Narrative:

Day began with confusion. Reported for flight to mco and fll. Departure jetway pulled and pushback checklist being accomplished when company called for me to contact scheduling immediately. Jetway pulled back to aircraft. I called from jetway. I was told to trade trips with another captain. He was 'high minimums' (new' and the WX at ord required a more senior captain--me. This last second shuffle resulted in confusion and less than adequate preflight of WX and NOTAMS, briefings, etc. Upon arrival at ord, contacting approach control we were told to expect runway 14L ILS. It was completely briefed and all navaids tuned and idented. Then approach changed to 14R, then 9L, then 14R again. Each was briefed and tuned, but this confusion factor has us wondering and there were approach charts everywhere. The problem we found later was that after that last change, the proper course (140 degrees) was not set in the CDI. It still showed 090 degrees with radio tuned to 14R ILS. Controller issued a heading (don't remember what) and maintain 5000' until established, cleared approach. 090 degree right went by, which corresponded to on course, and at same time controller issued new heading of 310 degrees to correct back to real course. At this time, DME showed we were inside what I thought was sexxy intersection, so I descended out of 5000'. After a few seconds, we weren't intercepting, and controller came back and said fly heading 170 degrees to intercept and asked our altitude--then about 3500'. At that time we showed abeam the NDB at a 90 degree intercept to the CDI, which was still wrong. We initiated a missed approach at the same time the controller called for a go around. That is when we discovered the wrong course set in. The controller then told us we were being vectored back to 14R, then changed again to 9R, where we flew to nearly minimums and had an uneventful landing. The controllers were extremely busy on this day of WX at minimums, and that, coupled with numerous runway changes, set up the preceding scenario. 4 runway assignments in the last critical stages of flight is extreme. Under these conditions on this day at ord is uncalled-for,but I had the wrong course in and descended improperly before calling for missed approach. 1 less change of plans by ATC and all would have been fine, but the closer we got the faster the changes came. It was trouble looking for a place to happen. The only question asked by the controller was, 'did you descend out of 5000'?' he really didn't have time to question us further. Supplemental information from acn 141245: with ord at near minimums that day, controllers were extremely busy. 4 runway changes in this type of environment is ludicrous. In efforts to accommodate the controllers, we allowed ourselves to get overloaded and make a very big mistake. We were loaded down to the point of breakdown and I believe this true of the approach controllers as well. The only question asked by the controller was one concerning altitude. He was too busy to ask anything else.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALT HEADING TRACK DEVIATION.

Narrative: DAY BEGAN WITH CONFUSION. RPTED FOR FLT TO MCO AND FLL. DEP JETWAY PULLED AND PUSHBACK CHKLIST BEING ACCOMPLISHED WHEN COMPANY CALLED FOR ME TO CONTACT SCHEDULING IMMEDIATELY. JETWAY PULLED BACK TO ACFT. I CALLED FROM JETWAY. I WAS TOLD TO TRADE TRIPS WITH ANOTHER CAPT. HE WAS 'HIGH MINIMUMS' (NEW' AND THE WX AT ORD REQUIRED A MORE SENIOR CAPT--ME. THIS LAST SECOND SHUFFLE RESULTED IN CONFUSION AND LESS THAN ADEQUATE PREFLT OF WX AND NOTAMS, BRIEFINGS, ETC. UPON ARR AT ORD, CONTACTING APCH CTL WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT RWY 14L ILS. IT WAS COMPLETELY BRIEFED AND ALL NAVAIDS TUNED AND IDENTED. THEN APCH CHANGED TO 14R, THEN 9L, THEN 14R AGAIN. EACH WAS BRIEFED AND TUNED, BUT THIS CONFUSION FACTOR HAS US WONDERING AND THERE WERE APCH CHARTS EVERYWHERE. THE PROB WE FOUND LATER WAS THAT AFTER THAT LAST CHANGE, THE PROPER COURSE (140 DEGS) WAS NOT SET IN THE CDI. IT STILL SHOWED 090 DEGS WITH RADIO TUNED TO 14R ILS. CTLR ISSUED A HDG (DON'T REMEMBER WHAT) AND MAINTAIN 5000' UNTIL ESTABLISHED, CLRED APCH. 090 DEG R WENT BY, WHICH CORRESPONDED TO ON COURSE, AND AT SAME TIME CTLR ISSUED NEW HDG OF 310 DEGS TO CORRECT BACK TO REAL COURSE. AT THIS TIME, DME SHOWED WE WERE INSIDE WHAT I THOUGHT WAS SEXXY INTXN, SO I DSNDED OUT OF 5000'. AFTER A FEW SECS, WE WEREN'T INTERCEPTING, AND CTLR CAME BACK AND SAID FLY HDG 170 DEGS TO INTERCEPT AND ASKED OUR ALT--THEN ABOUT 3500'. AT THAT TIME WE SHOWED ABEAM THE NDB AT A 90 DEG INTERCEPT TO THE CDI, WHICH WAS STILL WRONG. WE INITIATED A MISSED APCH AT THE SAME TIME THE CTLR CALLED FOR A GAR. THAT IS WHEN WE DISCOVERED THE WRONG COURSE SET IN. THE CTLR THEN TOLD US WE WERE BEING VECTORED BACK TO 14R, THEN CHANGED AGAIN TO 9R, WHERE WE FLEW TO NEARLY MINIMUMS AND HAD AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG. THE CTLRS WERE EXTREMELY BUSY ON THIS DAY OF WX AT MINIMUMS, AND THAT, COUPLED WITH NUMEROUS RWY CHANGES, SET UP THE PRECEDING SCENARIO. 4 RWY ASSIGNMENTS IN THE LAST CRITICAL STAGES OF FLT IS EXTREME. UNDER THESE CONDITIONS ON THIS DAY AT ORD IS UNCALLED-FOR,BUT I HAD THE WRONG COURSE IN AND DSNDED IMPROPERLY BEFORE CALLING FOR MISSED APCH. 1 LESS CHANGE OF PLANS BY ATC AND ALL WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE, BUT THE CLOSER WE GOT THE FASTER THE CHANGES CAME. IT WAS TROUBLE LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO HAPPEN. THE ONLY QUESTION ASKED BY THE CTLR WAS, 'DID YOU DSND OUT OF 5000'?' HE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO QUESTION US FURTHER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 141245: WITH ORD AT NEAR MINIMUMS THAT DAY, CTLRS WERE EXTREMELY BUSY. 4 RWY CHANGES IN THIS TYPE OF ENVIRONMENT IS LUDICROUS. IN EFFORTS TO ACCOMMODATE THE CTLRS, WE ALLOWED OURSELVES TO GET OVERLOADED AND MAKE A VERY BIG MISTAKE. WE WERE LOADED DOWN TO THE POINT OF BREAKDOWN AND I BELIEVE THIS TRUE OF THE APCH CTLRS AS WELL. THE ONLY QUESTION ASKED BY THE CTLR WAS ONE CONCERNING ALT. HE WAS TOO BUSY TO ASK ANYTHING ELSE.

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.