READBACK OF INCORRECT RWY ASSIGNMENT WAS NOT CAUGHT BY CTLR. THE CREW PLANNED AND MADE APCH TO WRONG RWY UNTIL TFC CONFLICT WAS DISCOVERED.

Narrative

APPROX 15 MI FROM BANTY INTXN ON COUGAR 6 ARR TO IAH; WE WERE GIVEN CLRNC 'DEPART BANTY HDG 085 DEGS....' WE HEARD AND READ BACK '...FOR RWY 27.' ALTHOUGH TAPES LATER REVEALED THAT CTLR HAD SAID 'RWY 26;' SHE FAILED TO CATCH AND CORRECT OUR READBACK. WE BRIEFED THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 27; BACKED UP BY THE ILS. WHILE BEING VECTORED ON THE DOWNWIND LEG; OUR FLT PATH APPEARED TO BE CLOSE TO RWY 26. THE NEXT VECTOR WAS TO A HDG OF 130 DEGS FOLLOWED VERY SHORTLY BY 'TURN R TO HDG OF 240 DEGS TO INTERCEPT THE LOC.' NO MENTION OF RWY 26 WAS MADE. AT A STANDARD RATE TURN; WE WENT THROUGH THE LOC OF RWY 26 AND WERE SET UP TO INTERCEPT RWY 27 LOC. AT THIS POINT THE FINAL CTLR ASKED WHAT RWY WE WERE GOING TO AND THERE ENSUED A CONVERSATION BTWN US AND THE CTLR THAT INDICATED THERE WAS CONFUSION AS TO WHICH APCH WE WERE CLRED FOR. DURING THIS TIME; WE VISUALLY SIGHTED AN ACFT ON THE APCH TO RWY 27 FOLLOWED IMMEDIATELY BY A TCASII RA TO CLB. AS WE STARTED TO CLB; THE CTLR TOLD US TO CLB TO AVOID THE TFC. HE THEN CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 26. THE REST OF THE FLT PROCEEDED WITHOUT INCIDENT; HOWEVER; CTLR ATTEMPTED TO ENGAGE US IN NON ESSENTIAL RADIO CHATTER WHILE WE WERE STILL ON RWY 26. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO INCIDENT WERE: 1) CREW FATIGUE DUE TO EARLY RPT TIME AND NO FACILITIES AND TIME TO EAT BREAKFAST. 2) FAILURE OF CTLR TO CATCH AND CORRECT OUR IMPROPER READBACK OF LNDG RWY. 3) CLOSE; TIGHT VECTORS TO RWY 26 WHICH CONFIRMED IN OUR MINDS OUR CLRNC FOR RWY 27. 4) USE OF THE PHRASE 'INTERCEPT THE LOC' WITHOUT SPECIFYING SPECIFIC LOC WHILE SIMULTANEOUS APCHS ARE BEING CONDUCTED TO CLOSELY SPACED RWYS. 5) AS A FINAL NOTE; HOUSTON CTLRS SEEM TO HAVE A TENDENCY TO USE EXCESSIVE AMOUNTS OF NONSTANDARD PHRASEOLOGY; AND THEY TEND TO TALK TOO FAST WITHOUT SPEAKING CLRLY.