FO REPORTS NEAR GAR CAUSED BY ATC FILLING ARRIVAL GAPS WITH ACFT ON OPPOSITE DOWNWIND AND LEAVING INSUFFICIENT SPACING.

Narrative

WE WERE ON A DOWNWIND FOR RWY 36L. WE WERE GIVEN A HDG AND ADVISED THAT OUR NEW RWY WOULD BE RWY 36R. WE WERE CLRED TO MAINTAIN 4000 FT AND TO INTERCEPT THE LOC FOR RWY 36R. WE FLEW THROUGH THE GS; AND IT PEGGED ON THE BOTTOM OF SCREEN. WE ASKED FOR LOWER AND WERE GIVEN 3000 FT. WE WERE THEN CLRED FOR THE APCH; ASKED TO SLOW TO 150 KTS OR SLOWER; AND TO CONTACT TWR. BEFORE WE SWITCHED OVER TO TWR; APCH TOLD US THEY NEEDED US TO SLOW AS RAPIDLY AS POSSIBLE. I SAID WE WERE TRYING; BUT THAT WE HAD BEEN KEPT HIGH AND FAST UNTIL PRETTY CLOSE IN. APCH OFFERED TO SIDESTEP US TO THE L SIDE; BUT THE CAPT DECLINED. I TOLD TWR WE COULD MAKE IT AND WE WERE TOLD TO CONTACT TWR. WE WERE NOW HIGH; FAST; AND ON SHORT FINAL. WE BEGAN CONFIGURING AND TRYING TO SLOW DOWN. SOMEWHERE IN ALL THE CONFUSION; I HEARD TWR ASK A COMPANY Y FLT IF HE COULD MAKE A SHORT APCH AND HE SAID YES; BUT I WAS TOO BUSY CONFIGURING; RUNNING CHKLISTS; AND TALKING TO TWR TO NOTICE WHAT WAS DEVELOPING. TWR THEN TOLD US TO BEGIN S-TURNING BECAUSE THERE WAS A DASH-8 ON A 1 MI FINAL AHEAD OF US. TWR ADVISED THAT AFTER 1 S-TURN; WE WERE CLRED TO LAND. THE DASH CLRED JUST AS OUR RADIO ALTIMETER SAID '100.' WE WERE STABILIZED BY 500 FT AFL AND MADE AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG. HOWEVER; I WAS CONFIGURING; RUNNING CHKLISTS; AND ASKING THE CAPT TO 'VERIFY' 2 ITEMS AT A PERIOD OF TIME WHEN HIS EYES NEEDED TO BE OUTSIDE. WE PULLED IT OFF; BUT I FEEL THE MARGIN OF SAFETY WAS SEVERELY COMPROMISED. CLT WAS TRYING TO SQUEEZE TOO MANY ACFT INTO TOO LITTLE AIRSPACE AT THE SAME TIME. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE WERE TOLD TO PLAN FOR RWY 36L; SWITCHED TO RWY 36R; AND THEN OFFERED A LAST-MIN SIDESTEP BACK OVER TO RWY 36L. IF RWY 36L WAS AVAILABLE FOR A LAST-MIN SIDESTEP; WHY DIDN'T WE JUST LAND THERE? ESPECIALLY SINCE LNDG ON RWY 36R APPARENTLY CAUSED TOO MUCH TFC IN TOO SHORT A TIMEFRAME. CLT ATC SEEMS TO HAVE A PARTICULAR PROB WITH THIS. IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THE CTLRS ARE TRYING TO CRAM AS MUCH TFC AS POSSIBLE INTO THE AIRSPACE QUICKLY; BUT WITHOUT HAVING THE EXPERIENCE TO DO SO. I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT TO 'PUSH TIN;' BUT THERE'S A FINE LINE BTWN PUSHING TIN AND BENDING IT. I WOULD RATHER ACCEPT MORE DELAYS THAN COMPROMISE ACFT SEPARATION. I CAN'T PUT MY FINGER ON THE EXACT ISSUE. SOME OF THE MORE UNIQUE TFC MGMNT SCHEMES THAT I SEE IN LGA; PHL; OR DCA WORK OUT WELL. BUT IN CLT; IT SEEMS THAT THESE 'UNIQUE' EFFORTS USUALLY END UP WITH A NEAR DISASTER. IS IT A CTLR EXPERIENCE ISSUE? I DON'T KNOW; BUT CLT SEEMS TO ME LIKE AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN.