EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Workload; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
We were flying the CXR (CHARDON) arrival. ATIS was broadcasting landings on 24L. We briefed and planned an approach to [Runway] 24L. After leaving LEBRN we were vectored for the approach. When we were very close to the airport Approach then cleared us for the approach to 24R.  We were also given the instruction to maintain 3;000 FT until 6.0 DME. I had the First Officer switch the ILS frequency so we could use the glideslope and localizer as a reference for the approach. The 3;000 FT restriction leaves the aircraft above the glide path and prevents the aircraft from capturing the glideslope while on autopilot. Knowing this I elected to select autopilot off and hand fly the aircraft. As we crossed 6 DME at 3;000 FT; I made the call; 'gear down; flaps 22; Landing Checklist.'At about the same time Approach told us to switch to Tower. The First Officer selected gear down; notified the Flight Attendant; and switched the radio to Tower. However the First Officer never selected flaps 22. I started a descent to capture the glideslope from above and had the aircraft stabilized on speed coming down the glideslope. Both the 1;000 FT and 500 FT calls were made. However; in all the activity the Before Landing Checklist was somehow missed. Coming down the glideslope we received a flap warning alert.Realizing the problem the First Officer selected flaps 22. We elected to land the aircraft. We were on speed; on the glideslope; and descending at a normal rate; with the Landing Checklist completed. We touched down with flaps 22 on speed with a normal descent rate and in the touchdown zone. I feared a go-around may cause further complications if flaps 9 were selected while in transition to flap 22 a flap failure may occur further complicating the problem. I thought the safest course of action was to continue the approach and land.Do not give aircraft approach changes and a crossing restriction without much time to prepare for the approach. Also the crossing restriction of 3;000 FT at 6 DME is unnecessary. It leaves the aircraft high for the approach and makes very little difference in noise abatement. We were both task saturated. I called for the items and expected them to be accomplished.
In the future I must complete all checklist task before performing other tasks like ATC comunication.
When Approach changed their approach and landing clearance from 24L to 24R at CLE and to maintain 3;000 until 6 DME the flight crew of an ERJ got task saturated and the First Officer failed to set landing flaps when requested by the Captain/Pilot Flying. The error was noted by the configuration warning and a safe landing with appropriate flap extension was completed.