Narrative:

On vector for approach assigned heading approximately 90 degrees, left base for runway 36L, following commuter which we had in sight. Approach asked if we had commuter in sight and said to follow him. Captain thought that we were still on vector since we had not been cleared for visual approach. I was watching other traffic on final outside us for runways 36L&right (multiple aircraft) and could not see aircraft we were following or runway as we were in turn. Captain stopped his turn at last assigned heading. I thought he was doing so to align with runway 36L. Apparently we crossed final for runway 36L and possibly runway 36R. I was still watching traffic and TCASII monitor and advised him we were going to get RA but conflict was already behind us. He responded to RA, then approach turned us left, back to 270 degree heading which put us across both finals (no alerts this time), a second time, and cleared us for a visual to runway 36L. As we turned to 360 degree heading approach decided that wasn't good because of traffic and broke us off to the west for a left 360 degree turn to a third visual to runway 36L which was uneventful. Difficult situation! I felt watching traffic was more important than monitoring captain's flying. Since I was on opposite side, my ability to judge what he was doing was limited. This type situation frequently occurs in clt so extreme alertness is required. I should have vocalized my understanding of clearance to captain. In addition to radio readback to controller to assure all of us on same page, especially in clt. Captain called approach control when on ground and they expressed relief we weren't upset enough to make issue -- we felt same. Although there was a conflict I had that traffic visually and at no time was any evasive action required.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD81 ON VECTOR TO RWY 36L FOLLOW COMMUTER ACFT IN SIGHT. CAPT THOUGHT HAD NOT RECEIVED CLRNC FOR A VISUAL APCH AND CONTINUED VECTOR HDG THROUGH RWY 36L. GOT TA BUT NOT NECESSARY TO TAKE EVASIVE ACTION. APCH CTLR VECTORED ACFT FOR A 360 DEG TURN AND REPOSITIONED THE ACFT ON RWY 36L. DISCUSSED WITH CTLR ON ARR.

Narrative: ON VECTOR FOR APCH ASSIGNED HDG APPROX 90 DEGS, L BASE FOR RWY 36L, FOLLOWING COMMUTER WHICH WE HAD IN SIGHT. APCH ASKED IF WE HAD COMMUTER IN SIGHT AND SAID TO FOLLOW HIM. CAPT THOUGHT THAT WE WERE STILL ON VECTOR SINCE WE HAD NOT BEEN CLRED FOR VISUAL APCH. I WAS WATCHING OTHER TFC ON FINAL OUTSIDE US FOR RWYS 36L&R (MULTIPLE ACFT) AND COULD NOT SEE ACFT WE WERE FOLLOWING OR RWY AS WE WERE IN TURN. CAPT STOPPED HIS TURN AT LAST ASSIGNED HDG. I THOUGHT HE WAS DOING SO TO ALIGN WITH RWY 36L. APPARENTLY WE CROSSED FINAL FOR RWY 36L AND POSSIBLY RWY 36R. I WAS STILL WATCHING TFC AND TCASII MONITOR AND ADVISED HIM WE WERE GOING TO GET RA BUT CONFLICT WAS ALREADY BEHIND US. HE RESPONDED TO RA, THEN APCH TURNED US L, BACK TO 270 DEG HDG WHICH PUT US ACROSS BOTH FINALS (NO ALERTS THIS TIME), A SECOND TIME, AND CLRED US FOR A VISUAL TO RWY 36L. AS WE TURNED TO 360 DEG HDG APCH DECIDED THAT WASN'T GOOD BECAUSE OF TFC AND BROKE US OFF TO THE W FOR A L 360 DEG TURN TO A THIRD VISUAL TO RWY 36L WHICH WAS UNEVENTFUL. DIFFICULT SIT! I FELT WATCHING TFC WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN MONITORING CAPT'S FLYING. SINCE I WAS ON OPPOSITE SIDE, MY ABILITY TO JUDGE WHAT HE WAS DOING WAS LIMITED. THIS TYPE SIT FREQUENTLY OCCURS IN CLT SO EXTREME ALERTNESS IS REQUIRED. I SHOULD HAVE VOCALIZED MY UNDERSTANDING OF CLRNC TO CAPT. IN ADDITION TO RADIO READBACK TO CTLR TO ASSURE ALL OF US ON SAME PAGE, ESPECIALLY IN CLT. CAPT CALLED APCH CTL WHEN ON GND AND THEY EXPRESSED RELIEF WE WEREN'T UPSET ENOUGH TO MAKE ISSUE -- WE FELT SAME. ALTHOUGH THERE WAS A CONFLICT I HAD THAT TFC VISUALLY AND AT NO TIME WAS ANY EVASIVE ACTION REQUIRED.

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.