Narrative:

I was the captain on a commercial flight from oak to lax. Our number call sign was chfg. Right behind us was another company aircraft with a number call sign of cafg descending over point sadde. We were told to expect runway 24R. Over smo, we heard what we thought the controller say 'company cafg expect runway 25L.' cafg acknowledged the radio call. This call may have been to us, chfg. We still anticipated runway 24R. Later, it was evident that the controller was trying to sequence our aircraft to runway 25L, but call sign assignment and acknowledgement were becoming confusing. We were told to follow what we thought was an aircraft to runway 24R. Approach control may have made a call to us to follow an aircraft to runway 25L, but company cafg acknowledged the call (blocked radio call). We turned a right based to final on runway 24R and approach asked us to confirm our runway. We stated runway 24R. We were issued missed approach instruction and completed a r-hand pattern for a normal landing on runway 24R. In speaking with ATC, it was evident that the similar call signs caused much confusion. I spoke with the captain of flight cafg and she stated she was having a hard time understanding the controller's call sign directions. Also, several calls may have been blocked or misacknowledged. Big problem -- the call signs were too similar. Also, due to the busy situation, confirmation of call signs and directions, by all parties, could have been more diligent. Supplemental information from acn 458649: controllers and crews were all aware of the similar sounding call signs. In addition, approach was very busy with many other aircraft approaching lax. Call signs and directions were confused numerous times, often both aircraft answering each other's directions. The company has been made aware of the hazards of similar sounding call signs. Other things that would help are the reducing of saturation of radio frequencys at busy airports and greater separation of approaching aircraft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 2 B737-300 FLTS WITH SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS ENTER AN AREA OF CONFUSION WITH SCT TRACON WITH ACFT MAKING A WRONG RWY APCH TO LAX, CA.

Narrative: I WAS THE CAPT ON A COMMERCIAL FLT FROM OAK TO LAX. OUR NUMBER CALL SIGN WAS CHFG. RIGHT BEHIND US WAS ANOTHER COMPANY ACFT WITH A NUMBER CALL SIGN OF CAFG DSNDING OVER POINT SADDE. WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT RWY 24R. OVER SMO, WE HEARD WHAT WE THOUGHT THE CTLR SAY 'COMPANY CAFG EXPECT RWY 25L.' CAFG ACKNOWLEDGED THE RADIO CALL. THIS CALL MAY HAVE BEEN TO US, CHFG. WE STILL ANTICIPATED RWY 24R. LATER, IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE CTLR WAS TRYING TO SEQUENCE OUR ACFT TO RWY 25L, BUT CALL SIGN ASSIGNMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WERE BECOMING CONFUSING. WE WERE TOLD TO FOLLOW WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS AN ACFT TO RWY 24R. APCH CTL MAY HAVE MADE A CALL TO US TO FOLLOW AN ACFT TO RWY 25L, BUT COMPANY CAFG ACKNOWLEDGED THE CALL (BLOCKED RADIO CALL). WE TURNED A R BASED TO FINAL ON RWY 24R AND APCH ASKED US TO CONFIRM OUR RWY. WE STATED RWY 24R. WE WERE ISSUED MISSED APCH INSTRUCTION AND COMPLETED A R-HAND PATTERN FOR A NORMAL LNDG ON RWY 24R. IN SPEAKING WITH ATC, IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE SIMILAR CALL SIGNS CAUSED MUCH CONFUSION. I SPOKE WITH THE CAPT OF FLT CAFG AND SHE STATED SHE WAS HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING THE CTLR'S CALL SIGN DIRECTIONS. ALSO, SEVERAL CALLS MAY HAVE BEEN BLOCKED OR MISACKNOWLEDGED. BIG PROB -- THE CALL SIGNS WERE TOO SIMILAR. ALSO, DUE TO THE BUSY SIT, CONFIRMATION OF CALL SIGNS AND DIRECTIONS, BY ALL PARTIES, COULD HAVE BEEN MORE DILIGENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 458649: CTLRS AND CREWS WERE ALL AWARE OF THE SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS. IN ADDITION, APCH WAS VERY BUSY WITH MANY OTHER ACFT APCHING LAX. CALL SIGNS AND DIRECTIONS WERE CONFUSED NUMEROUS TIMES, OFTEN BOTH ACFT ANSWERING EACH OTHER'S DIRECTIONS. THE COMPANY HAS BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE HAZARDS OF SIMILAR SOUNDING CALL SIGNS. OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD HELP ARE THE REDUCING OF SATURATION OF RADIO FREQS AT BUSY ARPTS AND GREATER SEPARATION OF APCHING ACFT.

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.