Narrative:

I was inbound to land at grand forks, nd (kgfk) from the west. The conditions were VFR, but humid and hazy. I descended out of 10000 ft (my assigned en route altitude), to 5000 ft and was requested to report visual on kgfk. The ATIS had said to expect a visual on runway 17R, so I scanned the horizon for a n-s runway and confused the n-s runway at the military airport, (roughly 5 mi west of kgfk), with runway 17R at kgfk. When I (incorrectly) reported kgfk in sight, the grand forks approach controller instructed me to descend to 4000 ft and not to descend lower until traffic cleared. I was given a radar vector of 090 degrees, to which I complied. I was cleared for the approach to runway 17R, but instructed not yet to descend. Upon reaching the north end of the military airport's n-s runway, I turned right (south). After perhaps 1 or 2 mins, the controller called, asked if my intentions were to land at kgfk. I replied 'yes.' it was then that I realized I was approaching the north end of the military airport's n-s runway. The controller asked if I had maintained 4000 ft. I replied 'affirmative,' to which he said, 'no harm done, proceed direct kgfk and report in sight.' turning left, I could now readily see the kgfk runways and airport environment. I was cleared for the approach to runway 8 and landed. Contributing factors: 1) although 'VFR' conditions the slant-angle visibility was poor, so that when I was roughly 9 mi west of kgfk, putting me at about 4 mi west of the military airport, kgfk was not distinguishable. 2) the similar layout of the 2 airports, with each having a n-s runway on the west side of several bldgs, made it easy to confuse runway 17R at kgfk with the military airport's n-s runway. Moreover, the fact that the military runway is roughly 12000 ft long, gave it the appearance of being a 7000 ft runway (that is, runway 17R at kgfk) at a greater distance 3) pilot fatigue. I had been flying for roughly 8 hours at the time of the mis-identify. Clearly, this problem illustrates the idea that once a 'fact' is perceived as true, it requires a large amount of effort to overcome that perception. In this case, once I had idented the n-s runway at the military airport as runway 17R at kgfk, I neglected to continue to xchk this. A quick check of my GPS would have uncovered this misconception. Instead, with the conditions being visual (although poor, with haze), my decisions continued to be driven by the one, incorrect, perception.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PA32 SINGLE PLT ENTERED THE PATTERN FOR THE MIL BASE, RDR, WHICH HE MISTOOK FOR GFK, BUT WAS SAVED BY RDR TRACON FROM LNDG AT THE WRONG ARPT.

Narrative: I WAS INBOUND TO LAND AT GRAND FORKS, ND (KGFK) FROM THE W. THE CONDITIONS WERE VFR, BUT HUMID AND HAZY. I DSNDED OUT OF 10000 FT (MY ASSIGNED ENRTE ALT), TO 5000 FT AND WAS REQUESTED TO RPT VISUAL ON KGFK. THE ATIS HAD SAID TO EXPECT A VISUAL ON RWY 17R, SO I SCANNED THE HORIZON FOR A N-S RWY AND CONFUSED THE N-S RWY AT THE MIL ARPT, (ROUGHLY 5 MI W OF KGFK), WITH RWY 17R AT KGFK. WHEN I (INCORRECTLY) RPTED KGFK IN SIGHT, THE GRAND FORKS APCH CTLR INSTRUCTED ME TO DSND TO 4000 FT AND NOT TO DSND LOWER UNTIL TFC CLRED. I WAS GIVEN A RADAR VECTOR OF 090 DEGS, TO WHICH I COMPLIED. I WAS CLRED FOR THE APCH TO RWY 17R, BUT INSTRUCTED NOT YET TO DSND. UPON REACHING THE N END OF THE MIL ARPT'S N-S RWY, I TURNED R (S). AFTER PERHAPS 1 OR 2 MINS, THE CTLR CALLED, ASKED IF MY INTENTIONS WERE TO LAND AT KGFK. I REPLIED 'YES.' IT WAS THEN THAT I REALIZED I WAS APCHING THE N END OF THE MIL ARPT'S N-S RWY. THE CTLR ASKED IF I HAD MAINTAINED 4000 FT. I REPLIED 'AFFIRMATIVE,' TO WHICH HE SAID, 'NO HARM DONE, PROCEED DIRECT KGFK AND REPORT IN SIGHT.' TURNING L, I COULD NOW READILY SEE THE KGFK RWYS AND ARPT ENVIRONMENT. I WAS CLRED FOR THE APCH TO RWY 8 AND LANDED. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) ALTHOUGH 'VFR' CONDITIONS THE SLANT-ANGLE VISIBILITY WAS POOR, SO THAT WHEN I WAS ROUGHLY 9 MI W OF KGFK, PUTTING ME AT ABOUT 4 MI W OF THE MIL ARPT, KGFK WAS NOT DISTINGUISHABLE. 2) THE SIMILAR LAYOUT OF THE 2 ARPTS, WITH EACH HAVING A N-S RWY ON THE W SIDE OF SEVERAL BLDGS, MADE IT EASY TO CONFUSE RWY 17R AT KGFK WITH THE MIL ARPT'S N-S RWY. MOREOVER, THE FACT THAT THE MIL RWY IS ROUGHLY 12000 FT LONG, GAVE IT THE APPEARANCE OF BEING A 7000 FT RWY (THAT IS, RWY 17R AT KGFK) AT A GREATER DISTANCE 3) PLT FATIGUE. I HAD BEEN FLYING FOR ROUGHLY 8 HRS AT THE TIME OF THE MIS-IDENT. CLEARLY, THIS PROB ILLUSTRATES THE IDEA THAT ONCE A 'FACT' IS PERCEIVED AS TRUE, IT REQUIRES A LARGE AMOUNT OF EFFORT TO OVERCOME THAT PERCEPTION. IN THIS CASE, ONCE I HAD IDENTED THE N-S RWY AT THE MIL ARPT AS RWY 17R AT KGFK, I NEGLECTED TO CONTINUE TO XCHK THIS. A QUICK CHK OF MY GPS WOULD HAVE UNCOVERED THIS MISCONCEPTION. INSTEAD, WITH THE CONDITIONS BEING VISUAL (ALTHOUGH POOR, WITH HAZE), MY DECISIONS CONTINUED TO BE DRIVEN BY THE ONE, INCORRECT, PERCEPTION.

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.