Narrative:

On approach to dfw we were told to expedite the descent and that we would be #1 for landing. We were told to expect the approach to runway 17C. We were turned to a left base just outside the marker and asked if we had the runway in sight. We called the runway in sight and were cleared the visual approach to runway 17C with other traffic to follow us. The first officer was flying and was still expediting the descent for landing and said he had the runway in sight. The localizer frequency and course were already selected for runway 17C. We still had full course deflection. I checked both HSI indications for any off flags and rechked the frequencys for identify. After this it became apparent that we had visually lined up for runway 17L. We started to correct for landing on runway 17C, however, we were aware other traffic was following us on approach. Upon visually checking to the right we saw traffic on approach. We could not readily determine if the traffic was on approach behind us or landing on the west side complex. We initiated a missed approach on runway heading and informed tower that we were on a missed approach. They gave us runway heading climb to 3000 ft. We were handed off to approach control for approach/landing. In retrospect, I believe we initially lined up on runway 17L because we had head-on traffic on base leg that were landing on the west side. We did not want any course overshoot because of the possible conflict. Course correction to runway 17C could have caused another conflict. This caused the missed approach.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THIS ACR FLC LINED UP ON THE WRONG RWY AT DFW AND DECIDED TO GAR RATHER THAN TO TRY TO CUT INTO THE TFC INBOUND TO THEIR ASSIGNED RWY. MD80, SUPER 80.

Narrative: ON APCH TO DFW WE WERE TOLD TO EXPEDITE THE DSCNT AND THAT WE WOULD BE #1 FOR LNDG. WE WERE TOLD TO EXPECT THE APCH TO RWY 17C. WE WERE TURNED TO A L BASE JUST OUTSIDE THE MARKER AND ASKED IF WE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT. WE CALLED THE RWY IN SIGHT AND WERE CLRED THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 17C WITH OTHER TFC TO FOLLOW US. THE FO WAS FLYING AND WAS STILL EXPEDITING THE DSCNT FOR LNDG AND SAID HE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT. THE LOC FREQ AND COURSE WERE ALREADY SELECTED FOR RWY 17C. WE STILL HAD FULL COURSE DEFLECTION. I CHKED BOTH HSI INDICATIONS FOR ANY OFF FLAGS AND RECHKED THE FREQS FOR IDENT. AFTER THIS IT BECAME APPARENT THAT WE HAD VISUALLY LINED UP FOR RWY 17L. WE STARTED TO CORRECT FOR LNDG ON RWY 17C, HOWEVER, WE WERE AWARE OTHER TFC WAS FOLLOWING US ON APCH. UPON VISUALLY CHKING TO THE R WE SAW TFC ON APCH. WE COULD NOT READILY DETERMINE IF THE TFC WAS ON APCH BEHIND US OR LNDG ON THE W SIDE COMPLEX. WE INITIATED A MISSED APCH ON RWY HDG AND INFORMED TWR THAT WE WERE ON A MISSED APCH. THEY GAVE US RWY HDG CLB TO 3000 FT. WE WERE HANDED OFF TO APCH CTL FOR APCH/LNDG. IN RETROSPECT, I BELIEVE WE INITIALLY LINED UP ON RWY 17L BECAUSE WE HAD HEAD-ON TFC ON BASE LEG THAT WERE LNDG ON THE W SIDE. WE DID NOT WANT ANY COURSE OVERSHOOT BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBLE CONFLICT. COURSE CORRECTION TO RWY 17C COULD HAVE CAUSED ANOTHER CONFLICT. THIS CAUSED THE MISSED APCH.

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.