Narrative:

We were cleared for the visual approach to runway 12R at stl. We contacted the tower and were cleared to land as #3 when we were approximately 15 NM from the runway, on the extended centerline. We had visual contact with traffic ahead as it landed and cleared the runway when we were about 3 mi out. Just after that, we noted an aircraft rolling for takeoff in front of us. We judged that our arrival after the departing aircraft would be tight, but workable, based on our apparent relative speeds and distance. We landed after the other aircraft became airborne and quickly cleared the runway. Not hearing the tower switch us to ground control, we switched on our own and were issued taxi instructions to our parking ramp. We were then told to please give the control tower a call on the phone. When I (the captain) spoke to the person at the number given, it came to light that the tower issued at least 1 go around clearance to us. We never heard such xmissions and I relayed this to the tower man. We speculated it may have been equipment related, but came up with no logical conclusions. I was asked that in the future, faced with a similar situation, that I verify landing clearance and maybe go around at our own discretion when no reply is heard or received. End conversation. At no time did we receive said xmissions and radio traffic seemed normal, busy. This kind of spacing and sequencing is not unusual in our experience at stl, so we did not overly question the tight situation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CL65RJ PIC'S RPT ON A POSSIBLE LOSS OF COM FREQ AND TFC SPACING WHILE LNDG AT STL.

Narrative: WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 12R AT STL. WE CONTACTED THE TWR AND WERE CLRED TO LAND AS #3 WHEN WE WERE APPROX 15 NM FROM THE RWY, ON THE EXTENDED CTRLINE. WE HAD VISUAL CONTACT WITH TFC AHEAD AS IT LANDED AND CLRED THE RWY WHEN WE WERE ABOUT 3 MI OUT. JUST AFTER THAT, WE NOTED AN ACFT ROLLING FOR TKOF IN FRONT OF US. WE JUDGED THAT OUR ARR AFTER THE DEPARTING ACFT WOULD BE TIGHT, BUT WORKABLE, BASED ON OUR APPARENT RELATIVE SPDS AND DISTANCE. WE LANDED AFTER THE OTHER ACFT BECAME AIRBORNE AND QUICKLY CLRED THE RWY. NOT HEARING THE TWR SWITCH US TO GND CTL, WE SWITCHED ON OUR OWN AND WERE ISSUED TAXI INSTRUCTIONS TO OUR PARKING RAMP. WE WERE THEN TOLD TO PLEASE GIVE THE CTL TWR A CALL ON THE PHONE. WHEN I (THE CAPT) SPOKE TO THE PERSON AT THE NUMBER GIVEN, IT CAME TO LIGHT THAT THE TWR ISSUED AT LEAST 1 GAR CLRNC TO US. WE NEVER HEARD SUCH XMISSIONS AND I RELAYED THIS TO THE TWR MAN. WE SPECULATED IT MAY HAVE BEEN EQUIP RELATED, BUT CAME UP WITH NO LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS. I WAS ASKED THAT IN THE FUTURE, FACED WITH A SIMILAR SIT, THAT I VERIFY LNDG CLRNC AND MAYBE GO AROUND AT OUR OWN DISCRETION WHEN NO REPLY IS HEARD OR RECEIVED. END CONVERSATION. AT NO TIME DID WE RECEIVE SAID XMISSIONS AND RADIO TFC SEEMED NORMAL, BUSY. THIS KIND OF SPACING AND SEQUENCING IS NOT UNUSUAL IN OUR EXPERIENCE AT STL, SO WE DID NOT OVERLY QUESTION THE TIGHT SIT.

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.