Way too close for comfort!!

DoubleT

DoubleT

Messages
1,318
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
snapped this one yesterday while out and about.. not too clear as they were just peeping behind some light clouds..

is it normal for planes to get this close???

DSC_8713.jpg
 
I once read something about this as its quite common apparantly, from memory it said something along the lines of they are probably a couple thousand feet apart, but the relative size difference between them (looks like a jumbo furthest and much smaller 737 type closer) and altitude difference (depth perception if you are looking up) makes them appear very close. Not a very good explanation on my part tho i kno lol.

Still looks waaaaaay closer than any ive seen in the past mind!
 
There's a similar composition shot on a popular aviation photography website (not sure if i'm allowed to mention the name.) But it's a 767 and 777 if my memory serves me correct, photographed side-on at LAX and it looks like they could be touching but as Chris pointed out the seperation rate is *something like* 1000ft vertical/horizontal leaving a mile behind for final approach vectoring. Brilliant shot however nonetheless, not something you see optically everyday.
 
There was a pair flying around last weekend over this area but I didn't have anything other than my 24-105 f4 and couldn't get a close enough shot. I don't think they are aas close as they look but they were doing circles over here and the jetwash was joining together as one. Wonder if it's BA's version of the Red Arrows for this years airshows.
 
DoubleT said:
snapped this one yesterday while out and about.. not too clear as they were just peeping behind some light clouds..

is it normal for planes to get this close???

DSC_8713.jpg
Click to expand...

LMAO!!! I'd say "NO" Awesome shot though, bet that'll never be seen again.
Where and when??? :bonk:

It's either a couple of terrorists practicing sincronised flying or a couple of ex red arrows pilots re-living the good old days....

Who knows, could be some sort of special forces training in a new manouver for boarding an aircraft at altitude, either way it's a worrying shot.

I guess the lesson is avoid BA.
 
They're not as close as it looks. The top one is a 747 (jumbo) and the bottom one is a 777 which is far less bulky so that makes them look closer for starters. Minimum separation over the Woking area is going to be 1,000ft (it's a Reduced Vertical Separation Minima area, RVSM) which is plenty for modern nav systems and in that shot it is probably a lot more separation than that. The relative sizes plus the telephoto create an optical illusion and that isn't a "near miss", or "airprox" as they're known.

Still a great shot though!
 
WilliamC said:
T Minimum separation over the Woking area is going to be 1,000ft (it's a Reduced Vertical Separation Minima area, RVSM)

Still a great shot though!
Click to expand...

Funny,I thought RVSM airspace started at FL285. If that was the case and these ac were under RVSM conditions, the zoom on the lens taking the shot must be outstanding. Below FL285 the vertical separation is still 1000'.

Cheesy
 
Cheesy said:
Funny,I thought RVSM airspace started at FL285. If that was the case and these ac were under RVSM conditions, the zoom on the lens taking the shot must be outstanding. Below FL285 the vertical separation is still 1000'.
Click to expand...

Sorry, didn't explain myself well. It'd be 1000ft minima in this area irrespective of altitude/FL because it's RVSM there.
 
send it to the papers lol,see what they make of it..Front page news me thinks and what laughs after we will have.
 
Telephoto lenses tend to compress distances between objects, that's what they do by definition. You can try it home. Just put two glasses on a table, let's say a couple of feet apart (one in the front and one two feet behind it). Try and take two photos, one with a 10mm lens and one with 300mm lens, but with the front glass having the same size in the frame in both pictures (the second glass behind it should be a bit to the side of it in the frame so you can see it. I assure you, on the wide shot it will seem that the glass are separated by a lot more than two feet, and with the telephoto, they will certainly look like they are on the same plane (next to one another).
 
I'd like to caveat my next statement with the fact that I am in no way belittling your image.

This is exactly the sort of 'no story' photo that the Sun would print on a slow news day. Just email their news desk telling them you saw what you thought was going to be a collision and took the shot. Give them a headline by saying that you were so concerned about the possibility of collision that you now think any plans for extra runways in the South of England have you terrified!
 
