Narrative:

We were flying from sfo to lax. The first of 6 legs, departing at XX00 am and the first time having flown together. The first officer was the PF and I was the PNF. While on descent into lax I turned the seat belt sign on (18000 ft) and was talking to the passenger, the first officer was flying the airplane and working the radios when he switched from ZLA to socal approach. The WX at lax was 700 ft overcast 5 mi fog and we had briefed and set up for the ILS runway 24R. (Approachs in use were ILS runways 24R and 25L.) when I returned to the radios the first officer relayed to me that he had checked in with socal approach and that approach had assigned us an 070 degree heading out of smo VOR for vectors to the ILS approach. After passing smo VOR we turned to a heading of 070 degrees as previously instructed, for vectors to what we thought was the ILS runway 24R. We were then given a heading of 160 degrees while descending to 4000 ft, then a heading of 220 degrees to intercept the localizer at or above 2500 ft. Not once did I hear or remember hearing approach assign us to the ILS runway 25L, we were just told to 'intercept the localizer at or above 2500 ft.' unfortunately, when I repeated the clearance, I repeated it the same way, '220 degree heading to intercept at or above 2500 ft.' we were never cleared for the approach, at least not that I can remember. As we intercepted runway 24R localizer, approach asked us which localizer were we intercepting? I told him the runway 24R localizer. The controller then said we were assigned the ILS runway 25L. At that time I requested the map and was instructed to track the runway 24R localizer for vectors to ILS runway 25L. We were 2-3 mi outside of the ILS runway 24R FAF when we executed the map, we were also level at 2500 ft. When approach handed us over to the next frequency, he thanked us for our cooperation. We landed without incident. When on the ground I called socal approach to inquire about what had happened. I was told by the supervisor that perhaps the controller thought that he had reassigned us to ILS runway 25L, but, it was never confirmed. I nor the first officer recalled hearing an assignment to ILS runway 25L. (I don't know, maybe it was said and we both heard ILS runway 24R.) the supervisor also told me that safety was not compromised and that there was never a loss of separation. Again, when on the ground, I asked the first officer which runway was assigned to us when he initially checked in with socal approach. He told me he was sure it was the ILS runway 24R. From now on I will be sure to say or repeat which runway or localizer course to intercept several times in order to prevent this from ever happening again. I don't know if the controller was never clear on which ILS he wanted us to fly or if we just didn't hear him correctly.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INCOMPLETE COMS AND LACK OF COORD CAUSED FLC TO EXECUTE MAP. RPTR WAS SET UP FOR AN ILS TO RWY 24R AND APCH WAS SET UP FOR RWY 25R.

Narrative: WE WERE FLYING FROM SFO TO LAX. THE FIRST OF 6 LEGS, DEPARTING AT XX00 AM AND THE FIRST TIME HAVING FLOWN TOGETHER. THE FO WAS THE PF AND I WAS THE PNF. WHILE ON DSCNT INTO LAX I TURNED THE SEAT BELT SIGN ON (18000 FT) AND WAS TALKING TO THE PAX, THE FO WAS FLYING THE AIRPLANE AND WORKING THE RADIOS WHEN HE SWITCHED FROM ZLA TO SOCAL APCH. THE WX AT LAX WAS 700 FT OVCST 5 MI FOG AND WE HAD BRIEFED AND SET UP FOR THE ILS RWY 24R. (APCHS IN USE WERE ILS RWYS 24R AND 25L.) WHEN I RETURNED TO THE RADIOS THE FO RELAYED TO ME THAT HE HAD CHKED IN WITH SOCAL APCH AND THAT APCH HAD ASSIGNED US AN 070 DEG HDG OUT OF SMO VOR FOR VECTORS TO THE ILS APCH. AFTER PASSING SMO VOR WE TURNED TO A HDG OF 070 DEGS AS PREVIOUSLY INSTRUCTED, FOR VECTORS TO WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE ILS RWY 24R. WE WERE THEN GIVEN A HDG OF 160 DEGS WHILE DSNDING TO 4000 FT, THEN A HDG OF 220 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE LOC AT OR ABOVE 2500 FT. NOT ONCE DID I HEAR OR REMEMBER HEARING APCH ASSIGN US TO THE ILS RWY 25L, WE WERE JUST TOLD TO 'INTERCEPT THE LOC AT OR ABOVE 2500 FT.' UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN I REPEATED THE CLRNC, I REPEATED IT THE SAME WAY, '220 DEG HDG TO INTERCEPT AT OR ABOVE 2500 FT.' WE WERE NEVER CLRED FOR THE APCH, AT LEAST NOT THAT I CAN REMEMBER. AS WE INTERCEPTED RWY 24R LOC, APCH ASKED US WHICH LOC WERE WE INTERCEPTING? I TOLD HIM THE RWY 24R LOC. THE CTLR THEN SAID WE WERE ASSIGNED THE ILS RWY 25L. AT THAT TIME I REQUESTED THE MAP AND WAS INSTRUCTED TO TRACK THE RWY 24R LOC FOR VECTORS TO ILS RWY 25L. WE WERE 2-3 MI OUTSIDE OF THE ILS RWY 24R FAF WHEN WE EXECUTED THE MAP, WE WERE ALSO LEVEL AT 2500 FT. WHEN APCH HANDED US OVER TO THE NEXT FREQ, HE THANKED US FOR OUR COOPERATION. WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. WHEN ON THE GND I CALLED SOCAL APCH TO INQUIRE ABOUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED. I WAS TOLD BY THE SUPVR THAT PERHAPS THE CTLR THOUGHT THAT HE HAD REASSIGNED US TO ILS RWY 25L, BUT, IT WAS NEVER CONFIRMED. I NOR THE FO RECALLED HEARING AN ASSIGNMENT TO ILS RWY 25L. (I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE IT WAS SAID AND WE BOTH HEARD ILS RWY 24R.) THE SUPVR ALSO TOLD ME THAT SAFETY WAS NOT COMPROMISED AND THAT THERE WAS NEVER A LOSS OF SEPARATION. AGAIN, WHEN ON THE GND, I ASKED THE FO WHICH RWY WAS ASSIGNED TO US WHEN HE INITIALLY CHKED IN WITH SOCAL APCH. HE TOLD ME HE WAS SURE IT WAS THE ILS RWY 24R. FROM NOW ON I WILL BE SURE TO SAY OR REPEAT WHICH RWY OR LOC COURSE TO INTERCEPT SEVERAL TIMES IN ORDER TO PREVENT THIS FROM EVER HAPPENING AGAIN. I DON'T KNOW IF THE CTLR WAS NEVER CLR ON WHICH ILS HE WANTED US TO FLY OR IF WE JUST DIDN'T HEAR HIM CORRECTLY.

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.