Narrative:

ATIS stated approachs were being made to 27L and 27R. Approach cleared us for what we thought was a visibility approach to 27L. The captain felt that we had read back 27L and I was also under the impression he had. Upon crossing the final course of 32L, the controller called and said we should be going to 32L. He then turned us left to a heading that put us on a right base for 32L. There was no traffic conflict at this point. Prior to turning final to 32L, we noticed a bomber on a close-in pattern begin a left turn for landing inside of us. We continued on our base heading and were vectored back for an uneventful approach and landing on 32L. There were a few factors leading to our overshoot. 1) ATIS was saying that landing aircraft were using 27L and 27R with no mention of 32L. 2) we were handed off to approach to 121.15. After several attempts of calling on this frequency with no reply, we went back to our previous frequency. He again told us to try 121.15. Still no luck. After returning again to our previous frequency, we were given 125.7. Shortly thereafter we were again handed to approach on 121.15 with 2-WAY communications finally established. This particular problem took a considerable amount of time. Due to all the switching back and forth, neither the captain nor I heard any of the controllers tell us a particular runway to expect, which is highly unusual at ord. 3) at one point, we were given an 090 degree heading, which would be appropriate for a downwind to 27L. In addition to the overshoot situation, I would like to comment on the tower situation with the bmb. On approach, I heard the controller tell what I understood to be the bmb that he could only have a straight in, full stop landing. Since the bmb was not on VHF, I did not hear his transmission, but the controller restated he could only have a straight in, full stop landing, so we were pretty surprised to see him on a close in left downwind after a touch and go. I don't think the tower controller was expecting us on 32L. I sincerely believe we were initially at least being vectored to 27L. I would like to make one recommendation: I think all aircraft utilizing large airports such as ord should be required to have VHF capability, and more importantly, use it.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW OF ACR WBD ON APCH INTO ORD MISTAKENLY BELIEVES THAT THEY ARE CLEARED FOR 27L UNTIL CTLR TELLS THEM THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO LINE UP WITH 32L. AFTER GETTING THAT PROBLEM RESOLVED, THE FLT CREW FEELS THAT THEY ARE TOO CLOSE TO A LNDG BMB AHEAD OF THEM AND ASKS FOR VECTORS BACK FOR ANOTHER VISUAL APCH.

Narrative: ATIS STATED APCHS WERE BEING MADE TO 27L AND 27R. APCH CLRED US FOR WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS A VIS APCH TO 27L. THE CAPT FELT THAT WE HAD READ BACK 27L AND I WAS ALSO UNDER THE IMPRESSION HE HAD. UPON XING THE FINAL COURSE OF 32L, THE CTLR CALLED AND SAID WE SHOULD BE GOING TO 32L. HE THEN TURNED US LEFT TO A HDG THAT PUT US ON A RIGHT BASE FOR 32L. THERE WAS NO TFC CONFLICT AT THIS POINT. PRIOR TO TURNING FINAL TO 32L, WE NOTICED A BOMBER ON A CLOSE-IN PATTERN BEGIN A LEFT TURN FOR LNDG INSIDE OF US. WE CONTINUED ON OUR BASE HDG AND WERE VECTORED BACK FOR AN UNEVENTFUL APCH AND LNDG ON 32L. THERE WERE A FEW FACTORS LEADING TO OUR OVERSHOOT. 1) ATIS WAS SAYING THAT LNDG ACFT WERE USING 27L AND 27R WITH NO MENTION OF 32L. 2) WE WERE HANDED OFF TO APCH TO 121.15. AFTER SEVERAL ATTEMPTS OF CALLING ON THIS FREQ WITH NO REPLY, WE WENT BACK TO OUR PREVIOUS FREQ. HE AGAIN TOLD US TO TRY 121.15. STILL NO LUCK. AFTER RETURNING AGAIN TO OUR PREVIOUS FREQ, WE WERE GIVEN 125.7. SHORTLY THEREAFTER WE WERE AGAIN HANDED TO APCH ON 121.15 WITH 2-WAY COMS FINALLY ESTABLISHED. THIS PARTICULAR PROB TOOK A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. DUE TO ALL THE SWITCHING BACK AND FORTH, NEITHER THE CAPT NOR I HEARD ANY OF THE CTLRS TELL US A PARTICULAR RWY TO EXPECT, WHICH IS HIGHLY UNUSUAL AT ORD. 3) AT ONE POINT, WE WERE GIVEN AN 090 DEG HDG, WHICH WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR A DOWNWIND TO 27L. IN ADDITION TO THE OVERSHOOT SITUATION, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THE TWR SITUATION WITH THE BMB. ON APCH, I HEARD THE CTLR TELL WHAT I UNDERSTOOD TO BE THE BMB THAT HE COULD ONLY HAVE A STRAIGHT IN, FULL STOP LNDG. SINCE THE BMB WAS NOT ON VHF, I DID NOT HEAR HIS XMISSION, BUT THE CTLR RESTATED HE COULD ONLY HAVE A STRAIGHT IN, FULL STOP LNDG, SO WE WERE PRETTY SURPRISED TO SEE HIM ON A CLOSE IN LEFT DOWNWIND AFTER A TOUCH AND GO. I DON'T THINK THE TWR CTLR WAS EXPECTING US ON 32L. I SINCERELY BELIEVE WE WERE INITIALLY AT LEAST BEING VECTORED TO 27L. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE RECOMMENDATION: I THINK ALL ACFT UTILIZING LARGE ARPTS SUCH AS ORD SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE VHF CAPABILITY, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, USE IT.

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.