Narrative:

Approach control vectored our aircraft (arriving from south) to be #2 behind a light aircraft which was in a r-hand pattern for runway 28. Was cleared for visual approach and handed off to tower on 3 mi final with #1 aircraft turning approximately 1 mi final. I (PNF) asked tower if we should do a 360 degree turn. Tower replied that the #1 aircraft had not flown a tight pattern as requested, but said that 'it should work out.' tower requested #1 aircraft to exit the runway as soon as possible, due to medium large transport on 1 1/2 mi final. No response. Aircraft was still on the runway as we approached threshold. Captain (PF) initiated go around. We reported go around to tower due to aircraft on the runway. Was cleared for visual downwind to follow aircraft on final. Subsequent landing was uneventful. Report is submitted because flight attendant and station agent stated that a passenger is filing a report claiming that our go around was because we had failed to extend the landing gear. We're unsure of passenger motivation, but suspect that the individual is a jerk, spectacularly stupid, or using bad drugs. Passenger were advised of the reason for the go around via PA announcement during downwind leg.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FORCED TO MAKE GAR DUE TO ACFT ON RWY. PAX SAYS HE WILL FILE RPT AS HE BELIEVES REAL REASON IS GEAR NOT DOWN.

Narrative: APCH CTL VECTORED OUR ACFT (ARRIVING FROM S) TO BE #2 BEHIND A LIGHT ACFT WHICH WAS IN A R-HAND PATTERN FOR RWY 28. WAS CLRED FOR VISUAL APCH AND HANDED OFF TO TWR ON 3 MI FINAL WITH #1 ACFT TURNING APPROX 1 MI FINAL. I (PNF) ASKED TWR IF WE SHOULD DO A 360 DEG TURN. TWR REPLIED THAT THE #1 ACFT HAD NOT FLOWN A TIGHT PATTERN AS REQUESTED, BUT SAID THAT 'IT SHOULD WORK OUT.' TWR REQUESTED #1 ACFT TO EXIT THE RWY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, DUE TO MLG ON 1 1/2 MI FINAL. NO RESPONSE. ACFT WAS STILL ON THE RWY AS WE APCHED THRESHOLD. CAPT (PF) INITIATED GAR. WE RPTED GAR TO TWR DUE TO ACFT ON THE RWY. WAS CLRED FOR VISUAL DOWNWIND TO FOLLOW ACFT ON FINAL. SUBSEQUENT LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. RPT IS SUBMITTED BECAUSE FLT ATTENDANT AND STATION AGENT STATED THAT A PAX IS FILING A RPT CLAIMING THAT OUR GAR WAS BECAUSE WE HAD FAILED TO EXTEND THE LNDG GEAR. WE'RE UNSURE OF PAX MOTIVATION, BUT SUSPECT THAT THE INDIVIDUAL IS A JERK, SPECTACULARLY STUPID, OR USING BAD DRUGS. PAX WERE ADVISED OF THE REASON FOR THE GAR VIA PA ANNOUNCEMENT DURING DOWNWIND LEG.

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.