Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Near Miss? [pics]
Sky News ^ | 01.30.06

Posted on 01/30/2006 5:17:44 PM PST by wallcrawlr

Disaster seemed certain when a photographer captured these planes on course to collide over east London.
To the onlookers below, the aircraft looked set for a horrific mid-air crash.

The cameraman took the pictures of an Airbus A300 belonging to transport firm DHL, which seemed to narrowly avoid flying into the rear of a Japan Airlines Boeing 777.

The photographer was in the crowd attending West Ham's home FA Cup match at Upton Park stadium on Saturday.

But the Civil Aviation Authority says the incident was an optical illusion and not as dangerous as it appeared from below.
A spokesman said: 'It is impossible to tell from the ground how close aircraft are in the air.'

For a mid-air incident to be classed a near miss, the planes must be within three nautical miles horizontally or 1,000ft vertically of each other.

A DHL spokesman said the company took safety 'extremely seriously' and had investigated the claims.
He said: 'In this instance a proper distance between the two planes was maintained at all times.'

Experts say the blue skies and sunshine added to the optical illusion as the conditions distorted the perspective of those watching below.



TOPICS: Arts/Photography; Chit/Chat; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: aviation; differentfltlevels; verticalseparation
I searched the title...didnt find it.
1 posted on 01/30/2006 5:17:44 PM PST by wallcrawlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

They're too close, but zoom lenses can be deceiving.


2 posted on 01/30/2006 5:19:25 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
They're too close, but zoom lenses can be deceiving.

Maybe, they could easily be 1000 ft apart. It all depends on the distance and zoom of the lens.

3 posted on 01/30/2006 5:22:45 PM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

near miss my butt! That was a near hit! :\


4 posted on 01/30/2006 5:25:53 PM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr

Missed it by _that_ much
5 posted on 01/30/2006 5:26:20 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

I'd guess the trailing plane is lower by a few hundred feet at least.

Still way too close given turbulence, etc., but nothing close to a fender bender.


6 posted on 01/30/2006 5:27:01 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hole_n_one

"Damn it, Stryker!! Pull up!!!"

7 posted on 01/30/2006 5:32:43 PM PST by socal_parrot (2006, the year of the parrot!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: socal_parrot; kstewskis; Victoria Delsoul

wow!


8 posted on 01/30/2006 5:43:16 PM PST by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: socal_parrot
perfect!

lol!

9 posted on 01/30/2006 5:44:13 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dashing Dasher

Holy Crap ping!


10 posted on 01/30/2006 5:49:30 PM PST by conservativebabe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr
Parallax, baby.
11 posted on 01/30/2006 5:50:31 PM PST by Dashing Dasher (HLL... I know you are -- but what am I!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Northern Yankee; Victoria Delsoul
Ooooooooooooooh!

I bet the pucker factor kinda pegged on that one!

12 posted on 01/30/2006 6:52:27 PM PST by kstewskis ("There you go again..." R.R.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr
The difference in the comparative size of the planes could also create the illusion.

The lower plane looks to be smaller but because it is closer to the camera it appears to be about the same size making the mind believe that they are at the same level.

13 posted on 01/30/2006 6:58:36 PM PST by carlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

LOL!


14 posted on 01/30/2006 7:04:07 PM PST by stylecouncilor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stylecouncilor

Indeed.


15 posted on 01/30/2006 9:36:26 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: carlr

"The difference in the comparative size of the planes could also create the illusion.
The lower plane looks to be smaller but because it is closer to the camera it appears to be about the same size making the mind believe that they are at the same level."

Googleized:

Airbus A300 specifications and plane history. ... Wingspan:, 147. Length:, 177.

Boeing 777 specifications and plane history
Wingspan:, 199. Length:, 209. Height:, 60.

COMMENT: If this says anything, it says that the smaller plane has to be pretty close to the larger plane, in order for the optical view to be so proportionately close to the true dimensions.


16 posted on 01/31/2006 4:43:01 AM PST by Dark Glasses and Corncob Pipe (15, 16, 18...whatever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson