Narrative:

While approaching ict, ks, from the southeast, the flight crew was looking for mid continent airport, which we knew by reference to charts was southeast of the ict VOR. We knew the runway layout from the airport diagram. The first officer had recently flown into ict, so he knew what the airport looked like. We came upon a very large airport complex, and verified that the runway layout matched the airport diagram. After the first officer verified that this was the airport he had just recently been into, the flight crew (while talking to approach) called the field in sight. The controller responded by giving the crew a 270 degree heading to fly for a right base into runway 1R at ict, and cleared us for the visual approach. With the first officer flying, we descended, slowed down, and set up for the approach and landing with all radios set and navaids tuned and idented. As we turned final, the approach controller turned us over to tower. Now on final, the tower controller cleared us to land. We then noticed that something looked different about the runways in front of us. The 2 parallel runways now looked very close together, where they earlier appeared to be properly spaced. We verified that something wasn't right when the localizer did not come in. After double-checking the radios for proper frequency, we decided to go around first, then to question the controller second. During the go around, the tower informed us that we were on final to mcconnell AFB and to fly another 270 degree heading to mid continent airport, which was just on the other side of the base. We then landed without incident. I feel the contributing factors were: we should have first verified with the approach controller that the airport we thought was mid continent was the correct airport. I feel the approach controller, who knew by our position that we were approaching a large airport complex (mcconnell AFB) with very similar runways, should have asked to make sure that it was not mcconnell AFB that we had in sight, especially since we were so close to the AFB. I feel the tower controller should not have told us we were cleared to land when we were obviously turning prior to his airport. Since both airports can look very similar and be mistaken for each other since they are so close, I feel that maybe there should be a warning on the en route chart.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A COMMUTER FLC FLEW A VISUAL APCH TO THE WRONG ARPT. THE DEST ARPT WAS LOCATED LESS THAN 10 NM ALONG THE FLT'S COURSE, BEYOND THE ARPT THAT THE FLC HAD MISIDENTED AS THE DEST.

Narrative: WHILE APCHING ICT, KS, FROM THE SE, THE FLC WAS LOOKING FOR MID CONTINENT ARPT, WHICH WE KNEW BY REF TO CHARTS WAS SE OF THE ICT VOR. WE KNEW THE RWY LAYOUT FROM THE ARPT DIAGRAM. THE FO HAD RECENTLY FLOWN INTO ICT, SO HE KNEW WHAT THE ARPT LOOKED LIKE. WE CAME UPON A VERY LARGE ARPT COMPLEX, AND VERIFIED THAT THE RWY LAYOUT MATCHED THE ARPT DIAGRAM. AFTER THE FO VERIFIED THAT THIS WAS THE ARPT HE HAD JUST RECENTLY BEEN INTO, THE FLC (WHILE TALKING TO APCH) CALLED THE FIELD IN SIGHT. THE CTLR RESPONDED BY GIVING THE CREW A 270 DEG HDG TO FLY FOR A R BASE INTO RWY 1R AT ICT, AND CLRED US FOR THE VISUAL APCH. WITH THE FO FLYING, WE DSNDED, SLOWED DOWN, AND SET UP FOR THE APCH AND LNDG WITH ALL RADIOS SET AND NAVAIDS TUNED AND IDENTED. AS WE TURNED FINAL, THE APCH CTLR TURNED US OVER TO TWR. NOW ON FINAL, THE TWR CTLR CLRED US TO LAND. WE THEN NOTICED THAT SOMETHING LOOKED DIFFERENT ABOUT THE RWYS IN FRONT OF US. THE 2 PARALLEL RWYS NOW LOOKED VERY CLOSE TOGETHER, WHERE THEY EARLIER APPEARED TO BE PROPERLY SPACED. WE VERIFIED THAT SOMETHING WASN'T RIGHT WHEN THE LOC DID NOT COME IN. AFTER DOUBLE-CHKING THE RADIOS FOR PROPER FREQ, WE DECIDED TO GAR FIRST, THEN TO QUESTION THE CTLR SECOND. DURING THE GAR, THE TWR INFORMED US THAT WE WERE ON FINAL TO MCCONNELL AFB AND TO FLY ANOTHER 270 DEG HDG TO MID CONTINENT ARPT, WHICH WAS JUST ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BASE. WE THEN LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. I FEEL THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE: WE SHOULD HAVE FIRST VERIFIED WITH THE APCH CTLR THAT THE ARPT WE THOUGHT WAS MID CONTINENT WAS THE CORRECT ARPT. I FEEL THE APCH CTLR, WHO KNEW BY OUR POS THAT WE WERE APCHING A LARGE ARPT COMPLEX (MCCONNELL AFB) WITH VERY SIMILAR RWYS, SHOULD HAVE ASKED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS NOT MCCONNELL AFB THAT WE HAD IN SIGHT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WE WERE SO CLOSE TO THE AFB. I FEEL THE TWR CTLR SHOULD NOT HAVE TOLD US WE WERE CLRED TO LAND WHEN WE WERE OBVIOUSLY TURNING PRIOR TO HIS ARPT. SINCE BOTH ARPTS CAN LOOK VERY SIMILAR AND BE MISTAKEN FOR EACH OTHER SINCE THEY ARE SO CLOSE, I FEEL THAT MAYBE THERE SHOULD BE A WARNING ON THE ENRTE CHART.

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.