曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

They instructed the tug driver to pull us
back into the gate [to let an Airline Y B-
747 pass]. We started forward and…our
right winglet was struck by the 747’s left
winglet. Ground Control had told Airline
Y ‘Caution for the aircraft pushed out from
the gate.’ Airline Y [acknowledged] just before
he clipped us. Airline Y continued to
the runway apparently unaware of the contact
until Tower told him.” (#278114)
Setting the Stage
As expected relative to the selection
criteria, 80% of the reports were from
Part 121 primary air carriers, and 87%
of the incidents occurred during passenger-
carrying operations. Nearly all
the reporters were flight crew; only
one report from a ground crew member
was in the study set. Specific environmental
factors were studied to
determine to what extent they influenced
the occurrence of ramp incidents.
The time of day, month of the
year, location (city and state), and
weather conditions referenced in the
study set generally mirrored the distribution
of those factors in the nearly
60,000 full-form records in the ASRS
database. Overall, environmental factors
do not appear to be directly relevant
to the reported ramp incidents.
Where and When
At first glance, one might expect an
even distribution of ramp incidents
during arrivals and departures. However,
in the study set, the aircraft was
making its arrival at the time of the
incident in 58% of the reports and its
departure in 35% of the reports (another
7% encompass miscellaneous
events, such as gate changes, powerouts,
etc.). Different procedures–or
lack of procedures–during arrival and
departure may account for this disparity.
On arrival, the ramp procedures
may be loosely defined. The flight
crew is often no longer in contact
with ATC, or even with company
ramp control, once the aircraft transitions
to the company gate area. Further,
the flight crew communications
with ground crew are likely to be primarily
visual (hand signals or guide
light systems).
Issue Number 8 13
ground crew guidance for clearance
from obstacles and for final taxi instructions.
This guidance is often hand
signals from ground crew personnel in
the form of an all-clear salute, or signals
from parking or guidance light
systems mounted on the terminal
building.
It is interesting to note that there
were more incidents in the gate stop
area during arrival (48%) than during
departure (31%). A possible explanation
is that there are more obstacles to
encounter when entering the more
congested area next to gates and terminal
buildings. It was also noted
that there were fewer incidents on
the ramp fringe areas during arrival
(13%) than during departure (30%).
This may be related to the large
number of pushback, power-out, and
power-turn procedures occurring
during departure operations.
As shown in Figure 1 (above), the
Ramp Entry or Exit Area—the area adjacent
to a taxiway and leading to or
from a company ramp—was the site of
the incident in 18% of the study set.
Aircraft operating in this area are usually
in communication with, and under
the control of, ATC. Another 39%
of the incidents occurred at the Gate
Entry or Exit Area, where taxi lines
converge leading into or out of the
gate area. In this area, an aircraft is
less likely to be in communication
with some controlling agency, and
may now be relying on a company
ramp control procedure or ground
crew input for guidance. The largest
percentage of the incidents, 43%, occurred
within the Gate Stop Area, that
is, within 20 feet of the nosewheel
parking line. At this point, the flight
crew is usually relying entirely on
14 Issue Number 8
Damage Occurrence
Ground equipment, and by association,
ground personnel, appear to be
most vulnerable to damage or injury
in ramp operation incidents. Ground
equipment in general was the clear
“loser” in the reported incidents, as
depicted in Figure 2. Ground equipment
damage occurred most often in
the gate stop area, less so in the gate
entry/exit areas, and rarely on the
ramp fringe areas.
In contrast, aircraft-to-aircraft damage
usually occurred in the ramp and
gate entry/exit areas, where the taxiing
aircraft were sharing the common
maneuvering area and were likely to
be in radio contact with a controlling
agency. Damage to aircraft at the gate
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：ASRS Directline(131)