Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, RR: 14 Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 37224 times:
Great photo , but it might not have even qualified as an incident .... it is very difficult in shots like these to tell what FL each plane is at .. they could have had 1000' vertical separation for all we know , the foreshortening affect has a way of making shots like this look more dramatic than they actually are ( I hope)
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
D L X From United States of America, joined exactly 14 years ago today! , 10561 posts, RR: 53 Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 37029 times:
It is interesting though that SkyNews was reporting it as a close call. Sensationalisation or truth?
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 37019 times:
Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 5): I'm curious why you think that way....? Any particular reason?
In just 2005 alone, JL's employed a safety regime that even China Airlines could criticize:
multiple counts of unauthorized takeoffs at CTS, ICN, and HND
aircraft equipment falling apart midflight only days/weeks apart
utilizing other aircraft parts on a 747
tires disengaging (not blowing out) upon touchdown
media reports of scheduled maintenance being found undone-but-checked-off
top officials turning in their resignation over admitted safety violations
...and the grandmomma of them all--- a press release stating that safety wasn't their top priority, and that they're sorry for that and will try to do better!!!!
Poitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 37019 times:
Quoting A319114 (Reply 3): I figured the same, but based on the dimensions of both the A300 and the 77W, it looks like they might be very close to each other.
The A300 is way lower than it looks. I took the image into Photoshop and measured the fusilage lenghts. The JAL plane is 6.4 inchs. The DHL plane is 4.9 inches long.
If you assume the JAL is a 773 then it is 243 feet, if a 772, then 209 feet.
If the assume that DHL is a A300 600F, then it is 133 feet long
That means the ratios of the two aircraft lenghts is either
133/243 or .54 or
133/209 or .63
Since 777 is 6.4 inches, the A300 would have to be either
6.4 * .54 or 3.4 inches or
6.4 * .63 or 4.0 inches.
Since it is 4.9 inches, it must either be a larger airplane than a A300-600F or it is lower.
Disclaimer! I am no expert on aircraft types, so if I have the wrong models please correct me gently
Jbmitt From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 509 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 36798 times:
Does DHL even operate into LHR? I would think the cargo companies aside from the subsidaries of passenger carries would go to other London airports. Why would the DHL flight be that close to LHR landing or arrival paths anyways?
BA0284 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 299 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 36764 times:
Quoting Jbmitt (Reply 12): Does DHL even operate into LHR?
Yeah they do, they have about 3 flights a day on a Saturday I think. I think that it isnt quite DHL, but it runs under European Air Transport. Planes are in DHL colours
However, I certinaly no longer like the git who sold this picture to the News Of The World, caused uneccecary concern about air safety and worst of all, he/she has probably got a lot of money for this pic!
MKEdude From South Korea, joined May 2005, 1008 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 36607 times:
As Concordeboy brought up 2005 was not a good year safety-wise for JAL. It is my understanding that their image in Japan was severely tarnished, and due to fewer bookings JAL had to trim back some international flights.
Even though this was not an incident, and according to reports the planes were always a safe distance from each other...a picture is worth a thousand words, and this will cause further problems for JAL.
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline." Frank Zappa
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 36578 times:
Quoting MKEdude (Reply 19): As Concordeboy brought up 2005 was not a good year safety-wise for JAL
well, it wasn't a cautious one... but I'd say it was a damn "good" year for them, since they very well could've killed a few hundred people in any one of those incidents. Fortune was strongly on their side.
Gritzngravee From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 128 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 35899 times:
Photographs are two dimensional, if this photo was taken and sold to a media outlet there is no one to blame but the media outlet. Bu tlike many of you have stated the media loves to make something out of nothing.
Pilot error does occur and in a city like London (LHR, GTW, STD, LNC, LUT) I'm sure there are close calls everyday just like in the NYC area(JFK, LGA, EWR, ISP and Westchester).
