Lack of coordination between tower ground control and company ramp control leads to traffic conflict...

Attributes
ACN	480081
Time
Date	200007
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : cvg.airport
State Reference	KY
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : taxi
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tower : cvg.tower
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : taxi
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 5500 flight time type : 1800
ASRS Report	480081
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	conflict : ground less severe non adherence : clearance
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company ATC Human Performance Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Company
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation Inter Facility Coordination Failure

Narrative:

At cincinnati, the crews typically land to the south. Ramp control almost always has us enter at spot X or Y. Ground will typically say 'call ramp when clear, good day' or 'enter spot Z, have a good day.' when contacting ramp control, the ramp controller will change the spot to enter. Almost always it isn't a problem. Today it was. Ramp told us to enter at spot Y (after ground said spot X). We went to spot Y. Unfortunately 2 air carrier aircraft were taxiing south on the taxiway. This created a conflict. After personally talking to an irate supervisor on the telephone, I learned that ramp has no authority/authorized to change entry spots given by ATC. Ramp has the usual procedure here of changing entry spots from ATC. That apparently is not correct. In good WX, this is minor. If it were low visibility, the potential for aircraft damage is there. There needs to be better coordination between ATC facilities and local ramp controllers -- maybe designated entry spots that will always be followed. If the flight crew had been a little more aware, we could have also been more emphatic about entering at spot X.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LACK OF COORD BTWN TWR GND CTL AND COMPANY RAMP CTL LEADS TO TFC CONFLICT.

Narrative: AT CINCINNATI, THE CREWS TYPICALLY LAND TO THE S. RAMP CTL ALMOST ALWAYS HAS US ENTER AT SPOT X OR Y. GND WILL TYPICALLY SAY 'CALL RAMP WHEN CLR, GOOD DAY' OR 'ENTER SPOT Z, HAVE A GOOD DAY.' WHEN CONTACTING RAMP CTL, THE RAMP CTLR WILL CHANGE THE SPOT TO ENTER. ALMOST ALWAYS IT ISN'T A PROB. TODAY IT WAS. RAMP TOLD US TO ENTER AT SPOT Y (AFTER GND SAID SPOT X). WE WENT TO SPOT Y. UNFORTUNATELY 2 ACR ACFT WERE TAXIING S ON THE TXWY. THIS CREATED A CONFLICT. AFTER PERSONALLY TALKING TO AN IRATE SUPVR ON THE TELEPHONE, I LEARNED THAT RAMP HAS NO AUTH TO CHANGE ENTRY SPOTS GIVEN BY ATC. RAMP HAS THE USUAL PROC HERE OF CHANGING ENTRY SPOTS FROM ATC. THAT APPARENTLY IS NOT CORRECT. IN GOOD WX, THIS IS MINOR. IF IT WERE LOW VISIBILITY, THE POTENTIAL FOR ACFT DAMAGE IS THERE. THERE NEEDS TO BE BETTER COORD BTWN ATC FACILITIES AND LCL RAMP CTLRS -- MAYBE DESIGNATED ENTRY SPOTS THAT WILL ALWAYS BE FOLLOWED. IF THE FLC HAD BEEN A LITTLE MORE AWARE, WE COULD HAVE ALSO BEEN MORE EMPHATIC ABOUT ENTERING AT SPOT X.

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.