Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 70; Flight Crew Total 26500; Flight Crew Type 6000
Fatigue; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Human Factors
Prior to departing we checked the atis for KIX and programmed the arrival and runway we anticipated; which was the DANDE B arrival; ILS 6L. During the flight we received the atis information for KIX which still indicated the ILS rwy 6L was in use. Inflight we checked and briefed the arrival and approach; cross checking altitudes and courses and waypoints. We were talking to approach control who sounded very garbled and we had to constantly ask him to repeat communications. While on the arrival we were cleared to fly the approach. The arrival intercepted the approach course at a 90 degree angle and I decided to intercept the approach course while on LNAV because it intercepts smoother at such a high intercept angle.  The airplane intercepted the approach course and turned to the approach course. Just as I was about to press the APP button the approach controller informed us we had intercepted the approach course for rwy 6R. We checked the FMC and saw that the approach entered was the ILS 6R. We started a turn to the left to intercept the approach course for 6L and then the controller told us to just continue on the approach for rwy 6R. We landed with no further issues on rwy 6R. Somehow we had erroneously entered the wrong runway. We had the correct arrival and the correct frequency set for the rwy 6L but the wrong approach programmed into the FMC. We did not notice any discontinuity on the FMC between the correct arrival and the incorrect approach. The aircraft upon reaching the last waypoint on the arrival (BERRY) then turned correctly to the approach course. When checking the FMC during the briefing I would swear that everything looked correct. But somehow it was not. Complacency would be the natural conclusion to jump to; however the sequence of flights during this duty period were extremely taxing. We were scheduled for three legs. These were two two hour legs bracketing a four hour leg. All the legs took longer than scheduled. We were scheduled for approximately 7 hours and 30 minutes and the middle leg alone was flight planned for 20 minutes more than the schedule. Our total flight time ended up being 7 hours and 51 minutes. Additionally we did not even have the chance to just sit anywhere and close our eyes; even for ten minutes because all our time in ZZZ is used up shuttling back and forth to the terminal and back for immigration. We were both extremely tired for this last leg even though we both made sure to get appropriate sleep prior to this duty period. We did not think we were too fatigued to continue. We did not think our cognitive skills were compromised. However; apparently they were. I will definitely keep this experience in mind from now on and monitor myself for fatigue more closely in the future. This duty period and this sequence of flights is very inducive to fatigue.
Arrival into RJBB. ATIS indicated 6L ILS. Loaded DANDE B arrival (and thought) ILS Y 6L. Cleared for the ILS Y 6L. Turned from BERRY on to final. Moments later; tower informed us that we had lined up on 6R. We asked to change to 6L and they then cleared us to land on 6R. We were confused; to say the least. Choose to not go around due to not being sure which missed approach to fly. Determined that we were cleared to land on 6R. Stable at just under 1000 ft on final. I had loaded the DANDE B arrival. We briefed the arrival but I'm not sure if we THROUGHLY briefed the approach. When tower informed us of our mistake of lining up (using LNAV) on 6R (at approx 8 miles); I noticed the following things: 1) 6R was the runway in the FMC (wrong one) 2) Prog page two indicated 33 miles from the active way point; which I thought was the runway3) the miles to the next waypoint on the EADI indicated 14-13 miles 4) I never noticed if LOC became active; but did notice the GS alive. Still trying to process what happened. We were aware that 6L was the active runway at RJBB but we failed to load and check the correct approach in the FMC. Bottom line: Flight deck discipline and procedures broke down. We did not brief enough if we actually briefed at all. I remember briefing the arrival but I am not sure about the completeness of the approach brief. We were both very tired and fortunately; very lucky today.
Flight crew loaded and intercepted the RJBB ILS Runway 6R; but were cleared for the ILS Runway 6L. The Tower changed their landing clearance to Runway 6R.