Narrative:

I slowed my taxi speed further as we approached gate area. First officer said it looks close. I looked out again and said looks like we got clearance. A few seconds later we heard a dull impact. I immediately set the parking brakes and looked out the window and saw we had made contact with the -300. We informed ATC; company; and made a PA; and then spoke to the flight attendants. Within 10 mins; company mechanics towed the -300 back in to gate; made contact with us on the flight interphone; and gave us the all clear sign to taxi. Operations advised us to pull in to gate xx. We contacted ground and taxied to gate xx. Passenger exited the airplane through the jetway. I spoke to dispatcher and then contacted chief pilot. He advised me that I was done flying for the day and that he would have us replaced. I spoke to our union and then to company mechanics. I then made a logbook entry and exited. To re-emphasize; I am very aware of the misperception from the cockpit. I remember the previously published handout about winglet incidents. I took its advice into account. The perception of clearance from the cockpit was 100% in my mind. I was on the yellow line and taxiing at a slower than normal speed (less than 10 mph). If I had any doubt in my mind; I would have set the brakes and requested a wing walker. I would like to suggest additional training on this issue. A video would be helpful. This visual perception problem will continue to plague company and the industry. I will spread the word of my experience. If the first officer has any concern; however small; I will set the parking brakes and request a wing walker. Supplemental information from acn 776364: after a normal pushback; engine start and after start flow; I called for taxi. Ground control replied; 'flight number; hold your taxi;' and I answered; 'flight number; hold our taxi.' looking out the captain's side; I could see the conflicting traffic. The other aircraft seemed to be taxiing normally (at a safe speed) to pass behind us going toward one of the gates on the other side. We were waiting for our taxi clearance to be delivered when we felt and heard an impact toward the back of the airplane. We couldn't see what had happened; but the captain said; 'well; they did it!' and we both looked down to see that the parking brake was still set. It was. Ground crew was signaling to shut down the engines so I did; and the captain put the APU (which was still running) on the bus after we checked the APU egt. There didn't seem to be any damage from the impact to the APU so we left it running until we had been towed back in to the gate. The passenger were deplaned at the gate. Once parked; we could see that the left winglet of the other airplane had struck the tip of our left horizontal stabilizer. I am assuming that the other aircraft was on the taxiway center. The only thing I can suggest is that if there is not room to taxi behind a pushed aircraft; then aircraft should be pushed right out onto the taxiway. The other aircraft certainly saw us; but thought there was enough room. Pushing out onto the taxiway would make it clear that 'none may pass.' I have flown with the captain of the other aircraft and know him as a careful and skilled pilot. If events like this are happening to pilots like him; then there is a problem and all of our winglet incidents are not caused by 'pilot carelessness.' my pet theory is that to see the winglet; one must look far enough behind you that the bridge of the pilot's nose blocks his opposite side eye; subtly removing binocular depth perception. This would leave relative size and experience based judgement as the only guides on congested ramps where wing walkers are not available. If my guess is correct; then the majority of winglet strikes probably occur on the captain's side.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 FLT CREW REPORTS WINGLET CONTACT WITH HORIZONTAL STABILIZER OF B737 PUSHED BACK FROM GATE IN PREPARATION FOR TAXI.

