Narrative:

While being radar vectored by pt. Mugu approach to the localizer for the oxnard ILS 25 approach, controller vectored us through the localizer and away from an small aircraft approximately 1 mi away. We were then vectored northeast away from the airport with the request to maintain 180 KTS until the OM. We were then vectored back through the localizer and given a divergent heading from the localizer and told to intercept. Immediately we were given a corrected heading with a traffic call of an mlt within 1 1/2 mi, told to maintain visual separation and cleared for the ILS 25 approach. The PNF was involved with the traffic call and approach clearance while the PF was trying to resolve conflicting localizer information and visual cues to an airfield that appeared to be oxnard. Camarillo airport is aligned to the north side of the oxnard localizer but is not depicted on the approach plate. Its runway 26 is approximately 6015 ft by 150 ft with a displaced threshold, and all major airport facilities to the south side of the airfield. Oxnard's runway 25 is 5950 ft by 100 ft with a displaced threshold and its major facilities also lie to the south side of the field. This approach was the first into oxnard airfield for both pilots. While the PNF was talking to the controller and looking for the traffic, the PF scanned to the west along the localizer readout but did not discern another airport and allowed his visual cues to override the instruments. Both pilots tried to discuss the situation when approach switched us to oxnard tower. The PNF reported final for runway 25 while discussing again the conflicting information. When tower was again contacted, it reported that the aircraft was not in sight and attempting an approach to camarillo airport. A go around was initiated while looking for conflicting traffic and at the same time we were instructed by oxnard tower to go around, heading 140 degrees and climb to 4000 ft. The PNF confirmed we were going around. We were switched to pt. Mugu approach and vectored back for the ILS, landing without further incident. I believe that had we not been fixated on the traffic call and had been warned of the camarillo airport underlying the localizer with a warning on the approach plate we would not have mistaken the camarillo airport for oxnard. The 2 fields are very similar in appearance to first time arrs and that should be noted also in the IFR en route supplement. I actually believed there was something either wrong with the navaids or our navigation equipment at the time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WHILE ON AN ILS APCH TO OXR, MLT CREW SAW AND BEGAN APCH TO CMA ARPT WHICH LIES UNDER THE APCH TO OXR.

Narrative: WHILE BEING RADAR VECTORED BY PT. MUGU APCH TO THE LOC FOR THE OXNARD ILS 25 APCH, CTLR VECTORED US THROUGH THE LOC AND AWAY FROM AN SMA APPROX 1 MI AWAY. WE WERE THEN VECTORED NE AWAY FROM THE ARPT WITH THE REQUEST TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS UNTIL THE OM. WE WERE THEN VECTORED BACK THROUGH THE LOC AND GIVEN A DIVERGENT HDG FROM THE LOC AND TOLD TO INTERCEPT. IMMEDIATELY WE WERE GIVEN A CORRECTED HDG WITH A TFC CALL OF AN MLT WITHIN 1 1/2 MI, TOLD TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION AND CLRED FOR THE ILS 25 APCH. THE PNF WAS INVOLVED WITH THE TFC CALL AND APCH CLRNC WHILE THE PF WAS TRYING TO RESOLVE CONFLICTING LOC INFO AND VISUAL CUES TO AN AIRFIELD THAT APPEARED TO BE OXNARD. CAMARILLO ARPT IS ALIGNED TO THE N SIDE OF THE OXNARD LOC BUT IS NOT DEPICTED ON THE APCH PLATE. ITS RWY 26 IS APPROX 6015 FT BY 150 FT WITH A DISPLACED THRESHOLD, AND ALL MAJOR ARPT FACILITIES TO THE S SIDE OF THE AIRFIELD. OXNARD'S RWY 25 IS 5950 FT BY 100 FT WITH A DISPLACED THRESHOLD AND ITS MAJOR FACILITIES ALSO LIE TO THE S SIDE OF THE FIELD. THIS APCH WAS THE FIRST INTO OXNARD AIRFIELD FOR BOTH PLTS. WHILE THE PNF WAS TALKING TO THE CTLR AND LOOKING FOR THE TFC, THE PF SCANNED TO THE W ALONG THE LOC READOUT BUT DID NOT DISCERN ANOTHER ARPT AND ALLOWED HIS VISUAL CUES TO OVERRIDE THE INSTS. BOTH PLTS TRIED TO DISCUSS THE SIT WHEN APCH SWITCHED US TO OXNARD TWR. THE PNF RPTED FINAL FOR RWY 25 WHILE DISCUSSING AGAIN THE CONFLICTING INFO. WHEN TWR WAS AGAIN CONTACTED, IT RPTED THAT THE ACFT WAS NOT IN SIGHT AND ATTEMPTING AN APCH TO CAMARILLO ARPT. A GAR WAS INITIATED WHILE LOOKING FOR CONFLICTING TFC AND AT THE SAME TIME WE WERE INSTRUCTED BY OXNARD TWR TO GAR, HDG 140 DEGS AND CLB TO 4000 FT. THE PNF CONFIRMED WE WERE GOING AROUND. WE WERE SWITCHED TO PT. MUGU APCH AND VECTORED BACK FOR THE ILS, LNDG WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. I BELIEVE THAT HAD WE NOT BEEN FIXATED ON THE TFC CALL AND HAD BEEN WARNED OF THE CAMARILLO ARPT UNDERLYING THE LOC WITH A WARNING ON THE APCH PLATE WE WOULD NOT HAVE MISTAKEN THE CAMARILLO ARPT FOR OXNARD. THE 2 FIELDS ARE VERY SIMILAR IN APPEARANCE TO FIRST TIME ARRS AND THAT SHOULD BE NOTED ALSO IN THE IFR ENRTE SUPPLEMENT. I ACTUALLY BELIEVED THERE WAS SOMETHING EITHER WRONG WITH THE NAVAIDS OR OUR NAV EQUIP AT THE TIME.

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.