A B737-400 FLC LANDED WITHOUT A CLRNC AT SFO.

Narrative

WE WERE ON BIG SUR 2 ARR; PLAN TIPP TOE VISUAL RWY 28L APCH. APPROX MENLO INTXN; TFC WAS GIVEN (A340) ON VISUAL RWY 28R. WE ACKNOWLEDGED TFC IN SIGHT. APCH GAVE US VECTOR TO INTERCEPT LOC CALL SAN MATEO BRIDGE OR ARPT IN SIGHT FOR RWY VISUAL RWY 28L. WE STAYED SLIGHTLY L (S) OF LOC SINCE THE A340 CROSSED THE RWY 28R CTRLINE (OR APPEARED TO) AND CAME APPROX 600 FT TO OUR ACFT. WE CALLED ARPT IN SIGHT APPROX 3 NM FINAL AND WERE CLRED FOR VISUAL RWY 28L MAINTAIN VISUAL WITH THE AIRBUS. WE WERE NEVER HANDED OFF TO TWR AND DUE TO OUR VIGILANCE IN WATCHING THE AIRBUS MANEUVER THE LOC; WE FAILED TO CONTACT TWR UNTIL 1 NM FINAL. WE MADE 3 CALL ATTEMPTS WITH NO RESPONSE. THE AIRBUS WAS TOO HIGH ON PROFILE TO MAKE THE ARPT SO THEY WENT AROUND ABOUT THIS SAME TIME. THE TWR WAS MOST LIKELY CONSUMED WITH COORD WITH APCH REGARDING THE AIRBUS THEY WERE UNABLE TO RESPOND. WE LANDED WITHOUT LNDG CLRNC. AFTER CONSIDERING A GAR; WE ELECTED TO LAND FOR SAFETY REASONS: 1) THE VISIBILITY WAS POOR WITH HAZE. WE WERE UNCERTAIN WE COULD KEEP THE AIRBUS IN SIGHT AT ALL TIMES. 2) THE AIRBUS APPEARED TO BE DISORIENTED DURING THE VISUAL APCH. WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT HIS MISSED APCH TRACK MIGHT BE. 3) WITH THE VOLUME OF TFC ON THE FREQ WE FELT APCH CTL AND TWR WOULD PREFER THAT WE WERE ON THE GND.