Narrative:

I am submitting this report because what happened to us in this situation is a safety hazard and it needs to be brought to the attention of the air traffic controllers involved on our descent into ZZZ. First of all; we checked the ZZZ weather while we were enroute and it was favoring landing on runway 16. (We did a WX request as they don't have a digital ATIS.) so we set up the FMC; the nav radios; the decision height altitude and the HUD for landing on 16. And per SOP we briefed everything for landing on 16. Then while we were still too far out to receive the ZZZ ATIS on the radio; ZZZ center gave us a descent clearance for landing on runway 16. So our top of descent (TOD) as well as everything else is set up for descent to runway 16. So we started down at the TOD point for 16 and then we were able to receive the ZZZ ATIS and it was info 'left' and it said they were landing runway 34 and the winds were calm. Shortly after that the controller said ZZZ is landing runway 34 and he gave us clearance to descend to 6;000 ft I believe (things started happening very quickly at this point) and to plan on the RNAV to runway 34. Then when we are trying to set up everything for the change to 34; and we were below 10;000 ft; the controller I guess doing his job; gives us like 5 or 6 aircraft to look for; some of which were way below us; like at 3;000 ft and miles away from us; and my first officer had to answer every one of these separate radio calls! Because you know what happens if you don't acknowledge every call from ATC. This was all at time when we were very busy trying to reset everything up and brief for runway 34. That includes the FMC; the HUD; the decision altitude; verifying the points for the approach; etc. Right after he pointed out all of that traffic to us; he handed us off to the next controller. By this point we had just reset everything up for runway 34 and then the controller says; 'oh ZZZ is now landing runway 16.' so we are like 'oh great!' and he clears us direct to the YYY VOR. So now we have to reset up for runway 16 again. Set up the FMC; the HUD; the decision height; etc. Do the FMC crosscheck again. This is all happening while we were well below 10;000 ft and still having to look for all of that VFR traffic flying around. And just some info on the weather. It was good VFR south of the ZZZ airport. We could see the airport when we were south of it. But we could also see that over the airport it had not cleared up yet and was marginal VFR (the bases seemed to be about 2;500 ft) and so we knew we had to reset up for the ILS to 16 properly because we were going to probably have to fly part of the approach before getting it visually. As then as the final last straw after we pass the YYY VOR and we are at 3;000 ft assigned the controller gives us a 310 heading I believe it was. And we are finally all caught up again and we did a wobbs check to make sure we had covered everything. And we are IMC in the clouds and the controller says let me know when you have the airport so I can give you the visual approach. So we said we needed lower because we were IMC. So he cleared us to 2;000 ft and he said something like 'let me know when you have the airport.' well we were still on the 310 heading assigned. Our tail was pointed directly at the airport; and since we don't have rear view mirrors; there was no way we were going to see the airport from this angle. So I told the first officer to tell the controller we needed a vector towards the airport before we could see it. So the controller gave us a 060 heading I believe it was; we got the airport in sight; called it; got cleared for the visual approach to 16 and completed the landing without further incident. So I really think that the moral of the story is; since the controllers don't do the ride along familiarization flights with us anymore; they need to be reminded that the increased workload is at least ten fold when they give us these continuous changes. All at atime when we are below 10;000 ft in a high threat environment from VFR aircraft; terrain; etc.they need to change the way they do things and ZZZ tower and whoever else is involved; has to change the way they make the last minute decisions for changing the runway in use. This type of way the controllers do these things in this area is going to cause another incident/accident like the airline accident where they ran off the end of the runway at an airport after getting approach and runway changes etc; by the controllers and they were so task saturated that they did not arm their speedbrakes for landing and then they went off the end. Thank you very much for your time and attention on this unsafe situation.the ZZZ tower changing the runway in use too often and the resulting communications from center and approach control to us.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain states runway changes added to workload upon arrival to destination.

