Narrative:

On feb/mon/00 at approximately XA30 on our way to lal, we were cruising at 3500 ft on the 080 degree radial from lal inbound for landing with good VFR WX. Orl flight following terminated us about 20 mi from lal at 3500 ft. We acquired ATIS and it was reporting VFR. The WX ahead looked low, so we began our descent to 1000 ft to maintain VFR. We acquired ATIS information from lal at approximately XA45 and 15 mi out. ATIS information stated VFR conditions, visibility 7 mi, temperature 18 degrees, dewpoint 16 degrees, clouds scattered at 1800 ft and the altimeter was 30.04 and runway 27 was closed and runway 23 was in use visual, as I can recall. Upon receiving the information, I switched the radios for the PF to tower frequency 124.5. However, it was later discovered what I actually dialed in, by accident, was 124.05 (124.05 is the secondary frequency for melbourne tower). The following communications between our aircraft and the tower are to the best of my memory. I called lal tower stating that we were 10 mi to the east inbound for landing and we had ATIS information. The tower replied and said to report the river for runway 27R. After further examining the sectional, I could not locate a river amongst the many lakes that surround the airport and began to scan visually. I stated to the PF that 'I didn't know lal has a runway 27R.' he advised me that during sun north' fun fly-in, the parallel taxiway is often used as a runway. I acknowledged this as it made sense because runway 27 was reported closed. As we approached the airport, the tower requested our position. We advised that we were 5 mi out, would like him to turn up the lights and confirm visibility because our flight visibility appeared to be deteriorating. The tower stated visibility was 7 mi. As best I can recall, the tower cleared us to land runway 27R when we had it in sight. We acknowledged this. Approaching lal, we asked the tower again to turn up the runway lights, as they did not appear to be on, and 'confirm that runway 27R was the parallel taxiway.' the tower replied, 'what about the taxiway, and the lights are up.' on short final I could see the runway 27R painted on the surface with landing spot markers that confirmed to me that our landing instructions were proper and I noted the construction on the main runway 27. The aircraft touched down on the landing spot marker number 2 and we rolled to a stop and exited what we thought was the runway. We contacted ground. Ground told us 'you have just landed in IFR conditions, without clearance, on a taxiway, pilot deviation, contact the tower by phone.' I contacted the tower and gave them my information since I was operating the radios and lal tower said we had not contacted them, we then found that the radio was set to 124.05 instead of 124.50. The entire time we thought we were talking to lal tower, melbourne tower was responding to us. Melbourne has a runway 27R. I did prefix my initial, and I believe subsequent calls with 'lal tower.' I do not recall melbourne tower ever correcting me or asking why I contacted them on the secondary frequency. When asked to confirm visibility, the tower confirmed 7 mi visibility, which concurred with ATIS information at lal. ATIS information was stated during the initial call to the tower. Prevention of a recurrence: during 1 of my 3 separate phone conversations with lal tower shortly after this on that same morning, the tower operator said that 'this has been a problem before.' when I asked 'what do you mean?' he only referred to 'the frequencys and other towers in the area.' it may assist in the future if towers were to identify themselves more than once during landing phases. Perhaps additional considerations should be made when putting 2 towers, both with a runway 27, and in this case both had some form of a runway 27R, in such a close geographical area with frequencys that can be easily mistaken.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA28 PLT AND PAX ON VFR FLT FROM MLB TO LAL LANDS AT LAL WHILE ON MLB FREQ.

