Narrative:

In a descent from 6000 ft to 2000 ft on vector for visual to runway 12R. Assigned heading 050 degrees from bizel intersection. Then final says left to 030 degrees for vector ILS final approach course. (WX clear, 7 SM visibility). I said split the difference and we'll likely proceed visually (1ST error). First officer asking for final confign for landing. Vector was through the localizer final and a turn to 150 degrees to reacquire was given. Final confign was accomplished. Captain on VOR, first officer on ILS, captain on VOR for azimuth. Captain acquired the field, visual given. First officer 'thought' he had the runway. RAPCON says 'stay at 2000 ft until 1000 ft.' I asked if the first officer was on GS and looked over -- not same time low altitude alert given by RAPCON and go around instructed. Descent stopped, climb initiated and then first officer acquires the runway. Stabilized approach resumed, tower switch, and uneventful landing made. Tower and ground had some questions about unreliable DME on the ILS. We said no. My error in not monitoring first officer approach. My error in not switching the ILS once runway was acquired. My judgement error in being complacent with first officer performance. My error in assuming first officer really had runway. Attaboy to final controller, although I don't think he saved any 'bacon.' this will not happen again to me. Constant vigilance in approach phase and adherence to procedure is the only answer.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BELOW GS, AN ATC LOW ALT ALERT, FOLLOWED BY A GAR, STARTED AND THEN ABANDONED, FINALLY ENDING IN AN 'UNEVENTFUL LNDG'?

Narrative: IN A DSCNT FROM 6000 FT TO 2000 FT ON VECTOR FOR VISUAL TO RWY 12R. ASSIGNED HEADING 050 DEGS FROM BIZEL INTXN. THEN FINAL SAYS L TO 030 DEGS FOR VECTOR ILS FINAL APCH COURSE. (WX CLR, 7 SM VISIBILITY). I SAID SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE AND WE'LL LIKELY PROCEED VISUALLY (1ST ERROR). FO ASKING FOR FINAL CONFIGN FOR LNDG. VECTOR WAS THROUGH THE LOC FINAL AND A TURN TO 150 DEGS TO REACQUIRE WAS GIVEN. FINAL CONFIGN WAS ACCOMPLISHED. CAPT ON VOR, FO ON ILS, CAPT ON VOR FOR AZIMUTH. CAPT ACQUIRED THE FIELD, VISUAL GIVEN. FO 'THOUGHT' HE HAD THE RWY. RAPCON SAYS 'STAY AT 2000 FT UNTIL 1000 FT.' I ASKED IF THE FO WAS ON GS AND LOOKED OVER -- NOT SAME TIME LOW ALT ALERT GIVEN BY RAPCON AND GO AROUND INSTRUCTED. DSCNT STOPPED, CLB INITIATED AND THEN FO ACQUIRES THE RWY. STABILIZED APCH RESUMED, TWR SWITCH, AND UNEVENTFUL LNDG MADE. TWR AND GND HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT UNRELIABLE DME ON THE ILS. WE SAID NO. MY ERROR IN NOT MONITORING FO APCH. MY ERROR IN NOT SWITCHING THE ILS ONCE RWY WAS ACQUIRED. MY JUDGEMENT ERROR IN BEING COMPLACENT WITH FO PERFORMANCE. MY ERROR IN ASSUMING FO REALLY HAD RWY. ATTABOY TO FINAL CTLR, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK HE SAVED ANY 'BACON.' THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN TO ME. CONSTANT VIGILANCE IN APCH PHASE AND ADHERENCE TO PROC IS THE ONLY ANSWER.

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.