B727-200 CREW WAS GIVEN PWRBACK CLRNC WITH THE NOSEWHEEL STEERING BYPASS PIN STILL INSTALLED.

Date: 2001-09 · Aircraft: B727-200 · Phase: taxi

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|other-nose-wheel-steering-bypassed-during-power-back

Synopsis

B727-200 CREW WAS GIVEN PWRBACK CLRNC WITH THE NOSEWHEEL STEERING BYPASS PIN STILL INSTALLED.

Narrative

STEERING BYPASS PIN LEFT IN FOR PWRBACK. WHEN DIRECTED TO MAKE A TURN DURING PWRBACK FROM GATE XX; THE NOSEWHEEL STEERING WOULD NOT TURN. I STOPPED THE ACFT AND PULLED SLIGHTLY FORWARD. THE NOSE OF THE ACFT WAS APPROX 30 FT FROM THE GUIDEMAN. BEFORE I COULD FLASH THE NOSE TAXI LIGHT; THE GUIDEMAN RAN TO THE NOSE OF THE ACFT; REMOVED THE NULLING PIN FROM THE STEERING BYPASS VALVE AND SHOWED IT TO ME. I THEN SPOKE TO HIM BY INTERPHONE TO VERBALLY CONFIRM WHAT HAPPENED. HE SAID SOMEONE MUST HAVE THOUGHT WE WERE TO BE PUSHED BACK AND INSTALLED THE PIN. ATL DOES A MIXTURE OF PUSHBACKS AND PWRBACKS FOR THE B727. I HAVE BEEN TOLD BY A RAMP SUPVR THAT THE TYPE OF DEP DEPENDS UPON EQUIP AND MANPOWER AVAILABILITY; BUT THAT THEY WOULD TRY TO DO A PUSHBACK WHEN ABLE. A TUG AND A B727 TOW BAR WERE BOTH POSITIONED IN THEIR PAINTED PARKING POS AT GATE XX FOR THIS DEP. MANPOWER TO CONNECT THE TOW BAR WAS CERTAINLY AVAILABLE AS 2 FLEET SVC PERSONNEL REMAINED IN THE ACFT TALKING TO A FLT ATTENDANT UNTIL BOARDING BEGAN. ALSO; THE FLAG ON THE PIN REMOVED BY THE GUIDEMAN APPEARED TO HAVE MOST OF THE ORANGE/RED COLOR MISSING. PERHAPS A BRIGHT ORANGE FLAG WOULD HAVE BEEN NOTICED BY THE GUIDEMAN BEFORE THE PWRBACK BEGAN. I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT ATL BEGIN EXCLUSIVELY PUSHING BACK ACFT. NOT ONLY WOULD THAT PREVENT INCIDENTS SUCH AS THIS; BUT IT WOULD ALSO ENHANCE THE SAFETY OF THE ATL DEP. AT ATL; WE PWR BACK ONTO E SIDE OF THE RAMP. IN FACT; THE PWRBACK CLRNC FOR THIS DEP INCLUDED INSTRUCTIONS TO KEEP THE TURN TIGHT DUE TO TFC ON THE PARALLEL. THIS IS LESS THAN IDEAL FOR A PWRBACK AND IT IS PROBABLY ONLY A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE A MORE SERIOUS INCIDENT OCCURS. WE HAVE A PROHIBITION AGAINST PWRBACK WHEN THERE IS MOVEMENT ON AN ADJACENT GATE. SHOULDN'T WE BE JUST AS CONCERNED ABOUT A PWRBACK IN CLOSE PROX TO ANOTHER ACFT AWAY FROM THE GATE.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.