Narrative: ON FEB/MON/00 AT APPROX XA30 ON OUR WAY TO LAL, WE WERE CRUISING AT 3500 FT ON THE 080 DEG RADIAL FROM LAL INBOUND FOR LNDG WITH GOOD VFR WX. ORL FLT FOLLOWING TERMINATED US ABOUT 20 MI FROM LAL AT 3500 FT. WE ACQUIRED ATIS AND IT WAS RPTING VFR. THE WX AHEAD LOOKED LOW, SO WE BEGAN OUR DSCNT TO 1000 FT TO MAINTAIN VFR. WE ACQUIRED ATIS INFO FROM LAL AT APPROX XA45 AND 15 MI OUT. ATIS INFO STATED VFR CONDITIONS, VISIBILITY 7 MI, TEMP 18 DEGS, DEWPOINT 16 DEGS, CLOUDS SCATTERED AT 1800 FT AND THE ALTIMETER WAS 30.04 AND RWY 27 WAS CLOSED AND RWY 23 WAS IN USE VISUAL, AS I CAN RECALL. UPON RECEIVING THE INFO, I SWITCHED THE RADIOS FOR THE PF TO TWR FREQ 124.5. HOWEVER, IT WAS LATER DISCOVERED WHAT I ACTUALLY DIALED IN, BY ACCIDENT, WAS 124.05 (124.05 IS THE SECONDARY FREQ FOR MELBOURNE TWR). THE FOLLOWING COMS BTWN OUR ACFT AND THE TWR ARE TO THE BEST OF MY MEMORY. I CALLED LAL TWR STATING THAT WE WERE 10 MI TO THE E INBOUND FOR LNDG AND WE HAD ATIS INFO. THE TWR REPLIED AND SAID TO RPT THE RIVER FOR RWY 27R. AFTER FURTHER EXAMINING THE SECTIONAL, I COULD NOT LOCATE A RIVER AMONGST THE MANY LAKES THAT SURROUND THE ARPT AND BEGAN TO SCAN VISUALLY. I STATED TO THE PF THAT 'I DIDN'T KNOW LAL HAS A RWY 27R.' HE ADVISED ME THAT DURING SUN N' FUN FLY-IN, THE PARALLEL TXWY IS OFTEN USED AS A RWY. I ACKNOWLEDGED THIS AS IT MADE SENSE BECAUSE RWY 27 WAS RPTED CLOSED. AS WE APCHED THE ARPT, THE TWR REQUESTED OUR POS. WE ADVISED THAT WE WERE 5 MI OUT, WOULD LIKE HIM TO TURN UP THE LIGHTS AND CONFIRM VISIBILITY BECAUSE OUR FLT VISIBILITY APPEARED TO BE DETERIORATING. THE TWR STATED VISIBILITY WAS 7 MI. AS BEST I CAN RECALL, THE TWR CLRED US TO LAND RWY 27R WHEN WE HAD IT IN SIGHT. WE ACKNOWLEDGED THIS. APCHING LAL, WE ASKED THE TWR AGAIN TO TURN UP THE RWY LIGHTS, AS THEY DID NOT APPEAR TO BE ON, AND 'CONFIRM THAT RWY 27R WAS THE PARALLEL TXWY.' THE TWR REPLIED, 'WHAT ABOUT THE TXWY, AND THE LIGHTS ARE UP.' ON SHORT FINAL I COULD SEE THE RWY 27R PAINTED ON THE SURFACE WITH LNDG SPOT MARKERS THAT CONFIRMED TO ME THAT OUR LNDG INSTRUCTIONS WERE PROPER AND I NOTED THE CONSTRUCTION ON THE MAIN RWY 27. THE ACFT TOUCHED DOWN ON THE LNDG SPOT MARKER NUMBER 2 AND WE ROLLED TO A STOP AND EXITED WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE RWY. WE CONTACTED GND. GND TOLD US 'YOU HAVE JUST LANDED IN IFR CONDITIONS, WITHOUT CLRNC, ON A TXWY, PLTDEV, CONTACT THE TWR BY PHONE.' I CONTACTED THE TWR AND GAVE THEM MY INFO SINCE I WAS OPERATING THE RADIOS AND LAL TWR SAID WE HAD NOT CONTACTED THEM, WE THEN FOUND THAT THE RADIO WAS SET TO 124.05 INSTEAD OF 124.50. THE ENTIRE TIME WE THOUGHT WE WERE TALKING TO LAL TWR, MELBOURNE TWR WAS RESPONDING TO US. MELBOURNE HAS A RWY 27R. I DID PREFIX MY INITIAL, AND I BELIEVE SUBSEQUENT CALLS WITH 'LAL TWR.' I DO NOT RECALL MELBOURNE TWR EVER CORRECTING ME OR ASKING WHY I CONTACTED THEM ON THE SECONDARY FREQ. WHEN ASKED TO CONFIRM VISIBILITY, THE TWR CONFIRMED 7 MI VISIBILITY, WHICH CONCURRED WITH ATIS INFO AT LAL. ATIS INFO WAS STATED DURING THE INITIAL CALL TO THE TWR. PREVENTION OF A RECURRENCE: DURING 1 OF MY 3 SEPARATE PHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH LAL TWR SHORTLY AFTER THIS ON THAT SAME MORNING, THE TWR OPERATOR SAID THAT 'THIS HAS BEEN A PROB BEFORE.' WHEN I ASKED 'WHAT DO YOU MEAN?' HE ONLY REFERRED TO 'THE FREQS AND OTHER TWRS IN THE AREA.' IT MAY ASSIST IN THE FUTURE IF TWRS WERE TO IDENT THEMSELVES MORE THAN ONCE DURING LNDG PHASES. PERHAPS ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS SHOULD BE MADE WHEN PUTTING 2 TWRS, BOTH WITH A RWY 27, AND IN THIS CASE BOTH HAD SOME FORM OF A RWY 27R, IN SUCH A CLOSE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA WITH FREQS THAT CAN BE EASILY MISTAKEN.

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.