Tower controller alleges flight landed wrong runway at lax.

Attributes
ACN	126586
Time
Date	198910
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : lax
State Reference	CA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 2500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : lax
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Widebody, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach descent other landing other
Route In Use	arrival : profile descent
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : commercial pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 100
ASRS Report	126586
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 185 flight time total : 21000 flight time type : 1485
ASRS Report	126585
Events
Anomaly	incursion : runway non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Inter Facility Coordination Failure Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Flight was cleared for civet profile descent. Upon handoff to lax approach controller we were told to turn 10 degree right to intercept 24R localizer for ILS 24R visual approach. We were then asked if we had aircraft widebody transport approaching from the west, who was also cleared for approach to 24R. We stated, affirmative, aircraft in sight and then due to the fact we were closing in on him, told by the approach controller to now side-step for landing on 24L, which we then acknowledged. Due to the closure rate on the widebody transport, we began an immediate reduction of speed, so as to not conflict during the parallel approach. At this time we were handed off to tower control, who then cleared us to land. Upon landing touchdown we were told by the tower controller that we had landed on the wrong runway, implying he had cleared us for landing on 24R. An uneventful rollout and taxi in to the gate was completed. In summary, we feel that if we indeed were cleared by the tower for runway 24R, he would have at least told us to side-step back to 24R, which then would have helped us determine at that point if it was even possible in order to make a safe landing.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TWR CTLR ALLEGES FLT LANDED WRONG RWY AT LAX.

Narrative: FLT WAS CLRED FOR CIVET PROFILE DSCNT. UPON HANDOFF TO LAX APCH CTLR WE WERE TOLD TO TURN 10 DEG RIGHT TO INTERCEPT 24R LOC FOR ILS 24R VISUAL APCH. WE WERE THEN ASKED IF WE HAD ACFT WDB APCHING FROM THE W, WHO WAS ALSO CLRED FOR APCH TO 24R. WE STATED, AFFIRMATIVE, ACFT IN SIGHT AND THEN DUE TO THE FACT WE WERE CLOSING IN ON HIM, TOLD BY THE APCH CTLR TO NOW SIDE-STEP FOR LNDG ON 24L, WHICH WE THEN ACKNOWLEDGED. DUE TO THE CLOSURE RATE ON THE WDB, WE BEGAN AN IMMEDIATE REDUCTION OF SPEED, SO AS TO NOT CONFLICT DURING THE PARALLEL APCH. AT THIS TIME WE WERE HANDED OFF TO TWR CTL, WHO THEN CLRED US TO LAND. UPON LNDG TOUCHDOWN WE WERE TOLD BY THE TWR CTLR THAT WE HAD LANDED ON THE WRONG RWY, IMPLYING HE HAD CLRED US FOR LNDG ON 24R. AN UNEVENTFUL ROLLOUT AND TAXI IN TO THE GATE WAS COMPLETED. IN SUMMARY, WE FEEL THAT IF WE INDEED WERE CLRED BY THE TWR FOR RWY 24R, HE WOULD HAVE AT LEAST TOLD US TO SIDE-STEP BACK TO 24R, WHICH THEN WOULD HAVE HELPED US DETERMINE AT THAT POINT IF IT WAS EVEN POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO MAKE A SAFE LNDG.

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.