imlach

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660644.stm



Anyone care to comment. Guess it's just an optical illusion they're so close....2.5 miles = 13000ft. Do they look that far apart?

_RIP_

No chance. Scary. You can keep your 75Kpa salary as an ATC.

All Torque

Looks 2.5 meters to me.

Johnny E

My @rse

Reffro

They need to be 2.5 miles apart horizontally, they can be closer vertically, so that's not 7500ft. But then again neither are they about to collide, the JAL 777 is a much larger aircraft than the DHL plane, so they aren't as close as you think.

_RIP_

Yes they are.

carl

Don't they only need 500 ft of vertical separation? Or maybe even less?

Lee247

clever pic

lpski1

well i was at Westham at that time and i didnt see them mind you the hammerettes had just walked off the pitch so my gaze was probably somewhere else

KiwiGTI

If someone could be bothered, a bit of trigonometry and the dimensions of the aircraft could give you some approximate indication how far they were apart.

mart360

sfunny, when your in the holding loop coming into LHR and you see other planes in the stack, they dont appear to be going that fast,

yet when you get them alongside you in normal flight, the closing rate is phenominal and they move like bloody lightening..

anyway those two are miles a part, i cant see any brown stuff from either so its got to be way off

Mart

Swen6

I don't give a **** about illusions or even knowing what variant of plane they are, the bloke on the back of the passanger plane would of seen the colour of the pilots eyes of the DHL plane.....and thats close enough for me

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

2.5miles or not..just as well they were travelling in the same(ish) direction. The worst air collisons are when the planes are travelling in different directions and thus have less time to react.

We're not in any designated air space here, but we don't half get the odd lost straggler flying extremely low (for a commercial jet) comming into BHX. They only do late at night, so makes me wonder they are playing at (taking pics for Google Earth?). They never fly over my house that low or in that area of teh Midlands when I'm on board (as I would have taken a picture )

mark1234

Best as I can check, the vertical separation minima is 1000ft in controlled airspace. Not *that* much, but sufficient.

Leslie

One of the most disturbing experiences was to be in one of the Heathrow holding patterns waiting for descent clearance and to suddenly become clear of cloud. You could see the other aircraft in the hold and they all looked too close for words. Best by far to stay in cloud where you could not see them!

Les

Flatcapdriver

It's just the media sensationalising things as per normal on what was probably a slow news day. The lense on that bloke's camera would compress the distance making the two aircraft appear much closer and I doubt they checked with the good folks down at the Belgrano because if they had, the CAA would never have referred to it as a near miss - that term isn't recognised in aviation.

Provided they have at least 1000ft vertical separation, which in this case they did otherwise their respective TCAS would have been going mental then things are well within safety limits. I've got heaps of photos showing the underside of 744s or whatever coming out of Gatwick, with me taking off 2000ft below them but on the photo it looks a lot closer than that.

FlightMan

Wait till my track keeping system at work is fixed, bloody IT, and i'll tell you.

Robbie T

iTrader: (8)

Not the same thing, but a couple of years ago on flight to Germany we almost touched down on the runway before sharply pulling up as another plane was still taxiing. On the return flight we actually touched the tarmac before pulling up and circling as another plane was still on the runway.

I've never had this happen before or since, so for it to happen twice in the same return journey was unreal, needless to say it **** everyone up a bit

Would that be classed as a near miss?

Flatcapdriver

Nope. It's called 'go around' and is extremely common which is why most commerical aircraft have a TOGA facility as part of their FMC for use in precisely these circumstances.

Robbie T

iTrader: (8)

And in English for those that don't live and breathe this sort of stuff ....

ricardo

Don't forget the picture isn't taken straight up, but slanting across, and with a very long lens on a very clear day. The two planes are at different heights (1000 feet separation is completely normal) and only appear close due to lining up in the picture.

The media conveniently omitted the vertical separation part, and tried to make out that this was a near accident. The orphanage is safe, the nuns on the planes will live to fly another day.

^Qwerty^

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/652327/M/

Another one.

Flatcapdriver

Sorry, was in a hurry. Take Off Go Around and FMC = Flight Management Computer.

FlightMan

Ok, the only time the 2 aircraft tracks "crossed" is when the DHL entered the stack the JAL 777 was in. Minimum vertical seperation in the stacks is 1000ft.

So, no story, no near miss, just a slow news day.

[Frank Drebin on]Move along, nothing to see here[Frank Drebin off]

Sbradley

If they're both being handled by the same controller and are flying on similar headings and at least one is visual with the other then separation may be reduced to 500'

That's what you're seeing there.

Looks scary from down here but really not as big a deal as it appears.

SB (rolling eyes at another bloody media scare story)

_RIP_

Hmm. I do wonder though why the detail on both planes looks so similar. Surely a camera would focus on the nearest plane making the furthest look slightly blurred. I'm no photography expert though.

M444GY

iTrader: (72)

dunno bout this ! looks messed with

dpb

Miss is as good as a mile ...

FlightMan

How about this one then?

http://www.planes.cz/data/fotografie/60129_LQHCZHSW.jpg