Narrative:

Upon handoff to second approach control facility, our flight was cleared to maintain 4000 ft and 190 KTS till the marker. We were on a steep base approximately 18-20 NM north of the airport with converging aircraft from all quadrants being vectored by approach control for the pm recovery. Additional instructions were received to intercept final approach course. As PNF, I had responded to traffic call which was intended for a different aircraft, 'maintain visual separations from parallel traffic'. Some preoccupation with this close traffic apparently took my eyes 'off of the store' as I responded to approach control about visual separation. Approach control and the follow on aircraft behind us correctly sorted out the traffic report to which I acknowledged. Meanwhile the first officer had intercepted the GS and started down the chute. At 3600 ft, approach requested if we had 'field in sight.' we responded affirmative. The next request was for our altitude. We responded 3500 ft. At this point we were then cleared for a visual approach. Although above/on the GS for the past 3-4 NM, we had never been cleared for the approach or cleared visual approach. Workload for this phase was particularly heavy due to converging traffic, traffic calls and approach handoffs. Additionally, had we correctly maintained our 4000 ft clearance, we would have been above/off scale the GS. This too may have painted an unusual distracting depiction which led to incorrectly starting down prematurely. Recommend minimum handoffs in congested airspace.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALTDEV.

Narrative: UPON HDOF TO SECOND APCH CTL FACILITY, OUR FLT WAS CLRED TO MAINTAIN 4000 FT AND 190 KTS TILL THE MARKER. WE WERE ON A STEEP BASE APPROX 18-20 NM N OF THE ARPT WITH CONVERGING ACFT FROM ALL QUADRANTS BEING VECTORED BY APCH CTL FOR THE PM RECOVERY. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS WERE RECEIVED TO INTERCEPT FINAL APCH COURSE. AS PNF, I HAD RESPONDED TO TFC CALL WHICH WAS INTENDED FOR A DIFFERENT ACFT, 'MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATIONS FROM PARALLEL TFC'. SOME PREOCCUPATION WITH THIS CLOSE TFC APPARENTLY TOOK MY EYES 'OFF OF THE STORE' AS I RESPONDED TO APCH CTL ABOUT VISUAL SEPARATION. APCH CTL AND THE FOLLOW ON ACFT BEHIND US CORRECTLY SORTED OUT THE TFC RPT TO WHICH I ACKNOWLEDGED. MEANWHILE THE FO HAD INTERCEPTED THE GS AND STARTED DOWN THE CHUTE. AT 3600 FT, APCH REQUESTED IF WE HAD 'FIELD IN SIGHT.' WE RESPONDED AFFIRMATIVE. THE NEXT REQUEST WAS FOR OUR ALT. WE RESPONDED 3500 FT. AT THIS POINT WE WERE THEN CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH. ALTHOUGH ABOVE/ON THE GS FOR THE PAST 3-4 NM, WE HAD NEVER BEEN CLRED FOR THE APCH OR CLRED VISUAL APCH. WORKLOAD FOR THIS PHASE WAS PARTICULARLY HVY DUE TO CONVERGING TFC, TFC CALLS AND APCH HDOFS. ADDITIONALLY, HAD WE CORRECTLY MAINTAINED OUR 4000 FT CLRNC, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOVE/OFF SCALE THE GS. THIS TOO MAY HAVE PAINTED AN UNUSUAL DISTRACTING DEPICTION WHICH LED TO INCORRECTLY STARTING DOWN PREMATURELY. RECOMMEND MINIMUM HDOFS IN CONGESTED AIRSPACE.

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.