Narrative:

Arrived on a modified rome arrival for landing at atlanta hartsfield international airport. Told to expect approach to runway 26R, set up and briefed ILS runway 26R. In close, 10 NM west of atl, runway changed to runway 27L. Set up and briefed. Vectored south of atl for left base to runway 27L. On base, descended from 7000 ft to 3000 ft, for a relatively short approach. Given dog-leg vector to intercept the localizer. Told to maintain 180 KTS, slowed from approximately 210 KTS. Intercepted final approximately 3 NM outside marker (depot). Told to follow ATR ahead. Slightly above GS at localizer intercept, initial spacing on ATR70(?) was approximately 4 1/2 mi but decreased to approximately 3 1/2 mi on final. Had been told to contact atl tower on 119.1 over depot when we were cleared for a visual approach approximately 3 mi outside the marker. Became concerned for spacing on ATR. Had not selected north complex ADF for display on my HSI. Did not turn on/up the aural indicator for the OM (depot). Did not observe OM light indication. No mention of marker by other crew members. Observed ATR sidestep for landing on inboard runway (27R). Searched runway 27L for possible conflict to our aircraft. Lowered landing gear at approximately 1300 ft AGL (somewhat lower than normal). We were completing the before landing checklist as we descended through 1000 ft AGL, a point where we normally confirm landing clearance. At approximately 700 ft AGL captain asked if we had received landing clearance. I replied that we had not. Due to other xmissions (by other aircraft and the controller) there was a delay before I could request landing clearance. After I requested clearance to land, approach control advised us to contact tower on 119.1. By this time we were approximately 300 ft above touchdown and were unable to contact tower in time to receive landing clearance in time to land. The captain executed a normal missed approach/go around as I was contacting the tower. I informed tower that we were 'on the go' and were subsequently vectored for an uneventful approach and landing. Factors which may have contributed: last leg of 2 day trip, change to different approach close in, concern for separation on ATR, no positive (immediate) hand off by approach to tower, no designated commuter runway at atl, and the turboprops considerably slower speed on final approach.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC DID NOT SWITCH TO TWR 119.1 WHEN CLRED FOR THE VISUAL AS THEY INTENDED. WHEN THE CREW AT 700 FT ABOVE THE ARPT REALIZED THEY DID NOT HAVE LNDG CLRNC AND THEN WERE TOLD TO CONTACT TWR IT WAS TOO LATE TO NEGOTIATE A CLRNC TO LAND AND A MISSED APCH WAS ACCOMPLISHED FOLLOWED BY A NORMAL LNDG.

Narrative: ARRIVED ON A MODIFIED ROME ARR FOR LNDG AT ATLANTA HARTSFIELD INTL ARPT. TOLD TO EXPECT APCH TO RWY 26R, SET UP AND BRIEFED ILS RWY 26R. IN CLOSE, 10 NM W OF ATL, RWY CHANGED TO RWY 27L. SET UP AND BRIEFED. VECTORED S OF ATL FOR L BASE TO RWY 27L. ON BASE, DSNDED FROM 7000 FT TO 3000 FT, FOR A RELATIVELY SHORT APCH. GIVEN DOG-LEG VECTOR TO INTERCEPT THE LOC. TOLD TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS, SLOWED FROM APPROX 210 KTS. INTERCEPTED FINAL APPROX 3 NM OUTSIDE MARKER (DEPOT). TOLD TO FOLLOW ATR AHEAD. SLIGHTLY ABOVE GS AT LOC INTERCEPT, INITIAL SPACING ON ATR70(?) WAS APPROX 4 1/2 MI BUT DECREASED TO APPROX 3 1/2 MI ON FINAL. HAD BEEN TOLD TO CONTACT ATL TWR ON 119.1 OVER DEPOT WHEN WE WERE CLRED FOR A VISUAL APCH APPROX 3 MI OUTSIDE THE MARKER. BECAME CONCERNED FOR SPACING ON ATR. HAD NOT SELECTED N COMPLEX ADF FOR DISPLAY ON MY HSI. DID NOT TURN ON/UP THE AURAL INDICATOR FOR THE OM (DEPOT). DID NOT OBSERVE OM LIGHT INDICATION. NO MENTION OF MARKER BY OTHER CREW MEMBERS. OBSERVED ATR SIDESTEP FOR LNDG ON INBOARD RWY (27R). SEARCHED RWY 27L FOR POSSIBLE CONFLICT TO OUR ACFT. LOWERED LNDG GEAR AT APPROX 1300 FT AGL (SOMEWHAT LOWER THAN NORMAL). WE WERE COMPLETING THE BEFORE LNDG CHKLIST AS WE DSNDED THROUGH 1000 FT AGL, A POINT WHERE WE NORMALLY CONFIRM LNDG CLRNC. AT APPROX 700 FT AGL CAPT ASKED IF WE HAD RECEIVED LNDG CLRNC. I REPLIED THAT WE HAD NOT. DUE TO OTHER XMISSIONS (BY OTHER ACFT AND THE CTLR) THERE WAS A DELAY BEFORE I COULD REQUEST LNDG CLRNC. AFTER I REQUESTED CLRNC TO LAND, APCH CTL ADVISED US TO CONTACT TWR ON 119.1. BY THIS TIME WE WERE APPROX 300 FT ABOVE TOUCHDOWN AND WERE UNABLE TO CONTACT TWR IN TIME TO RECEIVE LNDG CLRNC IN TIME TO LAND. THE CAPT EXECUTED A NORMAL MISSED APCH/GAR AS I WAS CONTACTING THE TWR. I INFORMED TWR THAT WE WERE 'ON THE GO' AND WERE SUBSEQUENTLY VECTORED FOR AN UNEVENTFUL APCH AND LNDG. FACTORS WHICH MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED: LAST LEG OF 2 DAY TRIP, CHANGE TO DIFFERENT APCH CLOSE IN, CONCERN FOR SEPARATION ON ATR, NO POSITIVE (IMMEDIATE) HAND OFF BY APCH TO TWR, NO DESIGNATED COMMUTER RWY AT ATL, AND THE TURBOPROPS CONSIDERABLY SLOWER SPD ON FINAL APCH.

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.