Narrative:

Descending into lax on the (STAR) civet one arrival, just prior to 'bremr' intersection, approach control changed our runway to runway 25R. However, there was some confusion in cockpit as each pilot 'heard' a different runway. The distraction resulted in our failure to cross 'arnes' intersection at 10000-11000 ft per the STAR. Further, we got so far behind on the approach that we elected to discontinue the approach at the OM. We were then vectored to an approach and landing on runway 24R. Lax continues to be a difficult airport to operate into. There are 4 runways with similar sounding names, so it is easy to say one runway and think another. Once again though, the old adage about 'someone must fly the airplane' has been proven wise. The copilot, who was flying, got distracted with me and failed to fly the airplane to the required crossing altitude. Also, the added busy work of the glass cockpit contributed to our inability to complete the approach and landing. Supplemental information from acn 371434: approaching bremr we were given a runway change to runway 25R. The PNF thought that the runway that we had been given was runway 24R. There was a ZLA controller who was on the jump seat, we ask what he had heard. He indicated he heard runway 25R. There is 7 mi between bremr and arnes and at a speed of 210 KTS takes approximately 2 mins. The captain was the first to notice that we had not reset our altitude window to 10000 ft after crossing bremr to meet the below 11000 ft above 10000 ft for arnes. We continued the approach but were high and made a go around and landed runway 24R. I personally blame myself for becoming distracted and not monitoring the flight path of the aircraft. Although a runway change appears to be a simple procedure, this phase of the approach is busy enough without adding a new set of problems. Set priorities and have the self discipline to maintain those priorities. Possibly using scenarios similar to the one we experience, in training would help teach some of these points.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT WAS TOO HIGH ON THE APCH DURING STAR ARR INTO LAX AFTER A RWY CHANGE WAS MADE. ACFT WENT AROUND FOR ANOTHER APCH. INITIAL CONFUSION OCCURRED OVER WHICH RWY WAS ASSIGNED AND THE FAILURE TO SET THE ALT WINDOW FOR DSCNT.

Narrative: DSNDING INTO LAX ON THE (STAR) CIVET ONE ARR, JUST PRIOR TO 'BREMR' INTXN, APCH CTL CHANGED OUR RWY TO RWY 25R. HOWEVER, THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IN COCKPIT AS EACH PLT 'HEARD' A DIFFERENT RWY. THE DISTR RESULTED IN OUR FAILURE TO CROSS 'ARNES' INTXN AT 10000-11000 FT PER THE STAR. FURTHER, WE GOT SO FAR BEHIND ON THE APCH THAT WE ELECTED TO DISCONTINUE THE APCH AT THE OM. WE WERE THEN VECTORED TO AN APCH AND LNDG ON RWY 24R. LAX CONTINUES TO BE A DIFFICULT ARPT TO OPERATE INTO. THERE ARE 4 RWYS WITH SIMILAR SOUNDING NAMES, SO IT IS EASY TO SAY ONE RWY AND THINK ANOTHER. ONCE AGAIN THOUGH, THE OLD ADAGE ABOUT 'SOMEONE MUST FLY THE AIRPLANE' HAS BEEN PROVEN WISE. THE COPLT, WHO WAS FLYING, GOT DISTRACTED WITH ME AND FAILED TO FLY THE AIRPLANE TO THE REQUIRED XING ALT. ALSO, THE ADDED BUSY WORK OF THE GLASS COCKPIT CONTRIBUTED TO OUR INABILITY TO COMPLETE THE APCH AND LNDG. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 371434: APCHING BREMR WE WERE GIVEN A RWY CHANGE TO RWY 25R. THE PNF THOUGHT THAT THE RWY THAT WE HAD BEEN GIVEN WAS RWY 24R. THERE WAS A ZLA CTLR WHO WAS ON THE JUMP SEAT, WE ASK WHAT HE HAD HEARD. HE INDICATED HE HEARD RWY 25R. THERE IS 7 MI BTWN BREMR AND ARNES AND AT A SPD OF 210 KTS TAKES APPROX 2 MINS. THE CAPT WAS THE FIRST TO NOTICE THAT WE HAD NOT RESET OUR ALT WINDOW TO 10000 FT AFTER XING BREMR TO MEET THE BELOW 11000 FT ABOVE 10000 FT FOR ARNES. WE CONTINUED THE APCH BUT WERE HIGH AND MADE A GAR AND LANDED RWY 24R. I PERSONALLY BLAME MYSELF FOR BECOMING DISTRACTED AND NOT MONITORING THE FLT PATH OF THE ACFT. ALTHOUGH A RWY CHANGE APPEARS TO BE A SIMPLE PROC, THIS PHASE OF THE APCH IS BUSY ENOUGH WITHOUT ADDING A NEW SET OF PROBS. SET PRIORITIES AND HAVE THE SELF DISCIPLINE TO MAINTAIN THOSE PRIORITIES. POSSIBLY USING SCENARIOS SIMILAR TO THE ONE WE EXPERIENCE, IN TRAINING WOULD HELP TEACH SOME OF THESE POINTS.

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.