MDT ON APCH BEGINS MISSED APCH WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS THERE WILL BE A CONFLICT WITH BE02 ON INTERSECTING RWY. TWR CALLS GAR FOR OTHER ACFT.

Narrative

WE WERE ON A NORMAL PAX FLT FROM ISP; NY; TO PHL; PA. FOR APCH WE WERE CLRED FOR THE ILS RWY 27R. WHEN CLRED; WE CONTACTED THE TWR. PHL TWR ADVISED US THAT THERE WAS TFC TO LAND BEHIND US ON RWY 35 AND CLRED US TO LAND. AT APPROX 2 MI FROM LNDG WE SPOTTED THE BE02 ON FINAL APCH TO RWY 35. SEVERAL SECONDS LATER; WE HEARD THE TWR ADVISE THE DEPARTING TFC ON RWY 27L TO CANCEL TKOF CLRNC. THIS BROUGHT A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY; FEELING THE TWR WAS AWARE OF THE DEVELOPING SIT. WE CONTINUED TO MONITOR SEPARATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD BE MAINTAINED. AT APPROX 1/2 MI FINAL; AND NO INDICATION THAT PHL TWR OR THE BE02 WAS AWARE OF THE DEVELOPING CONFLICT; WE DETERMINED THE SEPARATION WOULD BE LOST AT THE INTXN OF RWY 27R AND RWY 35. I INITIATED A GAR AT THE RWY THRESHOLD FEELING THIS WAS THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE. APPROX 1 SECOND AFTER ADDING PWR; PHL TWR THEN INSTRUCTED THE BE02 TO EXECUTE A GAR. I IMMEDIATELY DISCONTINUED OUR GAR TO PASS BENEATH THE OTHER ACFT. THAT ACFT PASSED APPROX 100 FT OVERHEAD AT THE INTXN OF RWY 27R AND RWY 35 AT PHL. I CONTACTED THE PHL TWR BY TELEPHONE AND WAS ADVISED THE LCL CTLR'S ATTN WAS SPLIT BTWN THE ARRS ON RWY 27R AND RWY 35 AND THE DEPARTING TFC ON RWY 27L. AT NO TIME DURING THE APCH SEQUENCE DID I HEAR PHL TWR ADVISE THE BE02 OF THE SIT; IE; THE ADJUST SPD OR FLT PATH. I ALSO DIDN'T HEAR THE BE02 INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD OUR ACFT VISUALLY. I FEEL THE SIT WAS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO THE POINT OF BECOMING EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. THE FO AND I DISCUSSED THE EVENT AND DETERMINED THAT WE SHOULD HAVE QUERIED THE CTLR AS SOON AS WE BEGAN TO HAVE DOUBTS OF ITS OUTCOME AND WILL DO SO IN THE FUTURE.