Narrative:

Our 3RD leg of the day; 3RD day of trip; had had various degrees of turbulence for the entire flight. Entering ord approach airspace; were asked to maintain 310 KTS in our descent; we requested slower because of mod chop; was given 300 KTS. Under 10000 ft was asked to maintain 250 KTS until approximately 15 miles from ord. They slowed us to 210 KTS about 7-10 miles from touchdown; then given 180 KTS to willt for a visual approach to runway 28; and asked to contact tower at willt. First officer was flying; autoplt/autothrottle off. I was heads down briefly to preset radio frequencys; flaps; ground spoilers; as we were gradually slowing to 180 KTS. When I looked up; we were beginning to cross the final for runway 28; and told the first officer to correct back to the final approach for runway 28. Approach asked us to verify we were landing runway 28; and had it in sight; I acknowledged 'affirmative;' and he repeated; call the tower at willt. We continued for a normal landing and taxi-in. The contributing factors for our overshoot of the runway 28 final: -- this trip is fairly fatiguing. Our first layover included an unsettled night's sleep; early pick up at hotel. An even earlier pick up at layover the next morning and being at the end of a 10:23 hour duty day. Continuous turbulence for the entire leg; followed by an ord approach requested high speed descent and approach. First officer confused runway 28 with runway 22L; and considering the poor runway numbering on the airport page; this is quite understandable. (The number '28' is right next to the approach end of runway 22L on the graphic. The runway numbering should be changed to the way it is presented on other pages.) I missed the incongruity in his approach briefing of the taxiway turnoff; being 'S2;' and not 'T;' for runway 28. We were landing into haze and sun glare; and the first officer's sun visor was loose and unusable; and had been previously written up and cleared.supplemental information from acn 784544: I briefed the visual approach backed up ILS to runway 28 however due to the runway number markings on the chart I thought runway 22L was runway 28 for orientation purposes and even briefed exiting at S3 taxiway. With the sun in my eyes due to unusable visor; hand flying automatic thrust off and the wrong picture in my mind as to the orientation of runway 28; I overshot final. Captain saw and corrected me. As I was turning back to runway 28 final approach control asked to verify runway 28 in site and the captain acknowledged and approach told us to contact tower. We landed normally. In retrospect when fatigued I will call off trip. I also believe that the graphics depicting the runway numbers need to be as they are on the low visibility charts. Lastly when tired I will use the automation until lined up on final.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A FATIGUED A319 CREW LANDING ORD RWY 28 LINED UP FOR RWY 22L AFTER THE FO MISREAD THE ARPT CHART WHERE RWY 28 NUMBERS APPEAR NEAR RWY 22L PICTURE.

Narrative: OUR 3RD LEG OF THE DAY; 3RD DAY OF TRIP; HAD HAD VARIOUS DEGREES OF TURB FOR THE ENTIRE FLT. ENTERING ORD APCH AIRSPACE; WERE ASKED TO MAINTAIN 310 KTS IN OUR DESCENT; WE REQUESTED SLOWER BECAUSE OF MOD CHOP; WAS GIVEN 300 KTS. UNDER 10000 FT WAS ASKED TO MAINTAIN 250 KTS UNTIL APPROX 15 MILES FROM ORD. THEY SLOWED US TO 210 KTS ABOUT 7-10 MILES FROM TOUCHDOWN; THEN GIVEN 180 KTS TO WILLT FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 28; AND ASKED TO CONTACT TOWER AT WILLT. FO WAS FLYING; AUTOPLT/AUTOTHROTTLE OFF. I WAS HEADS DOWN BRIEFLY TO PRESET RADIO FREQS; FLAPS; GROUND SPOILERS; AS WE WERE GRADUALLY SLOWING TO 180 KTS. WHEN I LOOKED UP; WE WERE BEGINNING TO CROSS THE FINAL FOR RWY 28; AND TOLD THE FO TO CORRECT BACK TO THE FINAL APCH FOR RWY 28. APCH ASKED US TO VERIFY WE WERE LANDING RWY 28; AND HAD IT IN SIGHT; I ACKNOWLEDGED 'AFFIRMATIVE;' AND HE REPEATED; CALL THE TWR AT WILLT. WE CONTINUED FOR A NORMAL LANDING AND TAXI-IN. THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS FOR OUR OVERSHOOT OF THE RWY 28 FINAL: -- THIS TRIP IS FAIRLY FATIGUING. OUR FIRST LAYOVER INCLUDED AN UNSETTLED NIGHT'S SLEEP; EARLY PICK UP AT HOTEL. AN EVEN EARLIER PICK UP AT LAYOVER THE NEXT MORNING AND BEING AT THE END OF A 10:23 HR DUTY DAY. CONTINUOUS TURBULENCE FOR THE ENTIRE LEG; FOLLOWED BY AN ORD APCH REQUESTED HIGH SPEED DESCENT AND APCH. FO CONFUSED RWY 28 WITH RWY 22L; AND CONSIDERING THE POOR RWY NUMBERING ON THE ARPT PAGE; THIS IS QUITE UNDERSTANDABLE. (THE NUMBER '28' IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE APCH END OF RWY 22L ON THE GRAPHIC. THE RWY NUMBERING SHOULD BE CHANGED TO THE WAY IT IS PRESENTED ON OTHER PAGES.) I MISSED THE INCONGRUITY IN HIS APCH BRIEFING OF THE TXWY TURNOFF; BEING 'S2;' AND NOT 'T;' FOR RWY 28. WE WERE LANDING INTO HAZE AND SUN GLARE; AND THE FO'S SUN VISOR WAS LOOSE AND UNUSABLE; AND HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN UP AND CLEARED.SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 784544: I BRIEFED THE VISUAL APPROACH BACKED UP ILS TO RWY 28 HOWEVER DUE TO THE RUNWAY NUMBER MARKINGS ON THE CHART I THOUGHT RWY 22L WAS RWY 28 FOR ORIENTATION PURPOSES AND EVEN BRIEFED EXITING AT S3 TXWY. WITH THE SUN IN MY EYES DUE TO UNUSABLE VISOR; HAND FLYING AUTO THRUST OFF AND THE WRONG PICTURE IN MY MIND AS TO THE ORIENTATION OF RWY 28; I OVERSHOT FINAL. CAPT SAW AND CORRECTED ME. AS I WAS TURNING BACK TO RWY 28 FINAL APPROACH CONTROL ASKED TO VERIFY RWY 28 IN SITE AND THE CAPT ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPROACH TOLD US TO CONTACT TOWER. WE LANDED NORMALLY. IN RETROSPECT WHEN FATIGUED I WILL CALL OFF TRIP. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE GRAPHICS DEPICTING THE RWY NUMBERS NEED TO BE AS THEY ARE ON THE LOW VISIBILITY CHARTS. LASTLY WHEN TIRED I WILL USE THE AUTOMATION UNTIL LINED UP ON FINAL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.