FLC OF A DC8-63 FAILED TO CONTACT THE TWR AND RECEIVE LNDG CLRNC AFTER BEING CLRED FOR THE APCH BY APCH CTL.

Narrative

AS THE FLT RECEIVED FINAL VECTORS FROM PHILADELPHIA APCH FOR ILS RWY 9R THE CREW WAS PREOCCUPIED WITH THE THOUGHT OF THE POTENTIAL ANTI-SKID PROB; AS WELL AS ALL THE NORMAL PROCS AND CALLOUTS OF A PRACTICED ILS APCH (IN VMC CONDITIONS). THE LAST COM RECALLED WAS: 'TURN L HDG 120 DEGS MAINTAIN 2000 FT UNTIL ESTABLISHED CLRED FOR ILS RWY 9R APCH.' THE FLT PROCEEDED AS INSTRUCTED. THE ILS WAS FLOWN TO A FULL LNDG ON RWY 9R WITHOUT ANY FURTHER COM WITH ATC. WHETHER THE CREW DID NOT HEAR A FREQ CHANGE INSTRUCTION ISSUED FROM PHILADELPHIA APCH TO PHILADELPHIA TWR OR IF THERE WAS NO FREQ CHANGE GIVEN IS UNCERTAIN. HOWEVER; THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF FATIGUE (I HAD JUST FLOWN INTO ILN FROM BFI AND OUR UNUSUAL ANTI-SKID SIT CAUSED A FIXATION ON THE APCH AT HAND AND THE CREW FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT A LNDG CLRNC HAD BEEN RECEIVED. UPON LNDG AND WITH SUBSEQUENT CONVERSATION WITH PHILADELPHIA GND CTL WE WERE ADVISED THAT THERE 'WAS NO PROB' AND THAT THEY THOUGHT THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A RADIO PROB THAT PRECLUDED US FROM CONTACTING TWR PRIOR TO OUR LNDG. ALSO; THERE WERE FEW IF ANY OTHER ACFT WITHIN THE ARPT VICINITY. HAD THERE BEEN VISUAL TFC (DEPARTING; LNDG; TAXIING; ETC) WE MAY HAVE BEEN MORE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAD NOT XMITTED TO PHL TWR.