Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Procedure; Weather
Tonight's Flight to EWR was mostly uneventful and we were closely monitoring weather system that was approaching NYC area. When we arrived at Cleveland airspace we were given an option to stay on route (FQM3) and do radar vectors for spacing or proceed in the direction of HNK VOR and do the (FLOSI 3) arrival. We elected to do the FLOSI 3 and headed that way; as soon as we switched to a different Cleveland controller he advised us of a heading to fly and that we will go back on original route. I questioned Cleveland about the weather on FQM3 arrival and was told that people are getting in no problem. Cleveland after couple of turns instructed us to precede direct to (FQM) for FQM3 and switched us over to NY Center. After we contacted NY Center we were given holding instruction to hold over FQM VOR and with an EFC of 1H. During the hold we were in and out of light turbulence in IMC conditions. We contacted dispatch and advised them of our hold and with surprise were informed that no one is holding for EWR. NY Center controller advised on his frequency that if anyone is interested in continuing arrival to let him know. On the inbound hold leg to FQM VOR we monitored our aircraft weather radar and we were not able to indicate any hazardous weather on the arrival. We advised NY Center that we are not seeing anything hazardous and would like to continue arrival. Controller cleared us direct to HAYED intersection and told us to continue with the arrival. When we were switched to a different NY controlled between HAYED and RACKI we noticed a moderate rain return on radar and as we got closer to HAYED that radar return started going from red to magenta color and we have also noticed a flash of lightning. We advised controller that we will require a left deviation which we received up to 5 miles left of course. We advised the controller that we were approaching that weather and we need 15 more miles to make sure that we completely avoid. ATC controller advised us to make a turn to a heading of 280 in which we complied; I also prompted ATC to tell us what he is seeing between us and RACKI intersection his response was light to moderate precipitation. In that turn we noticed that it would require us to turn into the weather we were trying to avoid. As we were in that turn assigned by ATC we noticed and used controller's radar Information and decided that the safest way to avoid this weather was to go direct to RACKI intersection which was on our route. I advised the controller that we would like to proceed to RACKI multiple times but the controller was silent. I have also advised NY Center that now were in moderate turbulence and that we are direct to RACKI. After a moment of silence controller came back on frequency and advised us of our heading; I told him that we were direct to RACKI intersection. During that time he advised us that in the future it is recommended to comply with ATC instructions and confirmed that we are direct to RACKI. I advised ATC stating that I understand and confirmed that we are direct to on course. The strong wind from the south made if a challenge for us to be right above RACKI intersection but we joined our route not far from it. The controller again advised us if we were on course over RACKI and I responded that we are not over but passing just left of it rejoining our arrival. Once we were on the other side of weather the flight continued on with no more problems.
Flight crew reported a track deviation during a weather encounter noting conflicting weather information and communication problems with ATC.