I noticed when looking at most apporach photos at SFO every shot looks like a close call but that's because there is no depth perception. Just like the London photo, you cannot tell how far or close you are to something when the background is the atmosphere, there are no shadows to measure or any clouds showing a refelction therefore zooming in makes it look like an extremely close call.
Just do a photo search of SFO and you will see almost all of the parallel approaches look like possible collisions.
Gritzngravee From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 128 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 35765 times:
I also forgot to mention the major issue concerning near misses of planes departing and approaching TEB and EWR. I live in North Jersey and all traffic departing LGA heading West, South or Northwest intersects JFK approaches from the west. At the same time if EWR are landing the 22's that means TEB traffic is also landing heading South. My window in my room looks directly South so I see TEB and EWR traffic converging and it always looks like close calls. But the human eye cannot zoom in and out like birds therefore we see things equally so to speak. But there have been numerous stories published in area papers about TEB traffic completely ignoring EWR approaching traffic, even ignoring commands to climb at a certain rate per minute(fines have been handed down to many private planes at TEB). Also many ATC's have complained about lack of man power at peak departure and arrivals at the NYC airports and it will probably take a collision to right the problem I hope that doersn't happen. There was a close call of about 300 feet or less when a plane was cleared to land the crosswind runway at EWR and a plane departing TEB was completely left in the blind (ATC too busy to see the potential danger, guiding other planes). Not to say this is what happened in London but you never know.
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, RR: 21 Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 35429 times:
You know...if JL was involved, I would not be surprised if it were actually true.
They just got a 2nd strike against them from the Ministry of Transportation for an incident on a 747 on NRT-TPE where a FA did not arm a door because "she didn't know how it worked". They have had multiple safety issues in the past couple months that are just based on stupidity and undereducated staff.
If this actually happened, the Japanese government will count it as strike 3 and they will be forced to suspend operations till they sort out their safety issues.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
25 Drakey: This is total media sensationalism. The two aircraft were both in the Lambourne hold for Heathrow and were vertically separated by 1000 feet. No pilot
26 Pogo: As BA0284 said yes they do, they also fly B757's in to LHR. They have a designated cargo shed and as well as dealing with the loads of there own airc
27 Echster: Just my 2 cents, but I find it unlikely aircraft equipped with TCAS would both order a left hand turn.
28 Jetlagged: TCAS only provides vertical resolutions, so can't order a turn in either direction. Certainly each aircraft would be on the other's TCAS display as p
29 727forever: The EAT airbus in this photo is in fact an A300-b4-200. 727forever
30 AirTranTUS: If the DHL plane is an A300B4, its length is 175ft. An A300-600 would be even longer. Some quick math yields: 175/243 or .72 6.4 * .72 = 4.6 inches 4
31 AirCanada014: It is A300-600F but the length is 177ft not 133ft
32 727forever: Of all possible DHL vendors, the following is true of their A300 fleets: 1. EAT has only A300b4-203Fs 2. Swift Air has only A300b4-200Fs 3. Astar has
33 LTU932: If the plane was really that close to the JL 77W, you can rest assured that TCAS would have alerted them in advance. However, if the TCAS wouldn't wor
34 Leigh pilgrim: I wondered how long it would be before this was on the net. Just read it in the daily mail, apparently a football fan took the picture near West Ham,
35 Henny: This is nonsense, shame on Sky - those two planes are simply in left end of the LAM hold at LHR, 1000ft apart - it's only because it's a clear day and
39 EddieGunsmoke: From Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet: "The DHL plane was an A300 which is a small freighter aircraft, and the passanger plane was a JAL A330, a much big
40 GBOAB: This is the DHL aircraft which I photographed on Saturday the registration is OO-DLU Airbus A300B4 and no it wasn't me that submitted the photo Cheers
41 Bennett123: This picture was on P1 of the Daily Mail today. However if you read P3, they suggest that the aircraft are not as close as they look. For my money the
42 KJFK31L: "While the lower plane was a A300, a smaller freight plane, the one behind was a JAL A330 - a larger, passenger plane." Not a A330 and obviously not "
43 Vr-hkg: Ah, Photoshop - you have to love it for its stupidity. Digital photographs don't have dimensions in "inches" unless you assume (as Photoshop does) th
44 Leigh pilgrim: Thats where I saw the report, the smaller pic looks worse, the bigger pic actually if looked at closely, does give the impression of 'Not close at al
45 HAWK21M: The Pic in post #1 can give a wrong Impression to the Public. Photoshopped I would think. What happened to TCAS.Did it warn them. regds MEL
46 KJFK31L: Photoshop may assume an arbitray size for pixels in a given image, but this size is rendered constant in a given image. Thus measuring the size of on
47 Lurch: If those two machines had been that close together on the same flight level their TCAS system would have been going APE as it is fitted to both of tho
48 Luisca: No wonder Airbus sold more than Boeing in 2005. As if subsidies were not enough, now they are stealing planes from Boeing.
