Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 73
Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Human Factors
Upon contact with OKC Approach in day VFR conditions; we were subsequently vectored off the STAR for a visual approach to 17L at KOKC.  We had briefed a visual approach to this runway; backed up with the ILS.  I remember seeing KOKC on the left as we descended. Approach assigned us a heading of 340 and a descent to 4000 FT MSL and I verbalized that this would put us west of the field for a right base to 17L.  Subsequently Approach asked us if we had the field in sight; and we agreed. We were cleared the visual. I called for flaps and gear in sequence. The field we saw was off our right wing. We turned about an eight mile right base off the fix page for KOKC Runway 17L; with landing gear and Flaps 15; to finish configuring on final.  At 3000 FT MSL on base; Approach asked us if we were executing the visual to 17L at KOKC. We replied affirmative; and then Approach climbed us to 4000 FT MSL and subsequently vectored us north.  Approach told us we were headed for Tinker AFB (visually about seven or eight NM at our two to three o'clock). We recognized our mistake; and coordinated with Approach for vectors to the Localizer for 17L at KOKC. We should have turned a left base to 17L instead of a right turn. Once we were positively sure of our position relative to KOKC; we coordinated for the visual to 17L and landed uneventfully at KOKC.Upon discussion with the other Pilot after the flight; we both recalled from training the technique to fly to the final approach fix using the FMC for the intended visual approach.  Given the conditions of an older model aircraft without the plan view that helps distinguish between airports; day VFR; multiple large airports in the local vicinity; an approach from the south that arrived near two airports; and the expectation bias of seeing an airport and reacting to a perceived location while using just the FIX page; the technique to fly to the final approach fix before committing to a pure visual approach is a much better planning tool to maintain situational awareness. I will certainly employ this technique immediately; as well as brief the threat of multiple airports in the vicinity. Also I will verbalize our position as we fly the approach; to give the other Pilot multiple chances to verify our position.  The KOKC 10-7 page does warn about confusion between multiple airports in the vicinity; yet I did not do enough to guard against this threat.  I will employ better planning via a more detailed briefing and more attention to approach waypoints to reduce this threat.
Flying the TSDEL1 Arrival into KOKC; we were vectored off the arrival and given a lower altitude to descend to. The Captain mentioned there were antennas that we needed to look out for on the approach of 17L. We were handed off to OKC Approach. Approach gave us a vector to parallel the runway and a descent down to 6000 FT. I was reviewing the approach quickly to reference the antennas. Approach asked if the airport was in sight. The Captain said the airport was in sight. I conveyed that to approach and we were cleared for the visual for 17L. The Captain flew until five miles downwind and started a base leg turn to the right. Approach said we turned in the wrong direction. The Captain told me to request radar vectors to the 17L. We landed without further incident.
The crew started a turn towards TIK while cleared for a visual approach to OKC Runway 17L.