Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Second aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: In a 737; clearance from ramp control was to push straight back; and release on south line abeam gate. Relayed same to tug operator. During pushback; the speed seemed somewhat fast; but everything was normal for about 40 feet (?) until ramp control asked us to stop our pushback; which we did; with the nose about 3 feet right of centerline. We felt nothing; but radio conversation revealed that some sort of contact had taken place between our right winglet and the left winglet of an Airbus 319 on the gate [next to us] that was also in the process of simultaneously pushing back. At this point; Airbus wingtip was noted forward of our wingline; and extremely close. There seemed to have been a shoulder-to-shoulder type contact between aircraft winglets; after which our wing slid to the rear; behind the Airbus wing. Maintenance was notified; and after some time; both aircraft were pulled back to their gates. Neither tug was disconnected at any point; since this occurred very early in the pushback of both. Our aircraft was subsequently taken out of service. Later; after a quick call to the Airbus CA; it was relayed that their tug operator had delayed their push unusually long; after receiving clearance to push. Our tug operator was then cleared to push; and did so somewhat aggressively. I made a comment to the FO about the quicker than usual pushback speed. Both gates run-in lines appear to converge in the shape of a capital letter V. This seems due to a roughly 150 degree corner angle in the terminal between the gates. Evidently; ramp control thought that they had pushed sufficiently rearward so that we could then push; but they had not made enough progress; and our tug operator quickly caught up to them. Our view of the incident was difficult; due to the rising sun in the east; and the general lack of ability to see the wingtips. This event happened so fast; we were not in much of a position to safely control the outcome. I suggest the following: 1) Ask Ramp Control to make pushback from these two gates mutually exclusive. 2) Add a note to company Jeppesen pages regarding these two gates; regarding the potential for conflict; to raise awareness.3) Add awareness for ramp personnel on these particular gates using signs. As pilots; we were not focused on our wing walkers; but it may be helpful to do so in the future; if they are visible.


Second narrative: I think; in general; our airline has very good procedures and policies in place. When something like this happens it can be hard to determine if it was a faulty procedure; human error or a combination of both. In looking back on the event there were a few factors that I believe contributed to this. During the time of our push I believe there was a 757 that couldn't get the second motor started which caused the alley to become blocked. There is typically a somewhat predictable cadence to the aircraft movement so the extra time the 757 was taking may have led to some of the confusion with the ramp tower in sequencing the calls? There was a lot going on with our push; the push right next to us; the stuck 757 and the multiple aircraft inbound on the south line who were speaking with the ramp. Another factor is that our gate is the last gate in the alley before the concourse begins to turn creating an angle. This puts the push directions of both gates right into each other. The aircraft we came into contact with was pushing from next to us. I believe this angle may have made it hard for our tug operator to see the distance between the winglets. One of the best ways to reduce human error outside of training is through procedure. After seeing this happen I think it would be best to never let those gates push at the same time because they simply aren't parallel gates. We have incredible ground crew and ramp controllers who push multiple gates successfully all day. They also push us in ways that allow for aircraft to park right at the gate that was occupied only moments before. Without the ability to push multiple gates our operation would come to a standstill; however I feel there are some gates that need special attention and must be treated differently. This awareness isn't just for the ground control. Just like hot spots when we taxi; I believe these areas need to be more highlighted for the cockpit crew as well. It might be helpful to [add] push 'hot spots' on the company charts?


Synopsis: The flight crews of a B737 and an A320 series aircraft reported their winglets made contact as both aircraft were pushed back from adjacent jetways. Normal ramp tower conflict advisory instructions had not been issued and the ground crew actions are not known.