SMA X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC INSTRUCTIONS FOLLOWED WRONG ACFT AND MADE APCH TO WRONG RWY. PLTDEV.

Date: 1992-02 · Aircraft: Small Aircraft

Anomalies: conflict-airborne-conflict|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance

Synopsis

SMA X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC INSTRUCTIONS FOLLOWED WRONG ACFT AND MADE APCH TO WRONG RWY. PLTDEV.

Narrative

WHILE ON A DOWNWIND LEG FOR LNDG RWY 32 AT SALT LAKE; WAS INFORMED BY THE TWR CTLR THAT I WAS TO PASS BEHIND AN AIRLINER ON FINAL FOR RWY 34R; THAT I WAS CLRED TO LAND RWY 32. OUR DOWNWIND WAS TO BE OVER REDWOOD ROAD WHICH IS E OF RWY 34R AND PARALLEL TO RWY 34R. AFTER I ACCEPTED CLRNC TO LAND; I NOTICED 2 ACFT THAT APPEARED TO BE ON FINAL FOR RWY 34R. I AGAIN ASKED THE CTLR WHAT WAS TO BE DONE; STATING THAT I HAD AN ACFT AT MY 1 O'CLOCK AND AT MY 4 O'CLOCK POSITIONS AS I REMAINED ON ASSIGNED DOWNWIND. I WAS TOLD TO FOLLOW THE ACFT ON FINAL FOR THE 'R' MEANING RWY 34R. I SEEING 2 ACFT ON FINAL APCHS; AND WITH SAFETY IN MIND DECIDED THAT I MUST FOLLOW THE SECOND ACFT Y I SAW RATHER THAT DO WHAT I FELT WAS 'SQUEEZE BTWN THEM.' SO I ATTEMPTED TO FOLLOW THE SECOND ACFT Y ON FINAL; AT WHICH POINT THE CTLR ISSUED ME A HARD R TURN TO A HDG OF 020. THE CTLR THEN ASKED ME WHY I WAS MAKING AN APCH TO RWY 34L; HE ASKED IF I WAS FAMILIAR WITH THE ARPT; AND THAT RWY 32 WAS THE DIAGONAL RWY. I THEN CONTINUED INBOUND FOR RWY 32 AND LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. I ASKED THE CTLR FOR A PHONE CONVERSATION. 2 ACFT WERE ON FINAL APCH - 1 FOR RWY 34R AND 1 FOR RWY 34L. 1 WAS ON A 2 MI FINAL THE OTHER ABOUT A 6 MI FINAL. BECAUSE THE CTLR FAILED TO INFORM ME THAT THERE WERE 2 ACFT ON FINAL FOR PARALLEL RWYS; I ATTEMPTED TO FOLLOW THE 1 FARTHEST OUT. IT SEEMS THAT AN ILLUSION TOOK PLACE FOR ME. I WAS NOT INFORMED THAT 2 ACFT WERE ON PARALLEL APCHS. IT WAS NIGHT.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.