Large transport lands without clearance. Still on approach frequency.

Attributes
ACN	276971
Time
Date	199407
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : sfo
State Reference	CA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 1200
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : oak tower : sfo
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B737-300
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	descent : approach landing other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	other pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 14000 flight time type : 1600
ASRS Report	276971
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	incursion : landing without clearance non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

While flying quiet bridge visual runway 28R sfo, parallel approach by company B-737-300 for runway 28L appeared even with us as we maneuvered to final course. I made a PA to passenger to advise them of normal operations and parallel approachs. After landing, it appeared we were still on approach control frequency. We held short of runway 28L and advised tower we may have missed the switchover due to distraction of parallel aircraft. It is possible we landed without landing clearance unless tower did not ask for a readback and did transmit a landing clearance. It appeared that no problems were created and tower did not seem aware of any problems. It is also possible we were on tower frequency and removed it by error when preselecting ground frequency. In both cases, I believe the distraction of the other close aircraft on final, along with some fatigue (7 plus 30 block time) contributed to a possible ATC violation.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGT LANDS WITHOUT CLRNC. STILL ON APCH FREQ.

Narrative: WHILE FLYING QUIET BRIDGE VISUAL RWY 28R SFO, PARALLEL APCH BY COMPANY B-737-300 FOR RWY 28L APPEARED EVEN WITH US AS WE MANEUVERED TO FINAL COURSE. I MADE A PA TO PAX TO ADVISE THEM OF NORMAL OPS AND PARALLEL APCHS. AFTER LNDG, IT APPEARED WE WERE STILL ON APCH CTL FREQ. WE HELD SHORT OF RWY 28L AND ADVISED TWR WE MAY HAVE MISSED THE SWITCHOVER DUE TO DISTR OF PARALLEL ACFT. IT IS POSSIBLE WE LANDED WITHOUT LNDG CLRNC UNLESS TWR DID NOT ASK FOR A READBACK AND DID XMIT A LNDG CLRNC. IT APPEARED THAT NO PROBS WERE CREATED AND TWR DID NOT SEEM AWARE OF ANY PROBS. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE WE WERE ON TWR FREQ AND REMOVED IT BY ERROR WHEN PRESELECTING GND FREQ. IN BOTH CASES, I BELIEVE THE DISTR OF THE OTHER CLOSE ACFT ON FINAL, ALONG WITH SOME FATIGUE (7 PLUS 30 BLOCK TIME) CONTRIBUTED TO A POSSIBLE ATC VIOLATION.

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.