDLING A LOT OF TFC. IT SEEMED QUIET ONTHE RADAR NEARLY ALL THE TIME. THE ATIS RPT OF 1400' OVCST AND 10 MI WAS SOMEWHAT OPTIMISTIC ALSO.

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.