49 Corey07850: If EWR is using the 22's, TEB will be using the VOR/DME A to runway 19 or 24 (19 if ILS is needed)... Therefore as aircraft passover the TEB VOR for
50 Treeny: According to Sky this has officially been declared a near miss which suggests that the photo hasnt been 'tamperd' with at all. Note that for a near mi
51 Tom12: " target=_blank>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660644.stm Just me or does the BBC article claim that it is a JAL A330? Tom
52 B777A340Fan: I'm 99.999999% sure that it was the camera angle that gives the visual effect that the planes are close to one another. It's hard to tell exactly wher
53 727forever: The photo of the LH744 and the UA772 is of the ILS PRM 28L/28R at SFO. While they are not touching, yes they are extremely close. The close proximity
54 727forever: oops, before I get flamed now, I realize that the UA bird is a 752. 727forever
55 Gritzngravee: Never heard any of this... TEB traffic has no reason to pay attention to EWR approaching traffic. Why would TEB traffic need to climb to avoid traffi
56 Poitin: OPPS! You are right! I took the CABIN lenght! http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfam...a310/a300-600f/specifications.html Your number is what I get now
57 Gritzngravee: Corey07850 I'm sure you've heard about this as well: http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?...kyJmZnYmVsN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2NzU0MTUw
58 Poitin: I assume you know little about Photoshop, for it is clearly the finest digital photographic tool. What I did was to put the monitor in 100% size (or
59 ChrisNH: Dude...you KNOW you've 'made it' when this story gets top-billing on The Drudge Report . Chris in NH
60 Vincewy: LOL, looks like those 2 planes are glued together, when did Boeing come up with such high capacity aircraft to combat A380?
61 Poitin: I friend of mine claims that it is all simple math (right -- sure) but you can calculate the height of both aircraft if you know their actual lenght,
62 Timz: The A300 fuselage isn't perpendicular to our line of sight, so the 4.9 inches in reply 6 should be adjusted to 5.2 inches or maybe a bit more. The 773
63 Poitin: Ah, let me explain -- the aircraft were measured from nose to tail. That clearly makes them "perpendicular to our line". In the case of the 773, I ex
64 Timz: If you photograph two A300s that are the same distance from the camera, one pointed perpendicular to your line of sight and the other pointed directl
65 Poitin: However, the two aircraft are more or less side-on to the photographer. The A330 could be fore shortened slightly, but not that much. It that were th
66 G-CIVP: Indeed correct. This has been confirmed via one of the LHR mailing lists via a former Air Traffic Controller.
67 Timz: I made a couple errors, so let me back up and start over. Contrary to what I said, the height estimation in Reply 61 above is legit, if we accept the
68 Noelg: Presumably you mean LHR, LGW, STN, LCY and LTN?
69 KJFK31L: Technically, that is correct- I agree. Newark is nevertheless positioned in such a way that close calls do occur on turns from a runway 22L departure
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 541 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
, 10561 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 241 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 235 posts, 
From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2005, 3760 posts, 
From South Korea, joined May 2005, 1008 posts, 
From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
