Quote:
Originally Posted by
wiggy 
Just my two pence worth - all this talk of drones, automated tugs, sensors etc is all very well and is great “Blue Sky” thinking but from a airline CEO/CFOs point of view it is not about avoiding ground incidents, it is about making them affordable...and some of you are not thinking through the cost vs. Benefit analysis behind all of this.
It’s all about the cheapest short term option - if that is hiring and firing wingwalkers and paying the insurance premiums then you are not going to see companies spend large sums spent on technological solutions.
And the cheapest solution is to make that gate single aisle only - although the airport might not think so.
I am surprised there are no regulations on gate size and geometry vs aircraft wingspan, length and undercarriage geometry.
Of course a large constraint on any solution is who pays for it, both directly and inderectly (reduced capacity etc).
That combined with "acceptable risk" (aka insurance rates) likely means there will be no improvement seen in foreseeable future.
Regulators probably will not see this problem as a passenger safety risk, at least until someone manage to puncture a fuel tank.