Flight crew of air carrier medium large transport confused about the type of approach they were clea...

Attributes
ACN	153313
Time
Date	199008
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : dfw
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 3000
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : dfw
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 5000 flight time type : 1900
ASRS Report	153313
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : commercial pilot : atp pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 9600 flight time type : 700
ASRS Report	153314
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Inter Facility Coordination Failure other

Narrative:

We were vectored from the east over the airport, around storms and eventually cleared 'ILS runway 13R'. Initially, based on ATIS, I briefed converging ILS-2-13R. It became apparent, because of a lower scud layer that ATIS was outdated and that approach control was clearing previous aircraft based upon the lower minimum ILS-1-13R. Heavy radio traffic because of the dynamic WX environment precluded a timely clarification of the actual airport approach status, ie, converging approachs or radar sep. I conformed to the status quo and flew the ILS-1-13R approach. I prefer to operate based on fact rather than assumptions and draw the following conclusions. A specific approach clearance or a timely radio call could have alleviated my concern of the airport approach status. There doesn't appear to be any readily available published guidance regard the 'converging approach'.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW OF ACR MLG CONFUSED ABOUT THE TYPE OF APCH THEY WERE CLRED TO FLY INTO DFW.

Narrative: WE WERE VECTORED FROM THE E OVER THE ARPT, AROUND STORMS AND EVENTUALLY CLRED 'ILS RWY 13R'. INITIALLY, BASED ON ATIS, I BRIEFED CONVERGING ILS-2-13R. IT BECAME APPARENT, BECAUSE OF A LOWER SCUD LAYER THAT ATIS WAS OUTDATED AND THAT APCH CTL WAS CLRING PREVIOUS ACFT BASED UPON THE LOWER MINIMUM ILS-1-13R. HVY RADIO TFC BECAUSE OF THE DYNAMIC WX ENVIRONMENT PRECLUDED A TIMELY CLARIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL ARPT APCH STATUS, IE, CONVERGING APCHS OR RADAR SEP. I CONFORMED TO THE STATUS QUO AND FLEW THE ILS-1-13R APCH. I PREFER TO OPERATE BASED ON FACT RATHER THAN ASSUMPTIONS AND DRAW THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS. A SPECIFIC APCH CLRNC OR A TIMELY RADIO CALL COULD HAVE ALLEVIATED MY CONCERN OF THE ARPT APCH STATUS. THERE DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY READILY AVAILABLE PUBLISHED GUIDANCE REGARD THE 'CONVERGING APCH'.

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.

Flight crew of air carrier medium large transport confused about the type of approach they were cleared to fly into dfw.