What happened
During an enroute phase of flight, the crew of VA942 was provided with a Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STAR) and an initial runway assignment. While the intended runway was 16L, the enroute controller issued a clearance for runway 34L. This error was not identified during the communication exchange, as the flight crew performed a correct read-back of the incorrect runway, and the controller subsequently acknowledged this read-back.
The investigation
Investigators examined the communication between the controller and the crew, confirming that standard phraseology was utilized. The investigation determined that the error was a skill-based slip caused by the high degree of similarity between the flight level of FL 340 and the assigned runway 34L. The controller was focused on the flight level data on the Automated Surveillance Display (ASD) when the runway assignment was spoken.
Furthermore, the investigation found that the ATIS information available to the crew indicated that runway 34L was not in operation. Despite this discrepancy, the crew did not seek clarification regarding the runway assignment until they transitioned to the approach controller, who then provided the correct assignment of 16L.
Findings
- The enroute controller issued a clearance for runway 34L instead of 16L due to information interference between the flight level and the runway number.
- The read-back and hear-back procedure failed to detect the incorrect runway assignment.
- The flight crew did not cross-check the clearance against the ATIS information, which noted that runway 34L was closed.