Narrative: I SLOWED MY TAXI SPD FURTHER AS WE APCHED GATE AREA. FO SAID IT LOOKS CLOSE. I LOOKED OUT AGAIN AND SAID LOOKS LIKE WE GOT CLRNC. A FEW SECONDS LATER WE HEARD A DULL IMPACT. I IMMEDIATELY SET THE PARKING BRAKES AND LOOKED OUT THE WINDOW AND SAW WE HAD MADE CONTACT WITH THE -300. WE INFORMED ATC; COMPANY; AND MADE A PA; AND THEN SPOKE TO THE FLT ATTENDANTS. WITHIN 10 MINS; COMPANY MECHS TOWED THE -300 BACK IN TO GATE; MADE CONTACT WITH US ON THE FLT INTERPHONE; AND GAVE US THE ALL CLR SIGN TO TAXI. OPS ADVISED US TO PULL IN TO GATE XX. WE CONTACTED GND AND TAXIED TO GATE XX. PAX EXITED THE AIRPLANE THROUGH THE JETWAY. I SPOKE TO DISPATCHER AND THEN CONTACTED CHIEF PLT. HE ADVISED ME THAT I WAS DONE FLYING FOR THE DAY AND THAT HE WOULD HAVE US REPLACED. I SPOKE TO OUR UNION AND THEN TO COMPANY MECHS. I THEN MADE A LOGBOOK ENTRY AND EXITED. TO RE-EMPHASIZE; I AM VERY AWARE OF THE MISPERCEPTION FROM THE COCKPIT. I REMEMBER THE PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED HANDOUT ABOUT WINGLET INCIDENTS. I TOOK ITS ADVICE INTO ACCOUNT. THE PERCEPTION OF CLRNC FROM THE COCKPIT WAS 100% IN MY MIND. I WAS ON THE YELLOW LINE AND TAXIING AT A SLOWER THAN NORMAL SPD (LESS THAN 10 MPH). IF I HAD ANY DOUBT IN MY MIND; I WOULD HAVE SET THE BRAKES AND REQUESTED A WING WALKER. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST ADDITIONAL TRAINING ON THIS ISSUE. A VIDEO WOULD BE HELPFUL. THIS VISUAL PERCEPTION PROB WILL CONTINUE TO PLAGUE COMPANY AND THE INDUSTRY. I WILL SPREAD THE WORD OF MY EXPERIENCE. IF THE FO HAS ANY CONCERN; HOWEVER SMALL; I WILL SET THE PARKING BRAKES AND REQUEST A WING WALKER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 776364: AFTER A NORMAL PUSHBACK; ENG START AND AFTER START FLOW; I CALLED FOR TAXI. GND CTL REPLIED; 'FLT NUMBER; HOLD YOUR TAXI;' AND I ANSWERED; 'FLT NUMBER; HOLD OUR TAXI.' LOOKING OUT THE CAPT'S SIDE; I COULD SEE THE CONFLICTING TFC. THE OTHER ACFT SEEMED TO BE TAXIING NORMALLY (AT A SAFE SPD) TO PASS BEHIND US GOING TOWARD ONE OF THE GATES ON THE OTHER SIDE. WE WERE WAITING FOR OUR TAXI CLRNC TO BE DELIVERED WHEN WE FELT AND HEARD AN IMPACT TOWARD THE BACK OF THE AIRPLANE. WE COULDN'T SEE WHAT HAD HAPPENED; BUT THE CAPT SAID; 'WELL; THEY DID IT!' AND WE BOTH LOOKED DOWN TO SEE THAT THE PARKING BRAKE WAS STILL SET. IT WAS. GND CREW WAS SIGNALING TO SHUT DOWN THE ENGS SO I DID; AND THE CAPT PUT THE APU (WHICH WAS STILL RUNNING) ON THE BUS AFTER WE CHKED THE APU EGT. THERE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE ANY DAMAGE FROM THE IMPACT TO THE APU SO WE LEFT IT RUNNING UNTIL WE HAD BEEN TOWED BACK IN TO THE GATE. THE PAX WERE DEPLANED AT THE GATE. ONCE PARKED; WE COULD SEE THAT THE L WINGLET OF THE OTHER AIRPLANE HAD STRUCK THE TIP OF OUR L HORIZ STABILIZER. I AM ASSUMING THAT THE OTHER ACFT WAS ON THE TXWY CTR. THE ONLY THING I CAN SUGGEST IS THAT IF THERE IS NOT ROOM TO TAXI BEHIND A PUSHED ACFT; THEN ACFT SHOULD BE PUSHED RIGHT OUT ONTO THE TXWY. THE OTHER ACFT CERTAINLY SAW US; BUT THOUGHT THERE WAS ENOUGH ROOM. PUSHING OUT ONTO THE TXWY WOULD MAKE IT CLR THAT 'NONE MAY PASS.' I HAVE FLOWN WITH THE CAPT OF THE OTHER ACFT AND KNOW HIM AS A CAREFUL AND SKILLED PLT. IF EVENTS LIKE THIS ARE HAPPENING TO PLTS LIKE HIM; THEN THERE IS A PROB AND ALL OF OUR WINGLET INCIDENTS ARE NOT CAUSED BY 'PLT CARELESSNESS.' MY PET THEORY IS THAT TO SEE THE WINGLET; ONE MUST LOOK FAR ENOUGH BEHIND YOU THAT THE BRIDGE OF THE PLT'S NOSE BLOCKS HIS OPPOSITE SIDE EYE; SUBTLY REMOVING BINOCULAR DEPTH PERCEPTION. THIS WOULD LEAVE RELATIVE SIZE AND EXPERIENCE BASED JUDGEMENT AS THE ONLY GUIDES ON CONGESTED RAMPS WHERE WING WALKERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE. IF MY GUESS IS CORRECT; THEN THE MAJORITY OF WINGLET STRIKES PROBABLY OCCUR ON THE CAPT'S SIDE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.