Narrative:

The WX in oak was approximately 50 broken, 70 overcast, and cloud bottoms were ragged. Visability approximately 10. Runway in use was runway 11 with ILS and visuals in use. We were descended to 6000 ft on a long downwind, with occasional ground contact. Downwind leg was extended to approximately 18 mi. Clearance then to approximately 3200 ft. Base turn 200 degrees. Clearance to be at or below 1800 ft at 6 DME from oak. Reached 1800 ft some 8-9 mi DME turn to 130 degrees and asked to call airport in sight. Lights on bridge were visible and lighted airport beyond bridge. Airport was called in sight. Since we were below GS that far out and not yet aligned with localizer, ILS indications appeared normal. We were cleared visual approach to runway 11. As we approached runway both of us noticed that ILS was not coming in, so we confirmed frequency, no flags, continued descent. We were switched to tower, and told we could request runway 09 right from them if we wanted. Request refused due to noise restrs by tower. Landing clearance received. Continued descent. Tower called us with low altitude alert, said oak 4 mi east. We saw numbers of runway we were approaching were runway 13, not runway 11, initiated go around, told tower we were at alameda and climbing to come to oakland. No touchdown was made at alameda. Landing at oakland uneventful, both of us very embarrassed. Lessons learned: although a visual approach may be acceptable if the criteria for accepting it are met. I will continue to fly the instrument approach briefed and insure that the visual clues match the navaids for the approach and switch to visual clues when it would normally be done on the instrument approach. Any doubt or questions about the approach or navaids should be asked of ATC controllers prior to committing to landing out of an approach. Long duty days call for heightened alertness towards the end of the day. As we brief the approach expected, nearby facilities that may affect visual clues will be a part of the briefing. Any deviations from the approach procedure briefed will be explained and understood by both crewmembers prior to executing them. Suggestions for this situation: this is only the second approach made to the east at oakland in the 7 yrs I have been flying out of southern ca because this approach is a relatively rare one for operators who occassionally use oakland, and because alameda is much more visible than oak approaching from the west, a simple phrase from the controller such as 'caution: NAS alameda at 1 O'clock 2 mi,' would help prevent nighttime confusion. Although it was not any controllers fault, and in fact ATC was very good that night, the timing of vectors, altitude changes, and frequency changes seemed to confirm that we were going to the right airport. Oakland airport was not so easy to pick out of the oakland area lights at night for someone unfamiliar with oak lighting, whereas alameda is very obvious and the vectors we were given put us right over it in a position to land. Another suggestion would be for the final controller to retain control of the aircraft until it is past alameda before clearing it for a visual or 'cleared to intercept localizer on present heading, then cleared visual runway 11 oakland.' although I accept full responsibility for this incident, these suggestions may prevent other crews from suffering the same embarrassment or perhaps a more serious incident.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CHARTER ACFT MAKES APCH TO WRONG ARPT.

