Narrative:

This sequence of trips had me paired with a very experienced, very capable, and very consciencious FAA designated check airman. Owing to his high diligence and capability displayed throughout the course of the trip series I felt very secure flying with this individual. The final leg of the series ended with the civit two profile descent to a landing on runway 25L at lax. Upon being cleared for the profile descent by la center, the captain/instrument directed me to dial in the los angeles ILS frequency used in this descent which he had tuned in his radio. I looked over at what he had tuned in his receiver and tuned the same frequency in mine, 109.7, west/O consulting my chart. I noticed we were high on the G/south, with the localizer 'pegged' to the right. I pulled the spdbrakes, increasing speed and rate of descent in order to try to cross civit as close to 14000' as possible. At the same time I began correcting to the right in order to intercept the localizer. I xed what I assumed to be civit high at FL180 and continued down in order to cross arnes at as close to 10000'/250 KTS as possible. I believe I was very close to 1000'; still no movement on the localizer when an urgent call from center directed me to 'climb immediately to 14000'' west/O hesitation I did this. It was shortly after this that we discovered that the ILS frequency whcih we both had tuned was for ontario, runway 26L; about 40 mi closer to us than la! It is hard to point to determine exactly were we were or how close to the mountains we were. I consider this to be a major altitude bust! My assessment, for myself, of this incident is as follows: I am a professional, and this is a basic violation of procedure. I continue to learn not to trust/assume that anyone's performance will be perfect and it seems always that I relearn this lesson when I am flying with those in our profession who seem the most competent. A simple glance at the chart would have told me that 109.9 was the correct frequency. But I assumed that 109.7 was correct because it came from this individual who had performed so flawlessly up to this point. He later intimated to me that because he had been flying so many trips out of and into ontario recently, he had tuned in 109.7 from memory. I would very much like to be able to pass along to others in my profession this experience. One of the problems, as I see it, which would seem to prohibit the free exchange of such information, is the punitive nature of the FAA. This institution is feared and hated by most pilots such as is the IRS by the general population. Mistakes such as the above described are not made on purpose. And yet they are perceived by most of us to be treated by the FAA as though they were.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW OF WDB CLEARED FOR CIVET PROFILE INTO LAX INADVERTENTLY TUNES IN THE ONT LOC INSTEAD OF THE LAX LOC AND DESCENDS USING THE I-ONT DME ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE CIVET PROFILE DESCENT CHART, TAKING THEM DOWN TO 10000' AND TOWARD TERRAIN IN EXCESS OF 11000' BEFORE ZLA CTLR WARNS THEM TO CLIMB.

Narrative: THIS SEQUENCE OF TRIPS HAD ME PAIRED WITH A VERY EXPERIENCED, VERY CAPABLE, AND VERY CONSCIENCIOUS FAA DESIGNATED CHK AIRMAN. OWING TO HIS HIGH DILIGENCE AND CAPABILITY DISPLAYED THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE TRIP SERIES I FELT VERY SECURE FLYING WITH THIS INDIVIDUAL. THE FINAL LEG OF THE SERIES ENDED WITH THE CIVIT TWO PROFILE DSCNT TO A LNDG ON RWY 25L AT LAX. UPON BEING CLRED FOR THE PROFILE DSNT BY LA CTR, THE CAPT/INSTR DIRECTED ME TO DIAL IN THE LOS ANGELES ILS FREQ USED IN THIS DSNT WHICH HE HAD TUNED IN HIS RADIO. I LOOKED OVER AT WHAT HE HAD TUNED IN HIS RECEIVER AND TUNED THE SAME FREQ IN MINE, 109.7, W/O CONSULTING MY CHART. I NOTICED WE WERE HIGH ON THE G/S, WITH THE LOC 'PEGGED' TO THE R. I PULLED THE SPDBRAKES, INCREASING SPD AND RATE OF DSNT IN ORDER TO TRY TO CROSS CIVIT AS CLOSE TO 14000' AS POSSIBLE. AT THE SAME TIME I BEGAN CORRECTING TO THE R IN ORDER TO INTERCEPT THE LOC. I XED WHAT I ASSUMED TO BE CIVIT HIGH AT FL180 AND CONTINUED DOWN IN ORDER TO CROSS ARNES AT AS CLOSE TO 10000'/250 KTS AS POSSIBLE. I BELIEVE I WAS VERY CLOSE TO 1000'; STILL NO MOVEMENT ON THE LOC WHEN AN URGENT CALL FROM CTR DIRECTED ME TO 'CLB IMMEDIATELY TO 14000'' W/O HESITATION I DID THIS. IT WAS SHORTLY AFTER THIS THAT WE DISCOVERED THAT THE ILS FREQ WHCIH WE BOTH HAD TUNED WAS FOR ONTARIO, RWY 26L; ABOUT 40 MI CLOSER TO US THAN LA! IT IS HARD TO POINT TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WERE WE WERE OR HOW CLOSE TO THE MOUNTAINS WE WERE. I CONSIDER THIS TO BE A MAJOR ALT BUST! MY ASSESSMENT, FOR MYSELF, OF THIS INCIDENT IS AS FOLLOWS: I AM A PROFESSIONAL, AND THIS IS A BASIC VIOLATION OF PROC. I CONTINUE TO LEARN NOT TO TRUST/ASSUME THAT ANYONE'S PERFORMANCE WILL BE PERFECT AND IT SEEMS ALWAYS THAT I RELEARN THIS LESSON WHEN I AM FLYING WITH THOSE IN OUR PROFESSION WHO SEEM THE MOST COMPETENT. A SIMPLE GLANCE AT THE CHART WOULD HAVE TOLD ME THAT 109.9 WAS THE CORRECT FREQ. BUT I ASSUMED THAT 109.7 WAS CORRECT BECAUSE IT CAME FROM THIS INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD PERFORMED SO FLAWLESSLY UP TO THIS POINT. HE LATER INTIMATED TO ME THAT BECAUSE HE HAD BEEN FLYING SO MANY TRIPS OUT OF AND INTO ONTARIO RECENTLY, HE HAD TUNED IN 109.7 FROM MEMORY. I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PASS ALONG TO OTHERS IN MY PROFESSION THIS EXPERIENCE. ONE OF THE PROBS, AS I SEE IT, WHICH WOULD SEEM TO PROHIBIT THE FREE EXCHANGE OF SUCH INFO, IS THE PUNITIVE NATURE OF THE FAA. THIS INSTITUTION IS FEARED AND HATED BY MOST PLTS SUCH AS IS THE IRS BY THE GENERAL POPULATION. MISTAKES SUCH AS THE ABOVE DESCRIBED ARE NOT MADE ON PURPOSE. AND YET THEY ARE PERCEIVED BY MOST OF US TO BE TREATED BY THE FAA AS THOUGH THEY WERE.

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.