Narrative:

I flew the VOR/DME-a approach to teterboro airport, nj, on an IFR flight plan under the control of new york approach control. The ATIS advised that the wind was from 250 degrees at 9 KTS and that lndgs were being conducted on runway 24 and 19. I mentally calculated the crosswind, downwind, base leg and final approach headings based on runway 24 in the belief that the somewhat significant wind would dictate that as my landing runway assignment. New york approach control passed me off to teterboro tower 4 or 5 mi out. As I passed overhead for the circling approach, teterboro tower said 'small transport clear to land runway 19.' I understood the runway assignment. Instead of turning to the proper crosswind, downwind and base leg headings for runway 19, however, I inadvertently used the headings I had calculated for runway 24 including rolling out on the start of a 1 1/2 mi final approach to runway 24. When I rolled out on final for 24, I noticed that an aircraft was holding in the landing zone end of the runway. Although I still had not become cognizant of my runway error, I was about to call teterboro tower to inquire about their intentions for the aircraft on the runway, when they noticed my mistake and told me that I was lined up for runway 24, not runway 19. I said I would correct my position, they acknowledged my transmission and we had no further conversation. I flew a modified base leg to runway 19 and landed as originally cleared without incident.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT ON VOR DME APCH LINES UP WITH WRONG RWY.

Narrative: I FLEW THE VOR/DME-A APCH TO TETERBORO ARPT, NJ, ON AN IFR FLT PLAN UNDER THE CTL OF NEW YORK APCH CTL. THE ATIS ADVISED THAT THE WIND WAS FROM 250 DEGS AT 9 KTS AND THAT LNDGS WERE BEING CONDUCTED ON RWY 24 AND 19. I MENTALLY CALCULATED THE XWIND, DOWNWIND, BASE LEG AND FINAL APCH HDGS BASED ON RWY 24 IN THE BELIEF THAT THE SOMEWHAT SIGNIFICANT WIND WOULD DICTATE THAT AS MY LNDG RWY ASSIGNMENT. NEW YORK APCH CTL PASSED ME OFF TO TETERBORO TWR 4 OR 5 MI OUT. AS I PASSED OVERHEAD FOR THE CIRCLING APCH, TETERBORO TWR SAID 'SMT CLR TO LAND RWY 19.' I UNDERSTOOD THE RWY ASSIGNMENT. INSTEAD OF TURNING TO THE PROPER XWIND, DOWNWIND AND BASE LEG HDGS FOR RWY 19, HOWEVER, I INADVERTENTLY USED THE HDGS I HAD CALCULATED FOR RWY 24 INCLUDING ROLLING OUT ON THE START OF A 1 1/2 MI FINAL APCH TO RWY 24. WHEN I ROLLED OUT ON FINAL FOR 24, I NOTICED THAT AN ACFT WAS HOLDING IN THE LNDG ZONE END OF THE RWY. ALTHOUGH I STILL HAD NOT BECOME COGNIZANT OF MY RWY ERROR, I WAS ABOUT TO CALL TETERBORO TWR TO INQUIRE ABOUT THEIR INTENTIONS FOR THE ACFT ON THE RWY, WHEN THEY NOTICED MY MISTAKE AND TOLD ME THAT I WAS LINED UP FOR RWY 24, NOT RWY 19. I SAID I WOULD CORRECT MY POS, THEY ACKNOWLEDGED MY XMISSION AND WE HAD NO FURTHER CONVERSATION. I FLEW A MODIFIED BASE LEG TO RWY 19 AND LANDED AS ORIGINALLY CLRED WITHOUT INCIDENT.

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.