There was no need to travel and so I was not flying IFR for 4 weeks. The awkward feeling of not doing it grew and I set off on a training flight. The weather was nice for IFR with some clouds, some light showers but basically no or a few clouds under 5000’.
Getting closer to the destination airport I was handed off my RADAR to DIRECTOR who handled my approach to the ILS. I was given several vectors and descent instructions. It was a vectors to final approach. The published approach path was north of the localizer while I was being vectored south of it. DIRECTOR sent me quite a bit out. I assumed it was for spacing.
Then the mistake happened that led to me being confused and messing up the approach.
I was given three instructions: turn left 260, cleared for the ILS 23, descent 3000’. I read back: 260, descending 3000’ and did not read back the ILS clearance!
So from that point on I was under the assumption that I had not been cleared for the ILS yet and the ATCO was still vectoring me around.
What followed was two more combinations of vectors and descent instructions. The third set of instructions were: descend 2000’ cleared ILS 23 report established. I thought it were the first time I heard the magic “cleared” but seconds later the ATCO said “disregard ILS clearance, turn heading 180”.
A few more seconds he was asking “do you have the field in sight”, I affirmed and was given a “cleared for the visual 23”. The actual landing was just perfect.
Now I’m sitting here to play the recording over and over again to figure out what happened. I’m happy that I had just bought a recording device and so have the full audio for the whole flight.
Somehow I must have remembered all the instructors during my training who emphasized that without the word “cleared” one does not turn onto the localizer. As I missed that clearance in the string of words early on, was mentally set for delay vectors and further on only heard “to establish” I was confused. I even reported that I was overshooting the localizer. During my training I had an ATCO have us fly through the localizer and the instructor was giving me lengthy explanations that ATCOs are supposed to tell when they plan to lead one through the localizer but sometimes forget. So somehow I assumed the situation were like that. Instead of asking “am I cleared for the ILS” I was asking “should I correct” and the answer was a new heading “to establish”.
In retrospect I assume the ATCO realized we both were confused and he saved the day by offering me the visual approach as I was still in a good position for landing.
In the end the experience proved to me that flying every week – and if ever possible IFR – seems to be a very good idea. It also reconfirmed my wish to attend a CPPP (that’s a COPA recurrent training program available 4 times a year) once per year. The professional pilots are put into a simulator frequently despite actually flying frequently as well – for a reason 
I was given three instructions: turn left 260, cleared for the ILS 23, descent 3000’. I read back: 260, descending 3000’ and did not read back the ILS clearance!
This is the untypical bit about your report: That the controller did not insist that you readback the ILS clearance (which is the most important bit of his message!). Usually they are very keen on that.
And if your vectors take you close to intecept the ILS and you are in doubt about being cleared or not, just ask – “Callsign – confirm cleared for the ILS?” Occasionally they simply forget us.
Something doesn’t add up. You write that you received two apprach clearances…
Steven, thanks for that interesting account of your flight. Glad it all worked out in the end.
Whilst I don’t necessarily disagree with anything you’ve said, I think there is another way of looking at this.
1. Who is to say that if you’d flown more IFR, more recently, it would have been any different. At its most simple, you missed an instruction. It’s true if you were more current perhaps you’d have had more “spare” mental capacity, so you might not have missed it. But you still might.
2. The system worked as it is supposed to; the controller noticed the error and helped you out.
3. Maybe the takeaway from this is to query the controller more readily? As you say, if they intend to vector you through the localizer you’d expect that to be explicit and as it wasn’t you wouldn’t have been out of line to query it.
Just something to think about.
what_next wrote:
This is the untypical bit about your report: That the controller did not insist that you readback the ILS clearance (which is the most important bit of his message!). Usually they are very keen on that.
Right. I believe that was what allowed me to believe he has some reason to vector me around. And when I was asking – too shy I have to admit – we got further into the wrong dance. It appears he later detected that himself and thus offered the visual approach.
boscomantico wrote:
Something doesn’t add up. You write that you received two apprach clearances…
That’s right. The first one that I didn’t recognize and then the second one shortly before it was too late.
David wrote:
Maybe the takeaway from this is to query the controller more readily?
Certainly. I do try to become more assertive and more dialog oriented. I notice that the big boys do the same. That’s also why I started to record while I fly so that I can listen to it later once again. Single-pilot IFR isn’t that easy – but may have said that already.
Speaking about recording… The German rules about radio communication being considered private and thus can not be published have not changed – have they?
Stephan, I do not know how much experience you have flying IFR, but if you are low-time, and in addition to that had little recent experience, you may just have been a little saturated by the rapid succession of events, and that caused you to miss the approach clearance.
When you are saturated you just stop assimilating information – you block out external sensors until the information overload is resolved. I had that happen to me twice. The first time was one of the very first times I sailed a cat with my uncle. We were tacking back and forth in a channel to get to shore on a beach, and there was a pole in the middle of the channel. Such a light cat has very little inertia, and in order to help the turn you keep the foresail against the wind, and only when the tack is completed do you sheet it in on the leeward side. On this occasion I released the sheet too early and we headed directly towards the pole. There was nothing the helmsman could do because having no forward speed, there was no rudder authority. He was shouting instructions to me, but I was incapable of reacting to them. Everything seemed to be in slow motion until I realised what I had to do, pulled in the sheet on the windward side and barely managed to avoid the pole.
The second time was during VP/RG differences training in a Piper Arrow. On climb out after a touch&go, I was focusing on retracting the gear and setting climb power (power reduction), keeping the blue side up and correct heading, when I got a call from tower. Although it sounds silly now 19 years later, that was enough for me to reach saturation. I heard the call as a distant voice in the headset, and I just knew I was unable to cope with more than I already had on my plate.
I do not want to downplay the importance of flying regularly, especially IFR, in order to maintain proficiency, and I object to those who claim that flying is like riding a bicycle; you never forget. My personal experience is however that the more experience you have, gained over a relatively short period of time, the less proficiency you loose over the time you have not been flying.
4 weeks without flying is nothing, and I am sure you will frequently have 4-week periods during which you do not fly, or do not fly IFR. You may want to mitigate lack of recent experience by canceling flights that would be too challenging weather wise, i.e. raise you personal minima until you have done a flight or two.
The German rules about radio communication being considered private and thus can not be published have not changed – have they?
No.
I agree, I think it is pure and simple saturation.
I find when I have flown for a while (and it applies to other things) the checklists do come in help. Just a simple checklist of the key actions for the particular phase in hand – read it through before you commence that phase and it is a surprising reminder of the key actions that you dont want to forget.
In a different world, but since it is being discussed, how many times have I nearly pulled away from my sailing berth forgetting to disconnect the shore power, or leave one of the bow ropes attached, or forget to switch to the inverter etc so I now have myself a little list of the things to remember and it works every time.
In the same way whilst I am pleased to say I have never had an engine failure in the climb, I now find myself in the twin doing a quick mental rehersal of the vital actions everytime.
It just puts the brain back in the mindset required.
Unfortunately the magic words “cleared for the ILS” are not always passed in time to act on them.
Flying into Annecy on Wednesday this week, I got them very late on base leg, with the LOC indicator already passing half scale and heading rapidly for the centre, and I had just enough time to press the APR button.
I flew it coupled so I could take photos 
but had I flown it by hand I would have needed a lot more than Rate 1 to turn onto the LOC without an overshoot.
It is always a tight moment in flying. For some reason ATC usually don’t clear you for the approach till really late, and it is not obvious why they do that.
And sometimes they just forget… has happened about 2x, once with Bournemouth.