Cheesy said:
This is exactly the sort of 'no story' photo that the Sun would print on a slow news day. Just email their news desk telling them you saw what you thought was going to be a collision and took the shot. Give them a headline by saying that you were so concerned about the possibility of collision that you now think any plans for extra runways in the South of England have you terrified!
Click to expand...

:LOL::LOL:
 
Going to stick my neck out and say the bottom plane is actually an Airbus A320, which is pretty small compared to the 747 above it. It's a telephoto illusion as stated.
 
DoubleT said:
I agree the telephoto lens has created an illusion but even when I was looking at it without the camera they still looked pretty damn close! Lol .
Click to expand...

This is what I was just thinking, it's all good and well saying, "it's the lens" but they must have looked like this for you to think wow, that doesn't look right....
 
When a mummy plane and a daddy plane love each other very much, they make baby planes.
 
Just to add some scale to the issue, the A320 (bottom) is 37M long, whilst the 747-400 in the shot is 70M long - nearly twice the length, but the illusion suggests they are nearly the same size.
 
stuartpengs said:
Just to add some scale to the issue, the A320 (bottom) is 37M long, whilst the 747-400 in the shot is 70M long - nearly twice the length, but the illusion suggests they are nearly the same size.
Click to expand...

I think that you are probably not far wrong there.
 
The last thing I wanna see when I look out the plane window is another plane!
 
I bet they do very close on occasions and i also guess we wouldnt be told only if it 'leaked' out
 
I'm pretty sure that the lower aircraft is B767, but I could be wrong - it's years since I had to differentiate airliners for a living!
 
A lot of people forget how ig a 747 actually is.

It's amazing seeing the crew prep one, when the tire is over 6ft tall, and a bloke standing next to it is dwarfed. Or when you used to see the space shuttle on it's back.
 
rj1986 said:
A lot of people forget how ig a 747 actually is.

It's amazing seeing the crew prep one, when the tire is over 6ft tall, and a bloke standing next to it is dwarfed. Or when you used to see the space shuttle on it's back.
Click to expand...

Haha speaking of that, I found a picture my dad took of me and a mate with the Shuttle in the background, piggy-backing on a 747 when it visited Stansted a good number of years ago - must have been 30 something years ago now.
 
rj1986 said:
It's amazing seeing the crew prep one, when the tire is over 6ft tall, and a bloke standing next to it is dwarfed.
Click to expand...

Nowhere near. An approximation, not having one to hand to measure, is around 40 inches.
 
MisterE said:
Nowhere near. An approximation, not having one to hand to measure, is around 40 inches.
Click to expand...

Psssst...

'The nose gear tire of a 747-8 airplane is a 26-inch tire, and the main gear tires are 36 inches. The 747-400 uses a size 32-inch for both the nose gear tire and main gear tires. These tires are made specifically for aircraft.'

From answerbag

I agree though it does look like a scary image, but it is just an illusion. Hopefully a bored news writer will jump on it!
 
purehillmanimp said:
Psssst...

'The nose gear tire of a 747-8 airplane is a 26-inch tire, and the main gear tires are 36 inches. The 747-400 uses a size 32-inch for both the nose gear tire and main gear tires. These tires are made specifically for aircraft.'
Click to expand...

I did say "around", estimating from memory :D. 777 tyres are 50ins.
 
Fair play- i haven't been on a 744 in about 7 years now (used to fly alot on MAS, but now used Air Asia who use airbus)
 
It is a 767 on the bottom, and see this quite a lot on my travels, depending on which way they are taking off from Heathrow.

You'll find one was heading to Heathrow to land, and the other was departing Heathrow.
 
Ady Williams said:
It is a 767 on the bottom, and see this quite a lot on my travels, depending on which way they are taking off from Heathrow.

You'll find one was heading to Heathrow to land, and the other was departing Heathrow.
Click to expand...

From my limited experience, aircraft tend to take off and land into wind (something about lift being proportional to airspeed rather than groundspeed). To that end I guarantee that one aircraft is not landing while the other is departing, rather Heathrow have been using parallel departure runways or (less likely) one is in the stack as the other departs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top