PWR BACK FROM GATE PROC RESULTS IN AN AFTER THE FACT RPT THAT THE ACFT LEFT THE PAVED SURFACE.

Narrative

ON PWR BACK IN STL I WAS MOMENTARILY DISTRACTED WITH SETTING PWR CAUSING US TO GO BACK FARTHER THAN NORMAL. THE FO AND MYSELF WERE CONFIDENT WE REMAINED ON PAVEMENT AND OUT OF TAXI LIGHTS. ON PWR BACK THE GUIDEMAN HAD HIS ARMS TO HIS SIDE TWIRLING WITH WRIST ACTION ONLY AT MID CHEST LEVEL. ON THE COME FORWARD SIGNAL HE HAD HIS ARMS TO HIS SIDE WAVING WITH WRIST ACTION ONLY AT MID CHEST LEVEL. IF HE WOULD HAVE USED MORE OF A FULL ARM MOTION ON THE COME FORWARD SIGNAL IT MAY HAVE HELPED ME REALIZE A LITTLE SOONER THAT I MISSED HIS TRANSITION FROM PWR BACK TO COME FORWARD. FROM NOW ON I WILL MAKE SURE I MONITOR THE GUIDEMAN CONTINUOUSLY NEVER LOOKING AWAY PER PROC. I WILL MAKE SURE I SET PWR BY SOUND; FEEL; AND OUTSIDE MOTION AND NOT BY LOOKING INSIDE AT EPR GAUGES. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 490312: I WAS NOTIFIED BY THE CTR MGR OF A POSSIBLE TXWY EXCURSION IN STL. APPARENTLY IN THE VIEW OF PUSH CREW IN STL THIS ACFT LEFT THE PAVED SURFACE ON POWERBACK. THE ISSUE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE LACK OF TIMELY INFO TO THE DISPATCHER AND THE DIRECTION OF INFO FLOW AS IT BECAME AVAILABLE. STL STATION PERSONNEL ADVISED THE CTR MGR OF THIS POSSIBLE SIT. STL STATION NEVER ADVISED DISPATCH OF THIS; ONLY SOC. THE SOC MGR ADVISED DISPATCH APPROX 10-15 MINS PRIOR TO SCHEDULED ARR. SAFETY MAY HAVE BEEN COMPROMISED WITH THIS FLT IF THE INVESTIGATION REVEALS THAT HIS ACFT DID INDEED LEAVE THE PAVED SURFACE. WITHOUT THIS INFO UNTIL LATE IN THE FLT LEFT THE DISPATCHER WITH INADEQUATE INFO IF FOR INSTANCE THE CAPT HAD CALLED BACK WITH AN ENG INDICATION PROB. THIS WOULD HAVE INDICATED TO THE DISPATCHER IF HE HAD THE FULL PICTURE THAT THERE VERY WELL COULD BE A PROB AND SPECIAL ATTN TO AN IMMEDIATE LNDG WOULD LIKELY HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. AS OF THIS RPT TIME THIS ACFT HAS BEEN CALLED OTS FOR AN INSPECTION OF THE ACFT.