Narrative:

Being vectored onto 17L localizer. In visual contact with dfw airport and traffic on 18R localizer. Assigned heading varied from 230-270 degrees at 3000' MSL and 170 KTS. Concerned with traffic on 18R localizer at our 1 O'clock position. Finally get turned onto 17L localizer and then turned back to 270 degrees for additional spacing(?). Twice I told approach control about our concerns with traffic and unusual vectors and he reclred us for the approach. At that time we had already flown through the 17L localizer and were lined up with the 18 runways. Meanwhile, traffic which had been established on runway 18R, turned out to the west to avoid further conflict. We quickly reintercepted 17L localizer, contacted tower, received clearance and landed. Better spacing options were slower airspeed clearance to runway 17R, vectors to the east or a go around. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: when the flight crew called the facility by telephone after landing, they were told that the controller handling their flight had already left for the day and therefore they could learn nothing about the incident. Reporter said that a traffic advisory was not given on the aircraft making a visual approach to the runway 18 complex. The point of closest proximity with the runway 18 aircraft was .75 mi, and not until the controller was questioned about the traffic did the controller instruct them to maintain visual sep with that traffic. Reporter said that it appeared as if the controller forgot them momentarily and allowed them to pass through the fap for the runway 17 complex, and then merely cleared them for the visual approach to runway 17L west/O even mentioning the traffic.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR-LGT VECTORED THROUGH FINAL APCH COURSE AND INTO CONFLICT WITH ACR-LGT MAKING VISUAL APCH TO OTHER RWY COMPLEX.

Narrative: BEING VECTORED ONTO 17L LOC. IN VISUAL CONTACT WITH DFW ARPT AND TFC ON 18R LOC. ASSIGNED HDG VARIED FROM 230-270 DEGS AT 3000' MSL AND 170 KTS. CONCERNED WITH TFC ON 18R LOC AT OUR 1 O'CLOCK POS. FINALLY GET TURNED ONTO 17L LOC AND THEN TURNED BACK TO 270 DEGS FOR ADDITIONAL SPACING(?). TWICE I TOLD APCH CTL ABOUT OUR CONCERNS WITH TFC AND UNUSUAL VECTORS AND HE RECLRED US FOR THE APCH. AT THAT TIME WE HAD ALREADY FLOWN THROUGH THE 17L LOC AND WERE LINED UP WITH THE 18 RWYS. MEANWHILE, TFC WHICH HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED ON RWY 18R, TURNED OUT TO THE W TO AVOID FURTHER CONFLICT. WE QUICKLY REINTERCEPTED 17L LOC, CONTACTED TWR, RECEIVED CLRNC AND LANDED. BETTER SPACING OPTIONS WERE SLOWER AIRSPD CLRNC TO RWY 17R, VECTORS TO THE E OR A GO AROUND. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: WHEN THE FLT CREW CALLED THE FAC BY TELEPHONE AFTER LNDG, THEY WERE TOLD THAT THE CTLR HANDLING THEIR FLT HAD ALREADY LEFT FOR THE DAY AND THEREFORE THEY COULD LEARN NOTHING ABOUT THE INCIDENT. RPTR SAID THAT A TFC ADVISORY WAS NOT GIVEN ON THE ACFT MAKING A VISUAL APCH TO THE RWY 18 COMPLEX. THE POINT OF CLOSEST PROX WITH THE RWY 18 ACFT WAS .75 MI, AND NOT UNTIL THE CTLR WAS QUESTIONED ABOUT THE TFC DID THE CTLR INSTRUCT THEM TO MAINTAIN VISUAL SEP WITH THAT TFC. REPORTER SAID THAT IT APPEARED AS IF THE CTLR FORGOT THEM MOMENTARILY AND ALLOWED THEM TO PASS THROUGH THE FAP FOR THE RWY 17 COMPLEX, AND THEN MERELY CLRED THEM FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 17L W/O EVEN MENTIONING THE TFC.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.