Narrative:

This flight originated in columbus, oh, and terminated in cleveland. It was 40 mins long and in VMC, and was the second trip of the day. The aircraft, an emb 120, was not equipped with TCASII. At about 15 NM from airport, approach pointed out our traffic to follow at 12 O'clock on final approach to runway 5R. We acknowledged traffic and were cleared to follow him for the visual approach to runway 5R. At about 8 NM, before turning onto final, approach informed us we were gaining on our traffic and were told to switch to runway 5L, pass behind traffic and do not pass traffic on final. Our spacing on the aircraft we were following was fine, about 4 NM. As we crossed the approach path of runway 5R, another aircraft on the frequency informed approach that an aircraft (us) had just passed in front of him. We proceeded to turn on final for runway 5L and he proceeded for runway 5R. At this time we were still under the impression that we were following the right aircraft, which by now was already on the ground. When we were first given traffic to follow, evidently we idented the wrong aircraft. We wrongly were following this aircraft to the airport. When approach switched us to the left runway, this was to avoid gaining on our traffic. Evidently he had perceived a possible conflict and if he would have let us know, or perhaps verified where our traffic was, this could have been avoided. If he maybe would have worded his instructions differently when he switched us to the other runway, we then might have perceived a problem was at hand. Also, for the past 2 1/2 yrs I have been flying aircraft with TCASII. I believe that if we would have had TCASII this would not have happened, as we could have backed up what we saw visually with the TCASII display. We would have been able to determine very early in this chain of events that we were following the wrong aircraft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC CROSSED IN FRONT OF ANOTHER ACFT AHEAD OF THEM ON FINAL DUE TO MISTAKENLY IDENTING THE WRONG ACFT TO FOLLOW.

Narrative: THIS FLT ORIGINATED IN COLUMBUS, OH, AND TERMINATED IN CLEVELAND. IT WAS 40 MINS LONG AND IN VMC, AND WAS THE SECOND TRIP OF THE DAY. THE ACFT, AN EMB 120, WAS NOT EQUIPPED WITH TCASII. AT ABOUT 15 NM FROM ARPT, APCH POINTED OUT OUR TFC TO FOLLOW AT 12 O'CLOCK ON FINAL APCH TO RWY 5R. WE ACKNOWLEDGED TFC AND WERE CLRED TO FOLLOW HIM FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 5R. AT ABOUT 8 NM, BEFORE TURNING ONTO FINAL, APCH INFORMED US WE WERE GAINING ON OUR TFC AND WERE TOLD TO SWITCH TO RWY 5L, PASS BEHIND TFC AND DO NOT PASS TFC ON FINAL. OUR SPACING ON THE ACFT WE WERE FOLLOWING WAS FINE, ABOUT 4 NM. AS WE CROSSED THE APCH PATH OF RWY 5R, ANOTHER ACFT ON THE FREQ INFORMED APCH THAT AN ACFT (US) HAD JUST PASSED IN FRONT OF HIM. WE PROCEEDED TO TURN ON FINAL FOR RWY 5L AND HE PROCEEDED FOR RWY 5R. AT THIS TIME WE WERE STILL UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE WERE FOLLOWING THE RIGHT ACFT, WHICH BY NOW WAS ALREADY ON THE GND. WHEN WE WERE FIRST GIVEN TFC TO FOLLOW, EVIDENTLY WE IDENTED THE WRONG ACFT. WE WRONGLY WERE FOLLOWING THIS ACFT TO THE ARPT. WHEN APCH SWITCHED US TO THE L RWY, THIS WAS TO AVOID GAINING ON OUR TFC. EVIDENTLY HE HAD PERCEIVED A POSSIBLE CONFLICT AND IF HE WOULD HAVE LET US KNOW, OR PERHAPS VERIFIED WHERE OUR TFC WAS, THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. IF HE MAYBE WOULD HAVE WORDED HIS INSTRUCTIONS DIFFERENTLY WHEN HE SWITCHED US TO THE OTHER RWY, WE THEN MIGHT HAVE PERCEIVED A PROB WAS AT HAND. ALSO, FOR THE PAST 2 1/2 YRS I HAVE BEEN FLYING ACFT WITH TCASII. I BELIEVE THAT IF WE WOULD HAVE HAD TCASII THIS WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED, AS WE COULD HAVE BACKED UP WHAT WE SAW VISUALLY WITH THE TCASII DISPLAY. WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DETERMINE VERY EARLY IN THIS CHAIN OF EVENTS THAT WE WERE FOLLOWING THE WRONG ACFT.

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.