Flight crew had some doubts as to whether landing was made with proper clearance.

Attributes
ACN	490319
Time
Date	200010
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mco.airport
State Reference	FL
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Dusk
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mco.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	DC-10 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	other
Flight Phase	descent : vacating altitude
Route In Use	approach : visual arrival : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : second officer
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 6500 flight time type : 600
ASRS Report	490312
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 1200
ASRS Report	490510
Events
Anomaly	incursion : landing without clearance non adherence : far non adherence : company policies non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

During the arrival to mco we were vectored for the ILS runway 18R. Prior to the final intercept of the localizer, we were asked if we had runway 18L in sight, if we did we could have a visual approach to that runway. After seeing the airport, we told approach that we did have runway 18L in sight. We were cleared for the visual approach to runway 18L with a restr to cross orl VOR at or above 2500 ft. The restr was not a problem as approach left us high throughout the arrival. We switched to tower and landed without incident. When leaving the aircraft at the gate, we discussed whether or not we had clearance to land. All 3 of the crew believes we did, and ground control never said anything. However, none of us can verify we did. Because of the last min runway change and being high on approach, the workload was high.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC HAD SOME DOUBTS AS TO WHETHER LNDG WAS MADE WITH PROPER CLRNC.

Narrative: DURING THE ARR TO MCO WE WERE VECTORED FOR THE ILS RWY 18R. PRIOR TO THE FINAL INTERCEPT OF THE LOC, WE WERE ASKED IF WE HAD RWY 18L IN SIGHT, IF WE DID WE COULD HAVE A VISUAL APCH TO THAT RWY. AFTER SEEING THE ARPT, WE TOLD APCH THAT WE DID HAVE RWY 18L IN SIGHT. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH TO RWY 18L WITH A RESTR TO CROSS ORL VOR AT OR ABOVE 2500 FT. THE RESTR WAS NOT A PROB AS APCH LEFT US HIGH THROUGHOUT THE ARR. WE SWITCHED TO TWR AND LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. WHEN LEAVING THE ACFT AT THE GATE, WE DISCUSSED WHETHER OR NOT WE HAD CLRNC TO LAND. ALL 3 OF THE CREW BELIEVES WE DID, AND GND CTL NEVER SAID ANYTHING. HOWEVER, NONE OF US CAN VERIFY WE DID. BECAUSE OF THE LAST MIN RWY CHANGE AND BEING HIGH ON APCH, THE WORKLOAD WAS HIGH.

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.