You can contribute by submitting additional or updated information.
| Date: | Wednesday 25 September 2024 |
| Time: | 15:26 |
| Type: |  Embraer 170-100LR |
| Owner/operator: | American Eagle, opb Envoy Air |
| Registration: | N772MR |
| MSN: | 17000092 |
| Year of manufacture: | 2004 |
| Engine model: | General Electric CF34-8E |
| Fatalities: | Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 68 |
| Other fatalities: | 0 |
| Aircraft damage: | None |
| Category: | Serious incident |
| Location: | O'Hare International Airport (ORD/KORD), Chicago, IL -
 United States of America
|
| Phase: | Landing |
| Nature: | Passenger - Scheduled |
| Departure airport: | Norfolk International Airport, VA (ORF/KORF) |
| Chicago-O'Hare International Airport, IL (ORD/KORD) | |
| Investigating agency: | NTSB |
| Confidence Rating: |  Information verified through data from accident investigation authorities |
On September 25, 2024, about 1526 central daylight time (CDT), Envoy Airlines flight 3936 (ENY3936), an Embraer 170-100 LR, N772MR, was cleared for the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to land on runway 10C at Chicago O’Hare International Airport (ORD), Chicago, Illinois, but the flight crew landed on runway 10L instead. None of the 68 occupants aboard the airplane were injured, and the airplane was not damaged. The regularly scheduled passenger flight was operating under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulation Part 121 from Norfolk International Airport (ORF), Norfolk, Virginia, to ORD.
The cockpit voice recorder was overwritten.
The flight crew reported that before departure, based on the current weather conditions at ORD, they had planned for the ILS runway 27R via the WATSON4 RNAV arrival. Before the airplane began its descent into the terminal area, they obtained automatic terminal information service (ATIS) information which indicated they should expect runway 9L. Subsequently, ATC changed their arrival to the ESSPO5 arrival which was programmed into the flight management computers (FMC) and briefed. They discussed which runway they should expect and concluded that they would likely be assigned runway 10R.
After checking in with the ORD approach controller they were assigned runway 10C. The captain, who was the pilot monitoring, briefed the approach and programmed and loaded the FMC with the instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 10C to back up the planned visual approach. However, they were not receiving the ILS identifier. The captain attempted to troubleshoot why the localizer frequency would not autotune by reloading the approach in the FMC and manually tuning the frequency. Unable to resolve the issue, they elected to proceed visually.
The captain contacted the air traffic control tower (ATCT) controller stating they were on the visual approach to runway 10C, and the airplane was cleared to land on runway 10C. However, the airplane was aligned with and landed on runway 10L. The airplane touched down at about1526:25 CDT and turned left to exit the runway. The figure below is a Google Earth screenshot that is overlaid with automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) ground track showing the incident flight aligned with and landing on runway 10L at ORD.
A review of ATC communications revealed that after checking in with ORD approach control ENY3936 was told to expect runway 10C. About 6 minutes later ENY3936 was instructed to turn to a 060° heading and intercept the 10C localizer. ENY3936 read back turn right heading 090° to intercept. To which the controller corrected ENY3936 and reissued the 060° heading which was read back by ENY3936 correctly.
About 30 seconds later ENY3936 was instructed to maintain 170 knots to RAYYY and contact the tower and the instructions were read back correctly. Subsequently, ENY3936 checked in with ORD air traffic control tower on the visual approach to 10C and was cleared to land.
The FAA mandatory occurrence report (MOR) revealed that the ATCT controller noticed the runway alignment error and coordinated with the runway 10L controller to allow ENY3936 to land on the incorrect runway as no traffic conflicts were noted. At no time on the approach was ENY3936 notified by ATC of their alignment error, nor did the crew communicate to ATC that they were unable to tune the localizer.
FAA Order JO 7110.65AA Air Traffic Organization Policy section 3-10-5 stated in part:
b. When you become aware that an aircraft is aligned with the wrong surface, inform the pilot and: 1. Issue control instructions/clearances, or EXAMPLE- “United four twenty three, go-around, you appear to be aligned with the wrong runway.” “American sixty three, go-around, you appear to be aligned with a taxiway.” “Southwest two thirty nine, you appear to be aligned with Runway 27 Left (pertinent information), Runway 27 Left, cleared to land.” 2. If time permits, verify the pilot is aligned with the correct runway. Issue control instructions/clearances as necessary. EXAMPLE- “Twin Cessna four one four lima bravo, verify you are aligned with Runway 27 Left.”
The investigation continues.
Accident investigation:
 |
|
Sources:
NTSB DCA24LA318
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n772mr#3743da4b
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n772mr
https://cdn.jetphotos.com/full/6/386204_1723568617.jpg (photo)
Location
Revision history:
| Date/time | Contributor | Updates |
|---|---|---|
| 01-Oct-2024 10:44 | Captain Adam | Added |
| 02-Oct-2024 07:09 | ASN | Updated [Time, Departure airport, Destination airport, Source, Damage, Narrative, ] |
| 16-Oct-2024 20:19 | Captain Adam | Updated [Time, Total occupants, Phase, Narrative, Accident report, ] |
Corrections or additions? ... Edit this accident description
The Aviation Safety Network is an exclusive service provided by:
Quick Links:
| ASN Home | Send Correction / Feedback |
| FSF Home | Disclaimer | Copyright |
| Contact Us | Privacy Policy |
| Press / Media |
CONNECT WITH US:
©2025 Flight Safety Foundation