Narrative:

During descent for arrival to lax from bos, the ATIS was copied and indicated ILS and visual approachs were in progress to runways 25L and 24R at lax. Our experience is that GA aircraft are normally put on runway 25L due to the location of the FBO. As a result, the CIVET4 STAR and ILS runway 25L approach were reviewed by the PF and myself. The PF then briefed both procedures and we planned the visual approach. We queried the ZLA controller as to what arrival to expect as the civet 4 indicates the mitts STAR may be assigned by ATC. The mitts STAR is used for runway 24R traffic. He advised the arrival would be assigned by approach control. We were vectored for traffic and then cleared to bremr intersection, which is an intermediate fix on the civet STAR idented by the ilax 40 DME fix. Center also advised us we would be following a B757 once on the localizer. We were then handed off to socal approach. Socal cleared us to 'descend on the civet arrival.' he also cautioned us for wake turbulence from the B757. The PF then stated to me he would 'follow the glide path.' I acknowledged this statement. Between approximately 6000 ft and 8000 ft MSL we were handed off to the final approach controller. He pointed out the B757 and I acknowledged we were 'looking' and that 'we have the airport in sight.' he then cleared us for the visual approach to runway 25L. We had the aircraft in sight but I elected not to report it due to concern of losing it in the city lights and then being unable to maintain visual and wake separation. At about 4500 ft MSL the controller stated 'what arrival were you cleared for?' I replied 'the civet 4.' at about 3800 ft MSL he then stated, 'you can't be below 8000 ft after fuelr, do you see that?' fuelr is the ilax 26 DME fix. By now I had the runway 25L ILS chart out and I was not going to try and review the STAR chart again at this stage of the flight. I replied something like 'yeah, we have it.' he then stated, 'I need you to sight that B757 right now!' I reported the B757 in sight and he then instructed us to contact the tower at limma. The remainder of the flight was uneventful. After deplaning the passenger the PF and I reviewed the STAR again. It indicates to cross fuelr at or above 8000 ft and to expect ILS approach. I then realized we had never actually been cleared other than to descend on the arrival. The PF stated he remembered hearing us being cleared for the STAR. Either way, both we and ATC should have realized we had no clearance beyond fuelr. Obviously, at least 4 people missed this fact until we were well below 8000 ft. Numerous factors contributed to this occurrence: 1) both of the pilots have flown this arrival in the past without incident in IMC and VMC. 2) a similar arrival used to have aircraft descend on the GS as part of the procedure. 3) the arrival culminated a 6 hour flight leg, the majority of which was at night. 4) visibility was amazing for the la basin. In fact, it was visible from east of las. 5) traffic on approach was unusually light, in my experience. This may have led to a more relaxed attitude than would have prevailed during IMC or normal la visibility on both the part of the crew and ATC. 6) I am new to this aircraft, and was more preoccupied with cockpit duties than normal. As a result, I allowed my review of the STAR and approach chart to be rushed, and therefore inadequate. 7) arrival procedure assigned by approach rather than center. This results in later than normal programming of FMS's and the requirement to brief multiple stars and approachs. 8) lack of situational awareness by the crew and ATC. This serves to remind all that 'things do change.' all procedures must be carefully reviewed and understood, even when they seem simple and familiar. This flight was at the end of day 4 of a 6 day trip. The crew was well rested and in good health. No alcohol had been consumed by either crew member during this trip series. (12+ hours of rest preceding reporting for this flight, and only a 45 min flight the previous day with a rest period of 20+ hours preceding that flight.)

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DA50 CREW ON CIVIT ARR INTO LAX START DSNDING BEFORE RECEIVING CLRNC CAUSING SOME CONCERN BY CTLR.

