Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MCI.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B MCI
ATC / advisory: TRACON MCI
Second aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Descending out of 10;000 feet MSL on right downwind for Runway 19R at MCI; I queried Kansas City Approach Control as to our sequence. He replied 'Standby...Number two'. I increased our rate of descent; and passing approximately 6000 feet MSL; my First Officer called the traffic on short final passing our right wing in sight. His description was 'traffic on final in sight'. Approach cleared us to follow the Airbus and cleared us for the visual approach. We determined that we were well behind the traffic and began to configure for landing. At approximately 4300 feet MSL; we were in a right base for Runway 19R with the gear down and flaps 15.At that point we were asked by Approach Control if we were following the other carrier Airbus. I looked left of the nose and saw the other carrier flight established on final and stopped our descent. Approach cleared us to descend further to 3000 feet MSL and turn left to heading 270. The other carrier was descending through 2000 feet and as we turned we received a TCAS TA. After reaching the 270 heading; Approach cleared us for a left turn to the runway and a visual approach to Runway 19R. After landing; I called Approach Control to determine where the misunderstanding took place and to determine who it was that we saw on short final. Approach Control determined that it was an additional carrier flight that we called on short final; but that the Controller's intent was for us to follow the other carrier Airbus who was actually 'number two' for arrival; making us 'number three'. Passengers were unaware of the event and all maneuvering was smooth and benign.Seeing an aircraft on short final met our expectation bias that we were number two for arrival. Had we been told that we were number three for arrival; we would have been looking for the appropriate aircraft to follow. Additionally; a better description from us to the Controller as to the position of our perceived traffic to follow might have alerted the Controller that we were looking at the wrong aircraft.


Second narrative: Looking back at the situation; at some point there was an obvious breakdown in communication. If we were told that we were number three for the airport we never would have made the base turn when we did. From my standpoint; when I look back at the situation; instead of just confirming I had the Airbus insight I could have said 'I have the (other carrier) Airbus on short final at our three o'clock position'. That may have prompted the Controller to know that we were talking about two different aircraft.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported receiving a TA on a visual approach to MCI when there was a misunderstanding with ATC as to their sequence.