Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B D10
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were being radar vectored for a Visual Approach and were told to report 'airport in sight'. Upon obtaining visual contact with the airport; we tried to notify Approach that we had the airport in sight. Due to congested radio traffic we were not able to inform Approach right away. When there was a gap in radio transmissions we immediately informed Approach we had the airport in sight. We were quickly approaching the extended centerline of the runway; and we were at an altitude where we needed to begin our Visual Approach quickly.We reported 'airport in sight' with no response from Approach. We reported 'airport in sight' again and Approach asked for clarification of our call sign. The controller seemed confused as to who we were; and where we were. We responded again with our call sign and stated the airport was in sight. After a short pause; the controller told us to contact the Tower. We asked for clarification about whether we were cleared for a visual approach. I don't think we received a reply. We contacted the Tower; but by this time we had flown through the final approach course and were no longer in a position to land.Tower queried us about our position and status. We told them 'we were told to contact Tower; but were never cleared for a visual approach.' Tower asked for clarification by repeating what we just told them; and we confirmed. Tower then asked did you come to Tower on your own; or were you told to contact Tower. We stated 'we were told to contact Tower; but were not cleared for a visual.' She then gave us vectors to parallel the runway until we were abeam the departure end; then they turned us over to Approach. We were now speaking with a different approach controller than the one who never cleared us for the visual. He vectored us around for another visual approach. We continued the approach and landing without incident.Since we know it was Approach Control's intent to issue a visual approach once the airport was in sight; we could have made the approach without the explicit clearance. We did not feel this would be appropriate; even though it would delay our flight by having to come around for another approach. To our knowledge no one was endangered nor was a traffic conflict created with another aircraft. There was no traffic for the parallel runway.




Synopsis: A pilot reported he was on a base leg vector for a visual approach and was issued a frequency change to the Tower without receiving an approach clearance.