Narrative: DURING DSCNT FOR ARR TO LAX FROM BOS, THE ATIS WAS COPIED AND INDICATED ILS AND VISUAL APCHS WERE IN PROGRESS TO RWYS 25L AND 24R AT LAX. OUR EXPERIENCE IS THAT GA ACFT ARE NORMALLY PUT ON RWY 25L DUE TO THE LOCATION OF THE FBO. AS A RESULT, THE CIVET4 STAR AND ILS RWY 25L APCH WERE REVIEWED BY THE PF AND MYSELF. THE PF THEN BRIEFED BOTH PROCS AND WE PLANNED THE VISUAL APCH. WE QUERIED THE ZLA CTLR AS TO WHAT ARR TO EXPECT AS THE CIVET 4 INDICATES THE MITTS STAR MAY BE ASSIGNED BY ATC. THE MITTS STAR IS USED FOR RWY 24R TFC. HE ADVISED THE ARR WOULD BE ASSIGNED BY APCH CTL. WE WERE VECTORED FOR TFC AND THEN CLRED TO BREMR INTXN, WHICH IS AN INTERMEDIATE FIX ON THE CIVET STAR IDENTED BY THE ILAX 40 DME FIX. CTR ALSO ADVISED US WE WOULD BE FOLLOWING A B757 ONCE ON THE LOC. WE WERE THEN HANDED OFF TO SOCAL APCH. SOCAL CLRED US TO 'DSND ON THE CIVET ARR.' HE ALSO CAUTIONED US FOR WAKE TURB FROM THE B757. THE PF THEN STATED TO ME HE WOULD 'FOLLOW THE GLIDE PATH.' I ACKNOWLEDGED THIS STATEMENT. BTWN APPROX 6000 FT AND 8000 FT MSL WE WERE HANDED OFF TO THE FINAL APCH CTLR. HE POINTED OUT THE B757 AND I ACKNOWLEDGED WE WERE 'LOOKING' AND THAT 'WE HAVE THE ARPT IN SIGHT.' HE THEN CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 25L. WE HAD THE ACFT IN SIGHT BUT I ELECTED NOT TO RPT IT DUE TO CONCERN OF LOSING IT IN THE CITY LIGHTS AND THEN BEING UNABLE TO MAINTAIN VISUAL AND WAKE SEPARATION. AT ABOUT 4500 FT MSL THE CTLR STATED 'WHAT ARR WERE YOU CLRED FOR?' I REPLIED 'THE CIVET 4.' AT ABOUT 3800 FT MSL HE THEN STATED, 'YOU CAN'T BE BELOW 8000 FT AFTER FUELR, DO YOU SEE THAT?' FUELR IS THE ILAX 26 DME FIX. BY NOW I HAD THE RWY 25L ILS CHART OUT AND I WAS NOT GOING TO TRY AND REVIEW THE STAR CHART AGAIN AT THIS STAGE OF THE FLT. I REPLIED SOMETHING LIKE 'YEAH, WE HAVE IT.' HE THEN STATED, 'I NEED YOU TO SIGHT THAT B757 RIGHT NOW!' I RPTED THE B757 IN SIGHT AND HE THEN INSTRUCTED US TO CONTACT THE TWR AT LIMMA. THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. AFTER DEPLANING THE PAX THE PF AND I REVIEWED THE STAR AGAIN. IT INDICATES TO CROSS FUELR AT OR ABOVE 8000 FT AND TO EXPECT ILS APCH. I THEN REALIZED WE HAD NEVER ACTUALLY BEEN CLRED OTHER THAN TO DSND ON THE ARR. THE PF STATED HE REMEMBERED HEARING US BEING CLRED FOR THE STAR. EITHER WAY, BOTH WE AND ATC SHOULD HAVE REALIZED WE HAD NO CLRNC BEYOND FUELR. OBVIOUSLY, AT LEAST 4 PEOPLE MISSED THIS FACT UNTIL WE WERE WELL BELOW 8000 FT. NUMEROUS FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO THIS OCCURRENCE: 1) BOTH OF THE PLTS HAVE FLOWN THIS ARR IN THE PAST WITHOUT INCIDENT IN IMC AND VMC. 2) A SIMILAR ARR USED TO HAVE ACFT DSND ON THE GS AS PART OF THE PROC. 3) THE ARR CULMINATED A 6 HR FLT LEG, THE MAJORITY OF WHICH WAS AT NIGHT. 4) VISIBILITY WAS AMAZING FOR THE LA BASIN. IN FACT, IT WAS VISIBLE FROM E OF LAS. 5) TFC ON APCH WAS UNUSUALLY LIGHT, IN MY EXPERIENCE. THIS MAY HAVE LED TO A MORE RELAXED ATTITUDE THAN WOULD HAVE PREVAILED DURING IMC OR NORMAL LA VISIBILITY ON BOTH THE PART OF THE CREW AND ATC. 6) I AM NEW TO THIS ACFT, AND WAS MORE PREOCCUPIED WITH COCKPIT DUTIES THAN NORMAL. AS A RESULT, I ALLOWED MY REVIEW OF THE STAR AND APCH CHART TO BE RUSHED, AND THEREFORE INADEQUATE. 7) ARR PROC ASSIGNED BY APCH RATHER THAN CTR. THIS RESULTS IN LATER THAN NORMAL PROGRAMMING OF FMS'S AND THE REQUIREMENT TO BRIEF MULTIPLE STARS AND APCHS. 8) LACK OF SITUATIONAL AWARENESS BY THE CREW AND ATC. THIS SERVES TO REMIND ALL THAT 'THINGS DO CHANGE.' ALL PROCS MUST BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND UNDERSTOOD, EVEN WHEN THEY SEEM SIMPLE AND FAMILIAR. THIS FLT WAS AT THE END OF DAY 4 OF A 6 DAY TRIP. THE CREW WAS WELL RESTED AND IN GOOD HEALTH. NO ALCOHOL HAD BEEN CONSUMED BY EITHER CREW MEMBER DURING THIS TRIP SERIES. (12+ HRS OF REST PRECEDING RPTING FOR THIS FLT, AND ONLY A 45 MIN FLT THE PREVIOUS DAY WITH A REST PERIOD OF 20+ HRS PRECEDING THAT FLT.)

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.