Narrative:

Upon approaching ads, approach advised that the field was at 1 O'clock to 1:30 and 5 mi. I observed a field at 12:30 and proceeded direct. Upon arrival at the field, I observed 2 intersecting runways, not one, and began turning away from what was later found to be rbd. Ads tower also noticed my problem and advised a turn to 330 degrees to put my aircraft on final approach to ads. I had been assigned a visibility approach from the approach controller and I accepted, thinking that the field in view from my altitude and direction was ads; however, from 2500' and a direction of east, rbd is much more pronounced than ads. In conclusion, it was my mistake--but perhaps a warning from ATC about rbd would have helped. No traffic conflict observed and no apparently problems with ATC at ads concerning my mistake.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CORP SMT CLEARED FOR VISUAL APCH PICKS WRONG ARPT.

Narrative: UPON APCHING ADS, APCH ADVISED THAT THE FIELD WAS AT 1 O'CLOCK TO 1:30 AND 5 MI. I OBSERVED A FIELD AT 12:30 AND PROCEEDED DIRECT. UPON ARR AT THE FIELD, I OBSERVED 2 INTERSECTING RWYS, NOT ONE, AND BEGAN TURNING AWAY FROM WHAT WAS LATER FOUND TO BE RBD. ADS TWR ALSO NOTICED MY PROB AND ADVISED A TURN TO 330 DEGS TO PUT MY ACFT ON FINAL APCH TO ADS. I HAD BEEN ASSIGNED A VIS APCH FROM THE APCH CTLR AND I ACCEPTED, THINKING THAT THE FIELD IN VIEW FROM MY ALT AND DIRECTION WAS ADS; HOWEVER, FROM 2500' AND A DIRECTION OF E, RBD IS MUCH MORE PRONOUNCED THAN ADS. IN CONCLUSION, IT WAS MY MISTAKE--BUT PERHAPS A WARNING FROM ATC ABOUT RBD WOULD HAVE HELPED. NO TFC CONFLICT OBSERVED AND NO APPARENTLY PROBS WITH ATC AT ADS CONCERNING MY MISTAKE.

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.