Narrative:

I was training a developmental on the local control position at ZZZ. The weather was VFR but there was rain on the field and heavy precipitation and thunderstorms in the vicinity. Aircraft X checked in on our frequency inbound from the northwest on a visual approach. At the time aircraft X was one to two miles northwest of the airport (ZZZ1) which his flight path would take him directly over as he joined the final. However; instead of continuing inbound for runway 18; the pilot descended to land at ZZZ1.the approach controller called us to verify that aircraft X was still inbound to the correct airport at which point the developmental reached out to aircraft X to let him know he was still 5 miles from ZZZ and to verify he had the correct airport in sight. The pilot seemed confused so at this point I took over the frequency. I asked the pilot if he had landed or was continuing inbound for ZZZ. It was difficult to hear everything the pilot said as the local control frequency at ZZZ is not meant for use on the ground at ZZZ1 but the pilot did verify that he was on the ground. I requested he cancel IFR; advised that ZZZ was no longer reporting VFR weather and issued the approach frequency for ZZZ1 so that he could call approach if he wanted to continue to ZZZ IFR. A short time later aircraft X contacted TRACON and departed ZZZ1 on a special VFR clearance for ZZZ where he landed without incident.contributing factors on our part included training and weather conditions. The developmental I was training is low on hours and told me he had never worked in adverse weather conditions before. Because of this we spent a good deal of time on position discussing the radar weather display; non-standard procedures and ways to be flexible when storms arrive. When aircraft X initially contacted us; the developmental was in the process of clearing an air carrier jet for takeoff. This involved putting the aircraft in position; suggesting a heading and giving the pilot time to review his own weather radar in case he wanted to request a different initial heading. When an acceptable departure heading was decided on; the developmental coordinated the heading with departure and cleared the jet for takeoff. This process and the questions it led to from the developmental took some of our attention away from the aircraft on final. Also; as the pilot was already at a low altitude when he checked on and was expected to fly directly over ZZZ1; it did not take long for him to descend and land.I'm not sure if the weather played a role in the pilot's confusion but it may not have been wise to clear him for a visual approach when the weather was marginal VFR and likely to become IFR. We were advertising instrument approaches but the pilot had requested a visual approach. While not necessarily a procedural change; I will do my best in the future to check with any aircraft flying low level and on a flight path close to ZZZ1 to ensure they have the correct airport in sight. I would also suggest emphasizing the vicinity of ZZZ1 to ZZZ in the classroom curriculum so that developmental controllers are also aware of the possible confusion.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Several Air Traffic Controllers reported an aircraft on a Visual Approach that landed at the wrong airport.

Narrative: I was training a developmental on the Local Control position at ZZZ. The weather was VFR but there was rain on the field and heavy precipitation and thunderstorms in the vicinity. Aircraft X checked in on our frequency inbound from the Northwest on a Visual Approach. At the time Aircraft X was one to two miles northwest of the airport (ZZZ1) which his flight path would take him directly over as he joined the final. However; instead of continuing inbound for RWY 18; the pilot descended to land at ZZZ1.The approach controller called us to verify that Aircraft X was still inbound to the correct airport at which point the developmental reached out to Aircraft X to let him know he was still 5 miles from ZZZ and to verify he had the correct airport in sight. The pilot seemed confused so at this point I took over the frequency. I asked the pilot if he had landed or was continuing inbound for ZZZ. It was difficult to hear everything the pilot said as the Local Control frequency at ZZZ is not meant for use on the ground at ZZZ1 but the pilot did verify that he was on the ground. I requested he cancel IFR; advised that ZZZ was no longer reporting VFR weather and issued the approach frequency for ZZZ1 so that he could call approach if he wanted to continue to ZZZ IFR. A short time later Aircraft X contacted TRACON and departed ZZZ1 on a special VFR clearance for ZZZ where he landed without incident.Contributing factors on our part included training and weather conditions. The developmental I was training is low on hours and told me he had never worked in adverse weather conditions before. Because of this we spent a good deal of time on position discussing the radar weather display; non-standard procedures and ways to be flexible when storms arrive. When Aircraft X initially contacted us; the developmental was in the process of clearing an air carrier jet for takeoff. This involved putting the aircraft in position; suggesting a heading and giving the pilot time to review his own weather radar in case he wanted to request a different initial heading. When an acceptable departure heading was decided on; the developmental coordinated the heading with departure and cleared the jet for takeoff. This process and the questions it led to from the developmental took some of our attention away from the aircraft on final. Also; as the pilot was already at a low altitude when he checked on and was expected to fly directly over ZZZ1; it did not take long for him to descend and land.I'm not sure if the weather played a role in the pilot's confusion but it may not have been wise to clear him for a visual approach when the weather was marginal VFR and likely to become IFR. We were advertising instrument approaches but the pilot had requested a visual approach. While not necessarily a procedural change; I will do my best in the future to check with any aircraft flying low level and on a flight path close to ZZZ1 to ensure they have the correct airport in sight. I would also suggest emphasizing the vicinity of ZZZ1 to ZZZ in the classroom curriculum so that developmental controllers are also aware of the possible confusion.

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.