Narrative: THE WX IN OAK WAS APPROX 50 BKN, 70 OVCST, AND CLOUD BOTTOMS WERE RAGGED. VISABILITY APPROX 10. RWY IN USE WAS RWY 11 WITH ILS AND VISUALS IN USE. WE WERE DSNDED TO 6000 FT ON A LONG DOWNWIND, WITH OCCASIONAL GND CONTACT. DOWNWIND LEG WAS EXTENDED TO APPROX 18 MI. CLRNC THEN TO APPROX 3200 FT. BASE TURN 200 DEGS. CLRNC TO BE AT OR BELOW 1800 FT AT 6 DME FROM OAK. REACHED 1800 FT SOME 8-9 MI DME TURN TO 130 DEGS AND ASKED TO CALL ARPT IN SIGHT. LIGHTS ON BRIDGE WERE VISIBLE AND LIGHTED ARPT BEYOND BRIDGE. ARPT WAS CALLED IN SIGHT. SINCE WE WERE BELOW GS THAT FAR OUT AND NOT YET ALIGNED WITH LOC, ILS INDICATIONS APPEARED NORMAL. WE WERE CLRED VISUAL APCH TO RWY 11. AS WE APCHED RWY BOTH OF US NOTICED THAT ILS WAS NOT COMING IN, SO WE CONFIRMED FREQ, NO FLAGS, CONTINUED DSCNT. WE WERE SWITCHED TO TWR, AND TOLD WE COULD REQUEST RWY 09 R FROM THEM IF WE WANTED. REQUEST REFUSED DUE TO NOISE RESTRS BY TWR. LNDG CLRNC RECEIVED. CONTINUED DSCNT. TWR CALLED US WITH LOW ALT ALERT, SAID OAK 4 MI E. WE SAW NUMBERS OF RWY WE WERE APCHING WERE RWY 13, NOT RWY 11, INITIATED GAR, TOLD TWR WE WERE AT ALAMEDA AND CLBING TO COME TO OAKLAND. NO TOUCHDOWN WAS MADE AT ALAMEDA. LNDG AT OAKLAND UNEVENTFUL, BOTH OF US VERY EMBARRASSED. LESSONS LEARNED: ALTHOUGH A VISUAL APCH MAY BE ACCEPTABLE IF THE CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTING IT ARE MET. I WILL CONTINUE TO FLY THE INST APCH BRIEFED AND INSURE THAT THE VISUAL CLUES MATCH THE NAVAIDS FOR THE APCH AND SWITCH TO VISUAL CLUES WHEN IT WOULD NORMALLY BE DONE ON THE INST APCH. ANY DOUBT OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APCH OR NAVAIDS SHOULD BE ASKED OF ATC CTLRS PRIOR TO COMMITTING TO LNDG OUT OF AN APCH. LONG DUTY DAYS CALL FOR HEIGHTENED ALERTNESS TOWARDS THE END OF THE DAY. AS WE BRIEF THE APCH EXPECTED, NEARBY FACILITIES THAT MAY AFFECT VISUAL CLUES WILL BE A PART OF THE BRIEFING. ANY DEVS FROM THE APCH PROC BRIEFED WILL BE EXPLAINED AND UNDERSTOOD BY BOTH CREWMEMBERS PRIOR TO EXECUTING THEM. SUGGESTIONS FOR THIS SIT: THIS IS ONLY THE SECOND APCH MADE TO THE E AT OAKLAND IN THE 7 YRS I HAVE BEEN FLYING OUT OF SOUTHERN CA BECAUSE THIS APCH IS A RELATIVELY RARE ONE FOR OPERATORS WHO OCCASSIONALLY USE OAKLAND, AND BECAUSE ALAMEDA IS MUCH MORE VISIBLE THAN OAK APCHING FROM THE W, A SIMPLE PHRASE FROM THE CTLR SUCH AS 'CAUTION: NAS ALAMEDA AT 1 O'CLOCK 2 MI,' WOULD HELP PREVENT NIGHTTIME CONFUSION. ALTHOUGH IT WAS NOT ANY CTLRS FAULT, AND IN FACT ATC WAS VERY GOOD THAT NIGHT, THE TIMING OF VECTORS, ALT CHANGES, AND FREQ CHANGES SEEMED TO CONFIRM THAT WE WERE GOING TO THE RIGHT ARPT. OAKLAND ARPT WAS NOT SO EASY TO PICK OUT OF THE OAKLAND AREA LIGHTS AT NIGHT FOR SOMEONE UNFAMILIAR WITH OAK LIGHTING, WHEREAS ALAMEDA IS VERY OBVIOUS AND THE VECTORS WE WERE GIVEN PUT US RIGHT OVER IT IN A POS TO LAND. ANOTHER SUGGESTION WOULD BE FOR THE FINAL CTLR TO RETAIN CTL OF THE ACFT UNTIL IT IS PAST ALAMEDA BEFORE CLRING IT FOR A VISUAL OR 'CLRED TO INTERCEPT LOC ON PRESENT HDG, THEN CLRED VISUAL RWY 11 OAKLAND.' ALTHOUGH I ACCEPT FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS INCIDENT, THESE SUGGESTIONS MAY PREVENT OTHER CREWS FROM SUFFERING THE SAME EMBARRASSMENT OR PERHAPS A MORE SERIOUS 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.