Narrative:

Ramp operations involving certain gates at ord are a safety concern for aircraft, ramp personnel and equipment. Because of the gates proximity to taxiway H, aircraft are pushed back from the gate only far enough to prevent the tail from blocking the taxiway. Aircraft pushed back from these gates are having their tails turned 45 degrees left or right of the gate lead-in line with the aircraft's nose pointed towards the wingtip of the aircraft parked next to them. In the pushed back position, the nose of the aircraft pushed back is only 30-40 ft approximately from the wingtip of the aircraft parked at the adjacent gate. The ramp surface also slopes down towards the gates. In order to begin a taxi away from these gates, the captain is forced to make a hard immediate, maximum effort turn in order to clear the wing and tail of both aircraft, requiring a turn sometimes well in excess of 90 degrees. In my opinion, requiring a maximum effort turn in an extremely confined space and on an uphill ramp surface, exposes our operation to a potential accident involving damage to aircraft and equipment, and injury to ramp personnel due to the hazards of jet blast. The company has already defined these gates as 'jet blast hazard' gate and restricts the use of thrust as well as turns away from the gate. The old ramp pushback procedures involved calling ord ground control and getting a clearance to pushback onto taxiway H. Are we sacrificing safety here in order to accommodate increased airport capacity at ord?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF A320 ADVISES PUSHBACK AND TAXI PROCS FOR CERTAIN GATES AT ORD RESULTS IN JET BLAST HAZARDS AND POTENTIAL FOR WING STRIKE TO PARKED ACFT.

Narrative: RAMP OPS INVOLVING CERTAIN GATES AT ORD ARE A SAFETY CONCERN FOR ACFT, RAMP PERSONNEL AND EQUIP. BECAUSE OF THE GATES PROX TO TXWY H, ACFT ARE PUSHED BACK FROM THE GATE ONLY FAR ENOUGH TO PREVENT THE TAIL FROM BLOCKING THE TXWY. ACFT PUSHED BACK FROM THESE GATES ARE HAVING THEIR TAILS TURNED 45 DEGS L OR R OF THE GATE LEAD-IN LINE WITH THE ACFT'S NOSE POINTED TOWARDS THE WINGTIP OF THE ACFT PARKED NEXT TO THEM. IN THE PUSHED BACK POS, THE NOSE OF THE ACFT PUSHED BACK IS ONLY 30-40 FT APPROX FROM THE WINGTIP OF THE ACFT PARKED AT THE ADJACENT GATE. THE RAMP SURFACE ALSO SLOPES DOWN TOWARDS THE GATES. IN ORDER TO BEGIN A TAXI AWAY FROM THESE GATES, THE CAPT IS FORCED TO MAKE A HARD IMMEDIATE, MAX EFFORT TURN IN ORDER TO CLR THE WING AND TAIL OF BOTH ACFT, REQUIRING A TURN SOMETIMES WELL IN EXCESS OF 90 DEGS. IN MY OPINION, REQUIRING A MAX EFFORT TURN IN AN EXTREMELY CONFINED SPACE AND ON AN UPHILL RAMP SURFACE, EXPOSES OUR OP TO A POTENTIAL ACCIDENT INVOLVING DAMAGE TO ACFT AND EQUIP, AND INJURY TO RAMP PERSONNEL DUE TO THE HAZARDS OF JET BLAST. THE COMPANY HAS ALREADY DEFINED THESE GATES AS 'JET BLAST HAZARD' GATE AND RESTRICTS THE USE OF THRUST AS WELL AS TURNS AWAY FROM THE GATE. THE OLD RAMP PUSHBACK PROCS INVOLVED CALLING ORD GND CTL AND GETTING A CLRNC TO PUSHBACK ONTO TXWY H. ARE WE SACRIFICING SAFETY HERE IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASED ARPT CAPACITY AT ORD?

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.