GA small aircraft wrong runway approach landing at bfi.

Attributes
ACN	133546
Time
Date	199001
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : bfi
State Reference	WA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : sea
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 2 Eng, Retractable Gear
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Route In Use	approach : straight in enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 17 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 17
ASRS Report	133546
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

I was cleared from spokane international to paine field. When I was able to receive ATIS, paine was 100' obscured and 1/16 of a mi visibility. I diverted to boeing field through seattle center as it had 800' and good visibility. I expected bfi ILS and set up for it. When approach control cleared me for the approach it was a back course approach to 31 bfi and I was still descending. The controller recognized my descent problem and gave me a 360, but I had to find and read the proper approach plates and my approach was not up to my standards. Fortunately, I had visual contact with the approach end lighting and the ground and was able to land straight in. I'm sure the controller advised me to make a back course ILS on first contact, but my mindset was a front course and the front end of some transmissions were clipped. Had I read back the approach expected when first given or the controller had requested a 'back course' response, I could have familiarized myself with the back course approach earlier and decreased my workload and the workload I caused the controller.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA WRONG RWY APCH LNDG AT BFI.

Narrative: I WAS CLRED FROM SPOKANE INTL TO PAINE FIELD. WHEN I WAS ABLE TO RECEIVE ATIS, PAINE WAS 100' OBSCURED AND 1/16 OF A MI VISIBILITY. I DIVERTED TO BOEING FIELD THROUGH SEATTLE CENTER AS IT HAD 800' AND GOOD VISIBILITY. I EXPECTED BFI ILS AND SET UP FOR IT. WHEN APCH CTL CLRED ME FOR THE APCH IT WAS A BACK COURSE APCH TO 31 BFI AND I WAS STILL DESCENDING. THE CTLR RECOGNIZED MY DSCNT PROBLEM AND GAVE ME A 360, BUT I HAD TO FIND AND READ THE PROPER APCH PLATES AND MY APCH WAS NOT UP TO MY STANDARDS. FORTUNATELY, I HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE APCH END LIGHTING AND THE GND AND WAS ABLE TO LAND STRAIGHT IN. I'M SURE THE CTLR ADVISED ME TO MAKE A BACK COURSE ILS ON FIRST CONTACT, BUT MY MINDSET WAS A FRONT COURSE AND THE FRONT END OF SOME TRANSMISSIONS WERE CLIPPED. HAD I READ BACK THE APCH EXPECTED WHEN FIRST GIVEN OR THE CTLR HAD REQUESTED A 'BACK COURSE' RESPONSE, I COULD HAVE FAMILIARIZED MYSELF WITH THE BACK COURSE APCH EARLIER AND DECREASED MY WORKLOAD AND THE WORKLOAD I CAUSED THE CTLR.

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