Narrative: I am submitting this report because what happened to us in this situation is a safety hazard and it needs to be brought to the attention of the air traffic controllers involved on our descent into ZZZ. First of all; we checked the ZZZ weather while we were enroute and it was favoring landing on Runway 16. (We did a WX Request as they don't have a Digital ATIS.) So we set up the FMC; the Nav Radios; the decision height altitude and the HUD for landing on 16. And per SOP we briefed everything for landing on 16. Then while we were still too far out to receive the ZZZ ATIS on the radio; ZZZ Center gave us a descent clearance for landing on Runway 16. So our Top Of Descent (TOD) as well as everything else is set up for descent to Runway 16. So we started down at the TOD point for 16 and then we were able to receive the ZZZ ATIS and it was Info 'L' and it said they were landing Runway 34 and the winds were calm. Shortly after that the Controller said ZZZ is landing Runway 34 and he gave us clearance to descend to 6;000 FT I believe (things started happening very quickly at this point) and to plan on the RNAV to Runway 34. Then when we are trying to set up everything for the change to 34; and we were below 10;000 FT; the Controller I guess doing his job; gives us like 5 or 6 aircraft to look for; some of which were way below us; like at 3;000 FT and miles away from us; and my First Officer had to answer every one of these separate radio calls! Because you know what happens if you don't acknowledge every call from ATC. This was all at time when we were very busy trying to reset everything up and brief for Runway 34. That includes the FMC; the HUD; the Decision Altitude; verifying the points for the approach; etc. Right after he pointed out all of that traffic to us; he handed us off to the next Controller. By this point we had just reset everything up for Runway 34 and then the Controller says; 'Oh ZZZ is now Landing Runway 16.' So we are like 'Oh Great!' and he clears us direct to the YYY VOR. So now we have to reset up for Runway 16 again. Set up the FMC; the HUD; the decision height; etc. Do the FMC crosscheck again. This is all happening while we were well below 10;000 FT and still having to look for all of that VFR traffic flying around. And just some info on the weather. It was good VFR south of the ZZZ Airport. We could see the airport when we were south of it. But we could also see that over the airport it had not cleared up yet and was marginal VFR (the bases seemed to be about 2;500 FT) and so we knew we had to reset up for the ILS to 16 properly because we were going to probably have to fly part of the approach before getting it visually. As then as the final last straw after we pass the YYY VOR and we are at 3;000 FT assigned the Controller gives us a 310 heading I believe it was. And we are finally all caught up again and we did a WOBBS check to make sure we had covered everything. And we are IMC in the clouds and the Controller says let me know when you have the airport so I can give you the Visual Approach. So we said we needed lower because we were IMC. So he cleared us to 2;000 FT and he said something like 'Let me know when you have the airport.' Well we were still on the 310 heading assigned. Our tail was pointed directly at the airport; and since we don't have rear view mirrors; there was no way we were going to see the airport from this angle. So I told the First Officer to tell the Controller we needed a vector towards the airport before we could see it. So the Controller gave us a 060 heading I believe it was; we got the airport in sight; called it; got cleared for the Visual Approach to 16 and completed the landing without further incident. So I really think that the moral of the story is; since the controllers don't do the ride along familiarization flights with us anymore; they need to be reminded that the increased workload is at least ten fold when they give us these continuous changes. All at atime when we are below 10;000 FT in a high threat environment from VFR aircraft; terrain; etc.They need to change the way they do things and ZZZ Tower and whoever else is involved; has to change the way they make the last minute decisions for changing the runway in use. This type of way the controllers do these things in this area is going to cause another incident/accident like the Airline accident where they ran off the end of the runway at an airport after getting approach and runway changes etc; by the controllers and they were so task saturated that they did not arm their speedbrakes for landing and then they went off the end. Thank you very much for your time and attention on this unsafe situation.The ZZZ Tower changing the runway in use too often and the resulting communications from Center and Approach Control to us.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.