Narrative:

While flying air carrier flight pit-den, we landed on runway 8L without tower contact. Approach control set us up on a left downwind north of the airport for runway 8L. We had the airport in sight. Approach asked us if we had the runway in sight. We replied that we did. They cleared us for a visual approach to runway 8L and reported traffic, an air carrier large transport, at 12 O'clock and 5 mi that would be landing on runway 8R. At this point, we made visual contact with the large transport and I started my turn to final. The large transport did the same. This placed us wingtip to wingtip all the way down final approach to land. Our TCASII was giving us TA's and RA's because of the close proximity of the large transport. Approach control was very busy and failed to give us a frequency change to tower. With all the distrs from the TCASII, running of the checklist, radio chatter, and trying to maintain runway alignment and separation on the large transport, we failed to realize that we had not contacted tower for clearance to land. After landing, we asked if we should contact ground and were told to contact tower! It then hit us that we had not talked to tower for clearance to land. We changed to ground control and were given clearance to the gate. When we arrived at the gate, we contacted tower on the landline to discuss the situation with them. Tower said they did not have a problem with this situation and not to worry about it. In my opinion there were 2 contributing factors to this situation: 1) approach control north and approach control south vectoring aircraft to turn final, wingtip to wingtip, on 2 runways that have only 900 ft centerline separation. We should have been staggered so as not to be placed in such close proximity and put in this situation. 2) no frequency change to tower and the distraction in and out of the cockpit. Nevertheless, this does not relieve us, the flight crew, of our responsibility to receive a proper clearance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 2 ACR LGTS LANDED SIDE BY SIDE AT DEN. IN THE CONFUSION, THE RPTING ACFT LANDED WITHOUT CLRNC.

Narrative: WHILE FLYING ACR FLT PIT-DEN, WE LANDED ON RWY 8L WITHOUT TWR CONTACT. APCH CTL SET US UP ON A L DOWNWIND N OF THE ARPT FOR RWY 8L. WE HAD THE ARPT IN SIGHT. APCH ASKED US IF WE HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT. WE REPLIED THAT WE DID. THEY CLRED US FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 8L AND RPTED TFC, AN ACR LGT, AT 12 O'CLOCK AND 5 MI THAT WOULD BE LNDG ON RWY 8R. AT THIS POINT, WE MADE VISUAL CONTACT WITH THE LGT AND I STARTED MY TURN TO FINAL. THE LGT DID THE SAME. THIS PLACED US WINGTIP TO WINGTIP ALL THE WAY DOWN FINAL APCH TO LAND. OUR TCASII WAS GIVING US TA'S AND RA'S BECAUSE OF THE CLOSE PROX OF THE LGT. APCH CTL WAS VERY BUSY AND FAILED TO GIVE US A FREQ CHANGE TO TWR. WITH ALL THE DISTRS FROM THE TCASII, RUNNING OF THE CHKLIST, RADIO CHATTER, AND TRYING TO MAINTAIN RWY ALIGNMENT AND SEPARATION ON THE LGT, WE FAILED TO REALIZE THAT WE HAD NOT CONTACTED TWR FOR CLRNC TO LAND. AFTER LNDG, WE ASKED IF WE SHOULD CONTACT GND AND WERE TOLD TO CONTACT TWR! IT THEN HIT US THAT WE HAD NOT TALKED TO TWR FOR CLRNC TO LAND. WE CHANGED TO GND CTL AND WERE GIVEN CLRNC TO THE GATE. WHEN WE ARRIVED AT THE GATE, WE CONTACTED TWR ON THE LANDLINE TO DISCUSS THE SIT WITH THEM. TWR SAID THEY DID NOT HAVE A PROB WITH THIS SIT AND NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT. IN MY OPINION THERE WERE 2 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS SIT: 1) APCH CTL N AND APCH CTL S VECTORING ACFT TO TURN FINAL, WINGTIP TO WINGTIP, ON 2 RWYS THAT HAVE ONLY 900 FT CTRLINE SEPARATION. WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN STAGGERED SO AS NOT TO BE PLACED IN SUCH CLOSE PROX AND PUT IN THIS SIT. 2) NO FREQ CHANGE TO TWR AND THE DISTR IN AND OUT OF THE COCKPIT. NEVERTHELESS, THIS DOES NOT RELIEVE US, THE FLC, OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO RECEIVE A PROPER CLRNC.

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.