Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Distraction; Situational Awareness
Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
We were cleared for Visual Approach to the left parallel runway about 10 miles out on a 90 degree dogleg. We turned to create a shallow intercept angle aiming about 1 mile prior to the Final Approach Fix. We began descent to 3000 feet at about 800 fpm. We received a traffic caution. The First Officer looked outside and verified visual contact as I (Pilot Flying) disconnected the autopilot and turned away from the traffic. We were about a quarter mile from the localizer centerline. The other aircraft seemed to have gone through their localizer course. I turned as a precaution to prevent possible close contact. The First Officer stated the other aircraft had finally started a hard right turn back to their approach course. We received a RA Monitor Vertical Speed command. I continued as I was flying as it was a descent rate less than the aircraft was warning therefore it was in compliance. We received clear of conflict. The First Officer notified ATC. We were right about the FAF and elected to continue the Visual Approach as we were still safely configuring and aligned for the runway at this point. We were able to continue to a safe and normal landing. I believe ATC cleared us possibly a little early for the approach. It seemed we should have been staggered with the other traffic rather than in a position to approach directly beside it.
We were cleared for the visual approach to 12L at Minneapolis airport. We were about 10 miles away from the runway on a 90deg angle to intercept the localizer for 12L. We then turned to intercept the localizer on a more parallel heading and planned on intercepting the localizer around a mile before the final approach fix. We were descending to 3000 feet at around 800 fpm. We received a traffic caution and I immediately looked at the indications of the airplane to see where the traffic was. I then looked outside to the right side of the aircraft and soul and airplane converging on us. The Pilot Flying immediately disconnected the autopilot and turned us a little bit more left even though we were not on the localizer yet. We were still to the east of the localizer for 12L. The Captain used good judgment in my opinion by turning a little more to the left because we were in visual conditions and I had the aircraft in sight. We received an RA monitor vertical speed command. Our current vertical speed at the time was less than what the warning was showing. Very close to the same time we received the warning I noticed the other aircraft making a hard bank to the right to get back on course for 12R. We received a clear of conflict message and I immediately notified ATC which was also the Tower for our landing runway that we received the RA. We were then near the final approach fix and the Captain and I decided to continue because we were clear of all conflicts and the aircraft was in a safe; desirable state to continue to land safely adhering to SOPs. We landed the aircraft safely with no further events.Other aircraft was very close to localizer 12L; and we may not have had the RA if there had been more lateral separation between our aircraft and the aircraft landing on 12R.
CRJ900 flight crew reported taking evasive action on a visual approach to avoid traffic deviating off course on the parallel runway.