Narrative:

Alignment with wrong runway. First officer was flying. On a right base leg for runway 31R dal, first officer and I both had a general idea where the airport was. We were asked several times by approach if we had the airport and I had declined accepting a visual approach due to the numerous lights in the area and because of having a new first officer that was unfamiliar. We received a late turn onto final probably because ATC planned on us taking a visual approach. This also left us higher than normal. We got clearance for approach runway 31R and first officer began turn to join runway 31R localizer. As wings rolled level, we were unknowingly lined up perfectly with runway 31L visually. Being distraction by a new first officer and offering guidance to begin descent, I allowed my scan of localizer to be omitted. As descent began, I then realized that approach had not switched us to tower, so I asked approach to switch us over and his reply was that we were lined up with runway 31L not runway 31R, and to just land on runway 31L. Unsure of this clearance by approach normally given by the tower, I told approach that we would go around because I feared a conflict with other possible traffic. Approach then stated 'you are cleared to land runway 31L.' with that, we decided to continue for runway 31L versus a go around or a turn back to runway 31R. I switched to tower frequency after landing and the tower controller had known of the clearance or had relayed it to approach for us. In either case, there was no conflict. Contributing factors: new first officer not familiar, approach clearance given above GS and first officer slow to respond distracting me, late turn to final with tailwind on base leg, and my failure to scan localizer.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: F100 CREW WAS GIVEN NON STANDARD CTLR INSTRUCTIONS AFTER BAD VECTOR TURN ON AT DAL.

Narrative: ALIGNMENT WITH WRONG RWY. FO WAS FLYING. ON A R BASE LEG FOR RWY 31R DAL, FO AND I BOTH HAD A GENERAL IDEA WHERE THE ARPT WAS. WE WERE ASKED SEVERAL TIMES BY APCH IF WE HAD THE ARPT AND I HAD DECLINED ACCEPTING A VISUAL APCH DUE TO THE NUMEROUS LIGHTS IN THE AREA AND BECAUSE OF HAVING A NEW FO THAT WAS UNFAMILIAR. WE RECEIVED A LATE TURN ONTO FINAL PROBABLY BECAUSE ATC PLANNED ON US TAKING A VISUAL APCH. THIS ALSO LEFT US HIGHER THAN NORMAL. WE GOT CLRNC FOR APCH RWY 31R AND FO BEGAN TURN TO JOIN RWY 31R LOC. AS WINGS ROLLED LEVEL, WE WERE UNKNOWINGLY LINED UP PERFECTLY WITH RWY 31L VISUALLY. BEING DISTR BY A NEW FO AND OFFERING GUIDANCE TO BEGIN DSCNT, I ALLOWED MY SCAN OF LOC TO BE OMITTED. AS DSCNT BEGAN, I THEN REALIZED THAT APCH HAD NOT SWITCHED US TO TWR, SO I ASKED APCH TO SWITCH US OVER AND HIS REPLY WAS THAT WE WERE LINED UP WITH RWY 31L NOT RWY 31R, AND TO JUST LAND ON RWY 31L. UNSURE OF THIS CLRNC BY APCH NORMALLY GIVEN BY THE TWR, I TOLD APCH THAT WE WOULD GO AROUND BECAUSE I FEARED A CONFLICT WITH OTHER POSSIBLE TFC. APCH THEN STATED 'YOU ARE CLRED TO LAND RWY 31L.' WITH THAT, WE DECIDED TO CONTINUE FOR RWY 31L VERSUS A GAR OR A TURN BACK TO RWY 31R. I SWITCHED TO TWR FREQ AFTER LNDG AND THE TWR CTLR HAD KNOWN OF THE CLRNC OR HAD RELAYED IT TO APCH FOR US. IN EITHER CASE, THERE WAS NO CONFLICT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: NEW FO NOT FAMILIAR, APCH CLRNC GIVEN ABOVE GS AND FO SLOW TO RESPOND DISTRACTING ME, LATE TURN TO FINAL WITH TAILWIND ON BASE LEG, AND MY FAILURE TO SCAN LOC.

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.