Narrative:

At the OM we switched to tower frequency and were told to continue (following traffic 3 mi ahead). ATIS had advised to expect nonstandard ground control frequency of 127.8. To help first officer after landing, I preselected 127.8 in communication radio, except that I selected it into the control head we were using instead of the 'standby' head. At approximately 500 ft we had still not been cleared to land so I requested landing clearance -- was told I was on approach control -- and switched back to tower. We were cleared to land with no conflict, but there was potential for accident. Human factor -- fatigue -- 3RD day of a 4 day trip. 2 early get-ups, 2 late nights, 1 day on west coast, 3 on east. This day's schedule sea-pit-phl-pit-roc (we were on second trip to pit). First officer and I were so tired and making so many mistakes that we had already called crew scheduling in phl and told them we needed to get off trip in pit due to fatigue. Even though pit-roc is only a 45 min flight, I seriously doubted we could have made the trip safely. Perhaps we should have gotten off in phl but we wanted to give company enough time to get reserves, without delaying trip. Had we gone to roc, flight time would have been approximately 8 1/2 hours though scheduled below 8 hours as per far -- delays on ground and in air due WX. Like most people, pilots rarely sleep well in hotels. FARS need to be changed. 8 hours flight time is excessive and our bodies respond to real time, not scheduled as per FARS.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LOSS OF COM FREQ DURING ANTICIPATED FREQ ASSIGNMENT CHANGE PREMATURE GUARDED. FLC BLAMES FLC BEHAVIOR FATIGUE FOR THE INCIDENT.

Narrative: AT THE OM WE SWITCHED TO TWR FREQ AND WERE TOLD TO CONTINUE (FOLLOWING TFC 3 MI AHEAD). ATIS HAD ADVISED TO EXPECT NONSTANDARD GND CTL FREQ OF 127.8. TO HELP FO AFTER LNDG, I PRESELECTED 127.8 IN COM RADIO, EXCEPT THAT I SELECTED IT INTO THE CTL HEAD WE WERE USING INSTEAD OF THE 'STANDBY' HEAD. AT APPROX 500 FT WE HAD STILL NOT BEEN CLRED TO LAND SO I REQUESTED LNDG CLRNC -- WAS TOLD I WAS ON APCH CTL -- AND SWITCHED BACK TO TWR. WE WERE CLRED TO LAND WITH NO CONFLICT, BUT THERE WAS POTENTIAL FOR ACCIDENT. HUMAN FACTOR -- FATIGUE -- 3RD DAY OF A 4 DAY TRIP. 2 EARLY GET-UPS, 2 LATE NIGHTS, 1 DAY ON W COAST, 3 ON E. THIS DAY'S SCHEDULE SEA-PIT-PHL-PIT-ROC (WE WERE ON SECOND TRIP TO PIT). FO AND I WERE SO TIRED AND MAKING SO MANY MISTAKES THAT WE HAD ALREADY CALLED CREW SCHEDULING IN PHL AND TOLD THEM WE NEEDED TO GET OFF TRIP IN PIT DUE TO FATIGUE. EVEN THOUGH PIT-ROC IS ONLY A 45 MIN FLT, I SERIOUSLY DOUBTED WE COULD HAVE MADE THE TRIP SAFELY. PERHAPS WE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN OFF IN PHL BUT WE WANTED TO GIVE COMPANY ENOUGH TIME TO GET RESERVES, WITHOUT DELAYING TRIP. HAD WE GONE TO ROC, FLT TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROX 8 1/2 HRS THOUGH SCHEDULED BELOW 8 HRS AS PER FAR -- DELAYS ON GND AND IN AIR DUE WX. LIKE MOST PEOPLE, PLTS RARELY SLEEP WELL IN HOTELS. FARS NEED TO BE CHANGED. 8 HRS FLT TIME IS EXCESSIVE AND OUR BODIES RESPOND TO REAL TIME, NOT SCHEDULED AS PER FARS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.