Narrative:

After being vectored to the final approach to runway 10 at ilg, we were cleared by the local controller for the ILS runway 10 and told to report crossing the outer marker. PNF acknowledged and continued to perform the before landing checklist. Upon crossing the outer marker, both pilots were concentrating on altitude callouts as per company memo. Both pilots noted localizer, and GS were centered and agreed with crossing altitude of the approach. Soon after crossing the outer marker, both pilots became distraction when the coupled autoplt made a 5-10 degree left turn. The PF disconnected the autoplt and continued the approach. After breaking out of IMC at approximately 1000 ft AGL with good visibility to the runway, PF asked PNF if we were cleared to land, and the reply was -- cleared for approach and landing. After touchdown and turn off on taxiway, ground control informed us the tower did not give us landing clearance, and asked us to call the tower. I called the tower and talked to the manager on duty, and told him we understood the clearance was for approach and landing. He said we were cleared for the approach, and to call passing the outer marker for landing, (which we did not do). He said that both sides had learned a lesson, and since we had not come close to any other aircraft or ground vehicles, that there was no harm and no foul, and that the phone call would be the end of the matter on his part. Myself and my first officer have filed written reports to our company.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: H25B FLT CREW ARE ADVISED BY ILG GND CTLR THAT THEY FAILED TO RPT OPS MANUAL AND OBTAIN LNDG CLRNC.

Narrative: AFTER BEING VECTORED TO THE FINAL APCH TO RWY 10 AT ILG, WE WERE CLRED BY THE LCL CTLR FOR THE ILS RWY 10 AND TOLD TO RPT XING THE OUTER MARKER. PNF ACKNOWLEDGED AND CONTINUED TO PERFORM THE BEFORE LNDG CHKLIST. UPON XING THE OUTER MARKER, BOTH PLTS WERE CONCENTRATING ON ALT CALLOUTS AS PER COMPANY MEMO. BOTH PLTS NOTED LOC, AND GS WERE CTRED AND AGREED WITH XING ALT OF THE APCH. SOON AFTER XING THE OUTER MARKER, BOTH PLTS BECAME DISTR WHEN THE COUPLED AUTOPLT MADE A 5-10 DEG L TURN. THE PF DISCONNECTED THE AUTOPLT AND CONTINUED THE APCH. AFTER BREAKING OUT OF IMC AT APPROX 1000 FT AGL WITH GOOD VISIBILITY TO THE RWY, PF ASKED PNF IF WE WERE CLRED TO LAND, AND THE REPLY WAS -- CLRED FOR APCH AND LNDG. AFTER TOUCHDOWN AND TURN OFF ON TXWY, GND CTL INFORMED US THE TWR DID NOT GIVE US LNDG CLRNC, AND ASKED US TO CALL THE TWR. I CALLED THE TWR AND TALKED TO THE MGR ON DUTY, AND TOLD HIM WE UNDERSTOOD THE CLRNC WAS FOR APCH AND LNDG. HE SAID WE WERE CLRED FOR THE APCH, AND TO CALL PASSING THE OUTER MARKER FOR LNDG, (WHICH WE DID NOT DO). HE SAID THAT BOTH SIDES HAD LEARNED A LESSON, AND SINCE WE HAD NOT COME CLOSE TO ANY OTHER ACFT OR GND VEHICLES, THAT THERE WAS NO HARM AND NO FOUL, AND THAT THE PHONE CALL WOULD BE THE END OF THE MATTER ON HIS PART. MYSELF AND MY FO HAVE FILED WRITTEN RPTS TO OUR COMPANY.

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.