Landing without clearance.

Attributes
ACN	294785
Time
Date	199501
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mxp
State Reference	FO
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
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
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	other personnel other
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : commercial pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time total : 11000 flight time type : 2200
ASRS Report	294785
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	incursion : landing without clearance non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

After landing at malpensa tower admonished us for failing to report the OM and for landing without a clearance. The first officer had definitely called at the malpensa NDB, which is co- located with the OM, on the initial check-in with tower. The tower controller responded with words that we took to mean acknowledging our position and clearing us for approach and landing. There is no radar at malpensa and the WX precluded visual contact by the tower until landing rollout. All 3 of us were experienced at malpensa and were aware of nothing unusual until tower's call after we landed. Possible contributing factors were language differences and fatigue associated with a long all night overwater flight. We had dealt with a passenger illness and turbulence as bad as I have seen, both of which disrupted the normal crew rest cycle. I'm not sure what corrective action would apply for the OM position report as it was definitely made and responded to. Perhaps use of the specific term 'OM' rather than the name of the co-located NDB would have helped. As for the landing, the obvious corrective action is to confirm and reconfirm landing clearance prior to landing. The final approach fix, completion of landing checks, passing 1000 ft AGL, acquiring visual contact with the runway and approaching short final would all be appropriate times to do this.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LNDG WITHOUT CLRNC.

Narrative: AFTER LNDG AT MALPENSA TWR ADMONISHED US FOR FAILING TO RPT THE OM AND FOR LNDG WITHOUT A CLRNC. THE FO HAD DEFINITELY CALLED AT THE MALPENSA NDB, WHICH IS CO- LOCATED WITH THE OM, ON THE INITIAL CHK-IN WITH TWR. THE TWR CTLR RESPONDED WITH WORDS THAT WE TOOK TO MEAN ACKNOWLEDGING OUR POS AND CLRING US FOR APCH AND LNDG. THERE IS NO RADAR AT MALPENSA AND THE WX PRECLUDED VISUAL CONTACT BY THE TWR UNTIL LNDG ROLLOUT. ALL 3 OF US WERE EXPERIENCED AT MALPENSA AND WERE AWARE OF NOTHING UNUSUAL UNTIL TWR'S CALL AFTER WE LANDED. POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES AND FATIGUE ASSOCIATED WITH A LONG ALL NIGHT OVERWATER FLT. WE HAD DEALT WITH A PAX ILLNESS AND TURB AS BAD AS I HAVE SEEN, BOTH OF WHICH DISRUPTED THE NORMAL CREW REST CYCLE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD APPLY FOR THE OM POS RPT AS IT WAS DEFINITELY MADE AND RESPONDED TO. PERHAPS USE OF THE SPECIFIC TERM 'OM' RATHER THAN THE NAME OF THE CO-LOCATED NDB WOULD HAVE HELPED. AS FOR THE LNDG, THE OBVIOUS CORRECTIVE ACTION IS TO CONFIRM AND RECONFIRM LNDG CLRNC PRIOR TO LNDG. THE FINAL APCH FIX, COMPLETION OF LNDG CHKS, PASSING 1000 FT AGL, ACQUIRING VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE RWY AND APCHING SHORT FINAL WOULD ALL BE APPROPRIATE TIMES TO DO THIS.

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.