Narrative:

At approximately XA05Z on jul/fri/00, I was working the ground control, clearance delivery, and flight data position combined (which is the normal mode of operation) at burlington ATCT (btv). I received a radio call from air carrier X, a B733, requesting IFR clearance to phl. The quality of the transmission was clear but extremely weak, so as to be nearly a whisper. I read the clearance to the pilot, confirmed the correct readback, and advised the pilot of the transmission quality. The pilot acknowledged, apparently made some adjustment, and called back. At this time, the radio was loud and clear. I so advised him. At approximately XA20Z, I became involved with several taxiing aircraft, including atx, a PA31, the taxi route of which took the aircraft along taxiway a (a ns oriented movement area) the western edge of which borders the air carrier terminal ramp (a non-movement area, which air carrier X was parked). (Air carrier jet aircraft parked at this ramp, when ready for departure, normally are pushed back from their gates by ground tugs. This pushback process generally requires clearance from ATC because it is nearly impossible to push back without impacting taxiway a.) along with the taxiing aircraft and other ground control duties (such as coordinating use of active runways with the local controller), I was involved with flight data and clearance delivery duties, including updating and ensuring compliance with flow control restrs and reading IFR clrncs to several aircraft. This caused some heads-down time, however, I knew that all taxiing aircraft were no factor for each other and none were close to any active runway. When I looked up, I noticed that air carrier X had been pushed back onto taxiway a, facing north, directly into the path of atx who was taxiing north on the taxiway. The air carrier X right wingtip and the atx left wingtip appeared to pass within ft of each other. This was the closest encounter between 2 aircraft on the ground that I have witnessed in nearly 18 yrs of ATC. When I queried the pilot of air carrier X concerning the receipt of authority/authorized for pushback, his reply was, 'we called 3 times and got no answer.' apparently, in the opinion of this pilot, the fact that no answer was received from ATC precludes the necessity of obtaining clearance to enter this portion of the airport movement area. (As an aside, I would pose this question to this pilot: if you were flying on an IFR flight, desiring a lower altitude, and after 3 requests to ATC still receiving no answer, would you then arbitrarily descend? Another question: if you were at the runway awaiting departure clearance, and after making 3 requests to ATC still receiving no answer, would you then simply taxi onto the runway and take off?) the ATCT watch supervisor was informed of the transgression and, within 1 hour of the event, he listened to the tape. There was no recognizable call from air carrier X on the tape. Indeed, after having been informed of the weak radio earlier, this pilot should have suspected that the same thing, or worse, was happening. This pilot created an undue hazard to the occupant(south) of the other taxiing aircraft atx. I do not know what the solution is to prevent this from happening again, the rules are clearly in place in the far's. The air carrier X station manager has been briefed on several occasions. It is clearly a case of disregard for the integrity of the system and the safety of aircraft and passenger by this particular pilot.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF AN ACR B737 PUSHBACK WITHOUT TWR CLRNC RESULTING IN A NEAR MISS OF AN ATX COMMUTER PIPER NAVAJO, PA31, ALMOST HITTING THE B737 AS IT TAXIED BY.

