Narrative:

Arriving las via the SKEEBR2 arrival. Was told to descend to 9000 ft. Abeam the field in VFR conditions, was told to descend to 8000 ft and reduce speed to 220 KTS. We were then told to expect base turn over the antenna farms, and we were #1 in front of company on lindsey arrival, runway 25L. Approximately 30 seconds later, we were given descent to 5000 ft and a frequency change. Approximately 15 seconds later, we were given a 30 degree heading. We acknowledged all calls. As we approached the final approach course, still on a 30 degree heading, a company aircraft came up on frequency 131.87 and indicated approach wanted us on 135.0. I responded on company that we were talking to approach on 125.6. Simultaneously, on 125.6 approach control said we 'should be turning to final.' we acknowledged the call with an immediate turn toward final. (At this point, we were approximately 140 degrees from final approach course heading). Approach then said, 'change of plan, turn left to heading 280 degree vectors for runway 19L.' we asked approach immediately on 125.6 (same controller) if we needed to call. He replied it was just a frequency mix-up. At no time had we been told to go to tower frequency or called the field in sight for a visual. I feel frequency changes within 6 mi of the airport (approach control to another approach control) with the intention of a close-in visual approach probably contributed to a less than optimum radar handoff and control.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ON THE LAS SKBER 2 ARR FOR RWY 25L, L30 APCH ISSUED A B737 AN INCORRECT HDG FOR THE RWY 25L FINAL INTERCEPT.

Narrative: ARRIVING LAS VIA THE SKEEBR2 ARR. WAS TOLD TO DSND TO 9000 FT. ABEAM THE FIELD IN VFR CONDITIONS, WAS TOLD TO DSND TO 8000 FT AND REDUCE SPD TO 220 KTS. WE WERE THEN TOLD TO EXPECT BASE TURN OVER THE ANTENNA FARMS, AND WE WERE #1 IN FRONT OF COMPANY ON LINDSEY ARR, RWY 25L. APPROX 30 SECONDS LATER, WE WERE GIVEN DSCNT TO 5000 FT AND A FREQ CHANGE. APPROX 15 SECONDS LATER, WE WERE GIVEN A 30 DEG HDG. WE ACKNOWLEDGED ALL CALLS. AS WE APCHED THE FINAL APCH COURSE, STILL ON A 30 DEG HDG, A COMPANY ACFT CAME UP ON FREQ 131.87 AND INDICATED APCH WANTED US ON 135.0. I RESPONDED ON COMPANY THAT WE WERE TALKING TO APCH ON 125.6. SIMULTANEOUSLY, ON 125.6 APCH CTL SAID WE 'SHOULD BE TURNING TO FINAL.' WE ACKNOWLEDGED THE CALL WITH AN IMMEDIATE TURN TOWARD FINAL. (AT THIS POINT, WE WERE APPROX 140 DEGS FROM FINAL APCH COURSE HDG). APCH THEN SAID, 'CHANGE OF PLAN, TURN L TO HDG 280 DEG VECTORS FOR RWY 19L.' WE ASKED APCH IMMEDIATELY ON 125.6 (SAME CTLR) IF WE NEEDED TO CALL. HE REPLIED IT WAS JUST A FREQ MIX-UP. AT NO TIME HAD WE BEEN TOLD TO GO TO TWR FREQ OR CALLED THE FIELD IN SIGHT FOR A VISUAL. I FEEL FREQ CHANGES WITHIN 6 MI OF THE ARPT (APCH CTL TO ANOTHER APCH CTL) WITH THE INTENTION OF A CLOSE-IN VISUAL APCH PROBABLY CONTRIBUTED TO A LESS THAN OPTIMUM RADAR HDOF AND CTL.

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.