Narrative:

On switchover to approach we were initially assigned to runway 05L. The approach was briefed in accordance with company guidelines. After receiving several vectors, we were switched to another approach frequency and then told the approach would now be to runway 05R. Approach plates were switched and the approach rebriefed. The inbound ILS course was the same for the right as for the left. Shortly thereafter we were given a final heading to intercept the localizer, cleared for the approach. After intercepting and tracking in on the ILS, the controller inquired whether we had intercepted the ILS final approach course yet, as it appeared we were tracking inbound on the ILS to runway 05L. We immediately checked the ILS frequency selected, finding runway 05L ILS dialed in rather than runway 05R. (We had never changed the selected ILS frequency after being changed from runway 05L to runway 05R.) we immediately dialed in runway 05R, broke off the approach to runway 05L and intercepted the runway 05R ILS about 4-5 mi out, finishing the approach west/O further incident. Contributing factors to the flight crew making this mistake and not detecting their error include: busy IMC conditions; distractions: 1) the captain was intent on trying to get the ADF tuned and idented (the ADF proved to be inoperative, unable to tune or identify any station), 2) the first officer was busy flying the aircraft, utilizing CAT ii procedures with the autoplt requiring more of his attention than normal (ie, not a procedure or technique you use every day), and 3) the F/east was busy calling and talking to maintenance re: several aircraft discrepancies and then helping the captain with the ADF.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT WRONG RWY APCH IMC.

Narrative: ON SWITCHOVER TO APCH WE WERE INITIALLY ASSIGNED TO RWY 05L. THE APCH WAS BRIEFED IAW COMPANY GUIDELINES. AFTER RECEIVING SEVERAL VECTORS, WE WERE SWITCHED TO ANOTHER APCH FREQ AND THEN TOLD THE APCH WOULD NOW BE TO RWY 05R. APCH PLATES WERE SWITCHED AND THE APCH REBRIEFED. THE INBND ILS COURSE WAS THE SAME FOR THE RIGHT AS FOR THE LEFT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER WE WERE GIVEN A FINAL HDG TO INTERCEPT THE LOC, CLRED FOR THE APCH. AFTER INTERCEPTING AND TRACKING IN ON THE ILS, THE CTLR INQUIRED WHETHER WE HAD INTERCEPTED THE ILS FINAL APCH COURSE YET, AS IT APPEARED WE WERE TRACKING INBND ON THE ILS TO RWY 05L. WE IMMEDIATELY CHKED THE ILS FREQ SELECTED, FINDING RWY 05L ILS DIALED IN RATHER THAN RWY 05R. (WE HAD NEVER CHANGED THE SELECTED ILS FREQ AFTER BEING CHANGED FROM RWY 05L TO RWY 05R.) WE IMMEDIATELY DIALED IN RWY 05R, BROKE OFF THE APCH TO RWY 05L AND INTERCEPTED THE RWY 05R ILS ABOUT 4-5 MI OUT, FINISHING THE APCH W/O FURTHER INCIDENT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THE FLT CREW MAKING THIS MISTAKE AND NOT DETECTING THEIR ERROR INCLUDE: BUSY IMC CONDITIONS; DISTRACTIONS: 1) THE CAPT WAS INTENT ON TRYING TO GET THE ADF TUNED AND IDENTED (THE ADF PROVED TO BE INOP, UNABLE TO TUNE OR IDENT ANY STATION), 2) THE F/O WAS BUSY FLYING THE ACFT, UTILIZING CAT II PROCS WITH THE AUTOPLT REQUIRING MORE OF HIS ATTN THAN NORMAL (IE, NOT A PROC OR TECHNIQUE YOU USE EVERY DAY), AND 3) THE F/E WAS BUSY CALLING AND TALKING TO MAINT RE: SEVERAL ACFT DISCREPANCIES AND THEN HELPING THE CAPT WITH THE ADF.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.