Narrative: AT APPROX XA05Z ON JUL/FRI/00, I WAS WORKING THE GND CTL, CLRNC DELIVERY, AND FLT DATA POS COMBINED (WHICH IS THE NORMAL MODE OF OP) AT BURLINGTON ATCT (BTV). I RECEIVED A RADIO CALL FROM ACR X, A B733, REQUESTING IFR CLRNC TO PHL. THE QUALITY OF THE XMISSION WAS CLR BUT EXTREMELY WEAK, SO AS TO BE NEARLY A WHISPER. I READ THE CLRNC TO THE PLT, CONFIRMED THE CORRECT READBACK, AND ADVISED THE PLT OF THE XMISSION QUALITY. THE PLT ACKNOWLEDGED, APPARENTLY MADE SOME ADJUSTMENT, AND CALLED BACK. AT THIS TIME, THE RADIO WAS LOUD AND CLR. I SO ADVISED HIM. AT APPROX XA20Z, I BECAME INVOLVED WITH SEVERAL TAXIING ACFT, INCLUDING ATX, A PA31, THE TAXI RTE OF WHICH TOOK THE ACFT ALONG TXWY A (A NS ORIENTED MOVEMENT AREA) THE WESTERN EDGE OF WHICH BORDERS THE ACR TERMINAL RAMP (A NON-MOVEMENT AREA, WHICH ACR X WAS PARKED). (ACR JET ACFT PARKED AT THIS RAMP, WHEN READY FOR DEP, NORMALLY ARE PUSHED BACK FROM THEIR GATES BY GND TUGS. THIS PUSHBACK PROCESS GENERALLY REQUIRES CLRNC FROM ATC BECAUSE IT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO PUSH BACK WITHOUT IMPACTING TXWY A.) ALONG WITH THE TAXIING ACFT AND OTHER GND CTL DUTIES (SUCH AS COORDINATING USE OF ACTIVE RWYS WITH THE LCL CTLR), I WAS INVOLVED WITH FLT DATA AND CLRNC DELIVERY DUTIES, INCLUDING UPDATING AND ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH FLOW CTL RESTRS AND READING IFR CLRNCS TO SEVERAL ACFT. THIS CAUSED SOME HEADS-DOWN TIME, HOWEVER, I KNEW THAT ALL TAXIING ACFT WERE NO FACTOR FOR EACH OTHER AND NONE WERE CLOSE TO ANY ACTIVE RWY. WHEN I LOOKED UP, I NOTICED THAT ACR X HAD BEEN PUSHED BACK ONTO TXWY A, FACING N, DIRECTLY INTO THE PATH OF ATX WHO WAS TAXIING N ON THE TXWY. THE ACR X R WINGTIP AND THE ATX L WINGTIP APPEARED TO PASS WITHIN FT OF EACH OTHER. THIS WAS THE CLOSEST ENCOUNTER BTWN 2 ACFT ON THE GND THAT I HAVE WITNESSED IN NEARLY 18 YRS OF ATC. WHEN I QUERIED THE PLT OF ACR X CONCERNING THE RECEIPT OF AUTH FOR PUSHBACK, HIS REPLY WAS, 'WE CALLED 3 TIMES AND GOT NO ANSWER.' APPARENTLY, IN THE OPINION OF THIS PLT, THE FACT THAT NO ANSWER WAS RECEIVED FROM ATC PRECLUDES THE NECESSITY OF OBTAINING CLRNC TO ENTER THIS PORTION OF THE ARPT MOVEMENT AREA. (AS AN ASIDE, I WOULD POSE THIS QUESTION TO THIS PLT: IF YOU WERE FLYING ON AN IFR FLT, DESIRING A LOWER ALT, AND AFTER 3 REQUESTS TO ATC STILL RECEIVING NO ANSWER, WOULD YOU THEN ARBITRARILY DSND? ANOTHER QUESTION: IF YOU WERE AT THE RWY AWAITING DEP CLRNC, AND AFTER MAKING 3 REQUESTS TO ATC STILL RECEIVING NO ANSWER, WOULD YOU THEN SIMPLY TAXI ONTO THE RWY AND TAKE OFF?) THE ATCT WATCH SUPVR WAS INFORMED OF THE TRANSGRESSION AND, WITHIN 1 HR OF THE EVENT, HE LISTENED TO THE TAPE. THERE WAS NO RECOGNIZABLE CALL FROM ACR X ON THE TAPE. INDEED, AFTER HAVING BEEN INFORMED OF THE WEAK RADIO EARLIER, THIS PLT SHOULD HAVE SUSPECTED THAT THE SAME THING, OR WORSE, WAS HAPPENING. THIS PLT CREATED AN UNDUE HAZARD TO THE OCCUPANT(S) OF THE OTHER TAXIING ACFT ATX. I DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE SOLUTION IS TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN, THE RULES ARE CLRLY IN PLACE IN THE FAR'S. THE ACR X STATION MGR HAS BEEN BRIEFED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. IT IS CLRLY A CASE OF DISREGARD FOR THE INTEGRITY OF THE SYS AND THE SAFETY OF ACFT AND PAX BY THIS PARTICULAR PLT.

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.