Narrative:

Our aircraft pushed back from gate Y in ord. Aircraft was improperly positioned by tug operated by pushback crew resulting in tail of aircraft not pointed towards blast fence to the rear of the aircraft. In addition, a baggage cart was left unattended between gate X and our gate Y. Because of improper positioning of our aircraft, when taxi thrust was applied, the baggage cart was blown into and damaged aircraft which was parked at X. Possible solutions: 1) gate is a tight fit for aircraft taxiing into and out of. Gate area should be eliminated. Far too many incidents of this type occur at this gate. 2) flight crew has no idea -- no markings, etc -- of whether they have been properly positioned or not. This particular gate, I am told, is a 4-STEP pushback procedure. The 4TH step is where the nose gear is supposed to be positioned prior to taxi. In this situation, a formal investigation revealed it had not been positioned on this spot resulting in the aircraft not being pointed in the required position, ie, heading. Flight crew should have some sort of way of determining from the cockpit whether they are in the proper spot or not. It is a gate where pushback has to be done perfectly or incidents of this type will continue beyond acceptable levels.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-300 FLC CAUSED A BAGGAGE CART TO STRIKE ANOTHER ACFT DEPARTING THE GATE AT ORD.

Narrative: OUR ACFT PUSHED BACK FROM GATE Y IN ORD. ACFT WAS IMPROPERLY POSITIONED BY TUG OPERATED BY PUSHBACK CREW RESULTING IN TAIL OF ACFT NOT POINTED TOWARDS BLAST FENCE TO THE REAR OF THE ACFT. IN ADDITION, A BAGGAGE CART WAS LEFT UNATTENDED BTWN GATE X AND OUR GATE Y. BECAUSE OF IMPROPER POSITIONING OF OUR ACFT, WHEN TAXI THRUST WAS APPLIED, THE BAGGAGE CART WAS BLOWN INTO AND DAMAGED ACFT WHICH WAS PARKED AT X. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: 1) GATE IS A TIGHT FIT FOR ACFT TAXIING INTO AND OUT OF. GATE AREA SHOULD BE ELIMINATED. FAR TOO MANY INCIDENTS OF THIS TYPE OCCUR AT THIS GATE. 2) FLC HAS NO IDEA -- NO MARKINGS, ETC -- OF WHETHER THEY HAVE BEEN PROPERLY POSITIONED OR NOT. THIS PARTICULAR GATE, I AM TOLD, IS A 4-STEP PUSHBACK PROC. THE 4TH STEP IS WHERE THE NOSE GEAR IS SUPPOSED TO BE POSITIONED PRIOR TO TAXI. IN THIS SIT, A FORMAL INVESTIGATION REVEALED IT HAD NOT BEEN POSITIONED ON THIS SPOT RESULTING IN THE ACFT NOT BEING POINTED IN THE REQUIRED POS, IE, HDG. FLC SHOULD HAVE SOME SORT OF WAY OF DETERMINING FROM THE COCKPIT WHETHER THEY ARE IN THE PROPER SPOT OR NOT. IT IS A GATE WHERE PUSHBACK HAS TO BE DONE PERFECTLY OR INCIDENTS OF THIS TYPE WILL CONTINUE BEYOND ACCEPTABLE LEVELS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.