Narrative:

Approach control cleared air carrier X for vectors to an ILS approach to runway 17L at dfw. At 3000' we were vectored to intercept the localizer and cleared for the ILS approach to runway 17L, told to maintain 190 KTS to the marker and to contact the tower. As we rolled out on the local we broke clear of the clouds and saw we were about 2 mi behind air carrier Y. Instead of switching to tower, I queried approach control on our sep from air carrier Y. He responded that we were cleared to the 18R ILS, given a vector to intercept that localizer and told to contact tower 124.15 for runway 18R at the marker. Approaching the marker I checked in with tower. Tower immediately told us to initiate a go around, climb to 3000' and contact approach control at the middle marker. The second approach and landing were uneventful. I believe there was confusion between approach control and the 18R and 17L tower controllers about which runway then wanted us on. Prior to the incident, approach control's communication to us was: 'cleared for ILS 17L, maintain 3000' until established on the localizer, maintain 190 KTS to the marker, contact tower on 126.55 at the marker.' I read it back, and was not challenged or corrected. That last communication, which is common at major hubs, is too much information for a single readback--it should be broken into 2 statements. Supplemental information from acn 138787: vectored to intercept th runway 17L ILS from the east side of the airport. When given the intercept heading the first officer repeated the instruction, including, 'to runway 17L.' once on the localizer we saw air carrier Y ahead with obviously less than standard separation. We asked approach about this and he stated we were cleared to runway 18R and were given a heading to intercept. Once intercepting runway 18R localizer we were issued missed approach instructions. We complied, made another approach to runway 17L and a normal landing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POSSIBLE LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION BETWEEN ACR X AND Y. SYSTEM ERROR. ACR X MADE ILS APCH TO WRONG RWY. OPERATIONAL DEVIATION.

Narrative: APCH CTL CLRED ACR X FOR VECTORS TO AN ILS APCH TO RWY 17L AT DFW. AT 3000' WE WERE VECTORED TO INTERCEPT THE LOC AND CLRED FOR THE ILS APCH TO RWY 17L, TOLD TO MAINTAIN 190 KTS TO THE MARKER AND TO CONTACT THE TWR. AS WE ROLLED OUT ON THE LCL WE BROKE CLR OF THE CLOUDS AND SAW WE WERE ABOUT 2 MI BEHIND ACR Y. INSTEAD OF SWITCHING TO TWR, I QUERIED APCH CTL ON OUR SEP FROM ACR Y. HE RESPONDED THAT WE WERE CLRED TO THE 18R ILS, GIVEN A VECTOR TO INTERCEPT THAT LOC AND TOLD TO CONTACT TWR 124.15 FOR RWY 18R AT THE MARKER. APCHING THE MARKER I CHKED IN WITH TWR. TWR IMMEDIATELY TOLD US TO INITIATE A GAR, CLB TO 3000' AND CONTACT APCH CTL AT THE MIDDLE MARKER. THE SECOND APCH AND LNDG WERE UNEVENTFUL. I BELIEVE THERE WAS CONFUSION BTWN APCH CTL AND THE 18R AND 17L TWR CTLRS ABOUT WHICH RWY THEN WANTED US ON. PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT, APCH CTL'S COM TO US WAS: 'CLRED FOR ILS 17L, MAINTAIN 3000' UNTIL ESTABLISHED ON THE LOC, MAINTAIN 190 KTS TO THE MARKER, CONTACT TWR ON 126.55 AT THE MARKER.' I READ IT BACK, AND WAS NOT CHALLENGED OR CORRECTED. THAT LAST COM, WHICH IS COMMON AT MAJOR HUBS, IS TOO MUCH INFO FOR A SINGLE READBACK--IT SHOULD BE BROKEN INTO 2 STATEMENTS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 138787: VECTORED TO INTERCEPT TH RWY 17L ILS FROM THE E SIDE OF THE ARPT. WHEN GIVEN THE INTERCEPT HDG THE F/O REPEATED THE INSTRUCTION, INCLUDING, 'TO RWY 17L.' ONCE ON THE LOC WE SAW ACR Y AHEAD WITH OBVIOUSLY LTSS. WE ASKED APCH ABOUT THIS AND HE STATED WE WERE CLRED TO RWY 18R AND WERE GIVEN A HDG TO INTERCEPT. ONCE INTERCEPTING RWY 18R LOC WE WERE ISSUED MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS. WE COMPLIED, MADE ANOTHER APCH TO RWY 17L AND A NORMAL LNDG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.