D-328 crew lined up on the wrong runway during a night visual approach at cae.

Attributes
ACN	513800
Time
Date	200106
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : cae.airport
State Reference	SC
Altitude	agl bound lower : 500 agl bound upper : 1000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Do 328 TP (Turboprop)
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Route In Use	approach : visual
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument pilot : multi engine
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 90 flight time total : 2100 flight time type : 400
ASRS Report	513800
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other other spatial deviation
Resolutory Action	flight crew : executed go around
Supplementary
Problem Areas	ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

At approximately XA28Z after receiving the ATIS information at cae airport, we elected the visual runway 29. Night VMC, we were on a vector from the northeast. Columbia approach asked to report the airport in sight. Spotting the airport beacon, we then had the apparent runway in sight, informed approach and were cleared for the visual for runway 29. We then configured the aircraft for landing and turned for final. On final approach, we realized that the ILS runway 29 localizer was not on and determined that we were not lined up with runway 29. At this point we executed a go around and were given vectors for a landing on runway 11 at cae airport. My judgement is that we probably should not have called the runway until vectored on final. Suggestion: with the similar runway layouts and close proximity of the airports, ATC could give a heads up about this situation.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: D-328 CREW LINED UP ON THE WRONG RWY DURING A NIGHT VISUAL APCH AT CAE.

Narrative: AT APPROX XA28Z AFTER RECEIVING THE ATIS INFO AT CAE ARPT, WE ELECTED THE VISUAL RWY 29. NIGHT VMC, WE WERE ON A VECTOR FROM THE NE. COLUMBIA APCH ASKED TO RPT THE ARPT IN SIGHT. SPOTTING THE ARPT BEACON, WE THEN HAD THE APPARENT RWY IN SIGHT, INFORMED APCH AND WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL FOR RWY 29. WE THEN CONFIGURED THE ACFT FOR LNDG AND TURNED FOR FINAL. ON FINAL APCH, WE REALIZED THAT THE ILS RWY 29 LOC WAS NOT ON AND DETERMINED THAT WE WERE NOT LINED UP WITH RWY 29. AT THIS POINT WE EXECUTED A GAR AND WERE GIVEN VECTORS FOR A LNDG ON RWY 11 AT CAE ARPT. MY JUDGEMENT IS THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD NOT HAVE CALLED THE RWY UNTIL VECTORED ON FINAL. SUGGESTION: WITH THE SIMILAR RWY LAYOUTS AND CLOSE PROX OF THE ARPTS, ATC COULD GIVE A HEADS UP ABOUT THIS SIT.

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.