B737-800 captain and additional B737 flight crew reported that after the flight was cleared to land ...

Attributes
ACN	1545011
Time
Date	201805
Local Time Of Day	0001-0600
Place
Locale Reference	LAS.Airport
State Reference	NV
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B737-800
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Initial Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Initial Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Captain Pilot Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Instrument
Person 2
Function	Pilot Not Flying First Officer
Qualification	Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Narrative:

We were cleared to intercept the localizer for [runway] 01 left. Once established; we were re-cleared to fly the visual to 01 right. We selected the RNAV 01 right in the FMC as a backup to our visual and were established on the VNAV path through out this event. [Aircraft X] came in behind and above us and we heard them being cleared for a visual to 01 right; and then heard [their] pilots confirming the clearance. We immediately queried ATC to confirm the clearances for [aircraft Y] and ourselves. ATC then corrected the clearance for [aircraft Y] for runway 01 left. The [other] aircraft was now parallel to our course; above us; and in front....as [they] descended to get on glideslope; we received a TCAS RA (resolution advisory) to climb. We had a visual on [aircraft Y] and I made the decision to not respond to the RA due to our proximity to them. I felt this was the safest course of action. We landed safely.in my opinion; I believe las vegas approach and tower controllers rely on the visual confirmations of participating aircraft before they can complete a hand off to the subsequent controller. When a visual of another/preceding aircraft cannot be confirmed; then stabilized approaches cannot be performed.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-800 Captain and additional B737 flight crew reported that after the flight was cleared to land another aircraft that was behind and above the Captain's aircraft was cleared to land on the same runway.

Narrative: We were cleared to intercept the Localizer for [Runway] 01 Left. Once established; we were re-cleared to fly the visual to 01 Right. We selected the RNAV 01 Right in the FMC as a backup to our visual and were established on the VNAV path through out this event. [Aircraft X] came in behind and above us and we heard them being cleared for a visual to 01 Right; and then heard [their] pilots confirming the clearance. We immediately queried ATC to confirm the clearances for [Aircraft Y] and ourselves. ATC then corrected the clearance for [Aircraft Y] for Runway 01 Left. The [other] aircraft was now parallel to our course; above us; and in front....as [they] descended to get on glideslope; we received a TCAS RA (Resolution Advisory) to climb. We had a visual on [Aircraft Y] and I made the decision to not respond to the RA due to our proximity to them. I felt this was the safest course of action. We landed safely.In my opinion; I believe Las Vegas Approach and Tower Controllers rely on the visual confirmations of participating aircraft before they can complete a hand off to the subsequent controller. When a visual of another/preceding aircraft cannot be confirmed; then stabilized approaches cannot be performed.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.

B737-800 captain and additional B737 flight crew reported that after the flight was cleared to land another aircraft that was behind and above the captain's aircraft was cleared to land on the same runway.