Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
General None Reported / Taken
Human Factors; Procedure
We contacted New York Approach Control on 127.6 and advised 3000 ft; heading 300 with information Romeo. The controller asked what approach we were requesting? We replied by requesting a visual approach. The controller asked if we had the field in sight. We replied we had the field in sight. We were approximately 3 miles from the airport at 3000 ft heading 300 when we crossed the centerline for runway 23. I asked the controller what was the plan? The controller replied 'there is no plan'. The controller said fly heading 290 and asked if we had the airport in sight. We replied we had the field in sight. The controller asked if we could take a turn in for the visual approach. I asked for a 270 degree turn back to the final approach course. We both heard the controller say turn to 180 degrees and descend to 2000 ft. We read it back. The controller did not say anything. I started the turn and decent. The controller asked if we were making a left turn. I was in a right turn. The controller must have forgotten about the 2000 ft descent. Both of us heard him say 2000 ft. The controller then said maintain 3000 ft. I had descended to 2600 ft at that time. We climbed back up to 3000 ft. The controller then asked if we had the field in sight. We replied we had the field in sight. The controller cleared us for the visual approach to runway 23 and contact the control tower. Nothing else was said by the approach controller. There was no traffic conflict or traffic in the area. The controller did not hear or understand we had the airport in sight. The controller stated that he 'did not have a plan'. You can check the tapes on that quote. The controller forgot he had decended us and then told us to maintain 3000 ft. We should have confirmed that the controller understood that we had the airport when he asked us the first time. If we were cleared for the visual approach initially; there would not been any issues.
We were repositioning an aircraft from ZZZ to ZZZ1. I was the pilot monitoring. Approaching our destination we contacted approach control at 3;000 feet heading 300 degrees with information Romeo. The controller asked if we had the airport in sight and the captain replied that he had the field in sight. After crossing the RWY 23 centerline at 3;000 feet & approximately 3 miles from the threshold; the captain asked the controller what was the plan. The controller replied that there was no plan and asked if we could fly a visual approach from there. The captain asked for a right 270 degree turn to final & the controller said to turn to 180 degrees & to descend to 2;000 feet. After starting the right turn to 180 & descent to 2;000 feet; the controller asked if we were in a left turn & to stay at 3;000 feet. We had descended to about 2;600 feet & immediately climbed back to 3;000. Then the controller asked if we had the airport in sight and cleared us for the visual approach. During this event there was no conflict with other aircraft. This event was caused by the failure of the controller to clear us for the visual approach when we initially said that we had the airport in sight and by our lack of aggressiveness to ask the controller if we were cleared for the visual approach. Furthermore it was caused by the controller forgetting that he had cleared us to descend to 2;000 feet. In the future; I'll be more aggressive about getting the controller to make a decision about whether or not we are cleared for the visual approach. I'll also make sure to get the controller to confirm heading & altitude clearances.
Commercial jet flight crew reported difficulty obtaining approach clearance.