Narrative:

While flying on left downwind for the airport I was cleared for the visual approach to runway 30L. ATC asked for a short approach. The airport was in sight; but individual runways were hard to make out due to our parallel course; construction lighting on the eastern half of the airport; and the surrounding neighborhood/business area lighting.I turned for a five-mile base with gear down and slowed to configure. The map display was on the ten-mile range; the ILS was tuned on both radios with final course set; and I saw that our heading would take us just inside moidd; the FAF for 30L ILS. The hgs was set up for arrival to 30L with GS; tdze; and runway length. After configuring on base; the ILS glideslope indicated that we were on path; but the localizer course was displaced to the right/east. Though the localizer was displaced; being only 5 miles from the runway made the glideslope indications match what I expected to see. My expedited approach plan to roll out at 1500' AGL on final did not give us much time to establish ourselves on course and path. The runways did not stand out amongst the airport lights as I had expected; but after rolling out around 1500' AGL on final; I spotted bright vasis that indicated we were below glide path. We were still offset to the west of the localizer course and the first officer and I discussed the possibility that the localizer was now out of service. ILS glide path showed us on but trending high; whereas the VASI out front showed us to be below glide path. At about 1400' AGL I began to level off and went to the VMC mode on the hgs to confirm our glide path and it agreed with the VASI; not the ILS glide path. At this point it was apparent I had aligned the aircraft with runway 29 and was too high to continue an approach to 30L. The first officer and I were planning to initiate a go-around when tower cleared us to land on 29. Landing was uneventful. While on downwind I had the airport environment and beacon in sight prior to turning base. 30R was closed and I recall construction/airfield lighting blended in with whatever dim lighting was associated with 30L. Runway 29 lighting was much brighter and being more secluded stood out much more against the dark background. Due to the short approach; poor lighting; and low altitude; I spent the majority of what little time was available trying to resolve the conflicting glide path issue which eventually led to the alignment with the wrong runway.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An air carrier pilot reported that on a night close in visual approach to STL Runway 30L; the construction and environmental lighting caused him to incorrectly line up and fly a low approach to Runway 29.

Narrative: While flying on left downwind for the airport I was cleared for the visual approach to Runway 30L. ATC asked for a short approach. The airport was in sight; but individual runways were hard to make out due to our parallel course; construction lighting on the eastern half of the airport; and the surrounding neighborhood/business area lighting.I turned for a five-mile base with gear down and slowed to configure. The map display was on the ten-mile range; the ILS was tuned on both radios with final course set; and I saw that our heading would take us just inside MOIDD; the FAF for 30L ILS. The HGS was set up for arrival to 30L with GS; TDZE; and runway length. After configuring on base; the ILS glideslope indicated that we were on path; but the LOC course was displaced to the right/EAST. Though the LOC was displaced; being only 5 miles from the runway made the glideslope indications match what I expected to see. My expedited approach plan to roll out at 1500' AGL on final did not give us much time to establish ourselves on course and path. The runways did not stand out amongst the airport lights as I had expected; but after rolling out around 1500' AGL on final; I spotted bright VASIs that indicated we were below glide path. We were still offset to the west of the LOC course and the First Officer and I discussed the possibility that the LOC was now out of service. ILS glide path showed us on but trending high; whereas the VASI out front showed us to be below glide path. At about 1400' AGL I began to level off and went to the VMC mode on the HGS to confirm our glide path and it agreed with the VASI; not the ILS glide path. At this point it was apparent I had aligned the aircraft with Runway 29 and was too high to continue an approach to 30L. The First Officer and I were planning to initiate a go-around when Tower cleared us to land on 29. Landing was uneventful. While on downwind I had the airport environment and beacon in sight prior to turning base. 30R was closed and I recall construction/airfield lighting blended in with whatever dim lighting was associated with 30L. Runway 29 lighting was much brighter and being more secluded stood out much more against the dark background. Due to the short approach; poor lighting; and low altitude; I spent the majority of what little time was available trying to resolve the conflicting glide path issue which eventually led to the alignment with the wrong runway.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.