MainRunway
Topic Author
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:00 am

747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:37 pm

just saw this. If this was already posted, I apologize. E190 and 747 nearly collide when 747 decides to do a go around.

http://gma.yahoo.com/video/planes-ne...-miss-over-nyc-120558220.html?vp=1
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:55 pm

Does anyone have a link to the live atc recording?
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
kaitak
Posts: 9756
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:03 pm

Couldn't see the video; what airlines were involved?
 
MainRunway
Topic Author
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 7:00 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:08 pm

DL 172 a 747 arriving from Tokyo and I believe a DL regional jet departing from LGA.
 
panamair
Posts: 4133
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:17 pm

Here's a less-sensationalized account of what happened:

http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/06/c...america-e170-what-really-happened/
 
rwy04lga
Posts: 1976
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 7:21 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:38 pm

Quoting MainRunway (Thread starter):
If this was already posted, I apologize.

It was...

AP: DL Planes Leaving LGA, Arr. JFK Near Miss (by PHX787 Jun 20 2013 in Civil Aviation)
Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 9:49 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
Does anyone have a link to the live atc recording?

EDIT: Wrong feed, my bad. It seems that the title was either incorrect for this feed or there was another near miss yesterday.

[Edited 2013-06-21 14:51:20]
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
CXH
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:37 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Fri Jun 21, 2013 10:32 pm

Quoting panamair (Reply 4):

Here's a less-sensationalized account of what happened:

http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/06/c...ened/

Thanks Panamair! A clear, factual explanation.
I've seen the future, I can't afford it. - Martin Fry
 
mark2fly1034
Posts: 251
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:38 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:22 am

If it was a near miss that means they would of hit... So it was a near hit.

In this article it says "Delta turning to the right, Shuttle America to the left." Now I dont know much about what happened but if they were both head on would that not mean they turned into each other?

http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/06/c...what-really-happened/#.UcUJGpywWHh
 
winstonlegthigh
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 5:15 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:56 am

Sensationalized or not, "Never saw him" isn't a statement that sounds reassuring to a good portion of people watching a report concerning aircraft separation on the evening news.

[Edited 2013-06-21 20:01:39]
Never has gravity been so uplifting.
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:59 am

Quoting Mark2fly1034 (Reply 8):
If it was a near miss that means they would of hit... So it was a near hit.

Or it was a miss but it was a close-in miss.

Technically, two planes 1,000 miles apart "missed" each other, too. They were a far miss.  
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Posts: 2251
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:04 am

Quoting Mark2fly1034 (Reply 8):
If it was a near miss that means they would of hit... So it was a near hit.

Not this again.

It's a near miss because near refers to the distance by which they missed (they were near each other).

Now, if they said nearly missed, that would be different. But they didn't, so the thread title is correct.

Just as it is every other time this comes up.
The plural of Airbus is Airbuses. Airbii is not a word.
There is no 787-800, nor 787-900 or 747-800. It's 787-8, 787-9, and 747-8.
A321neoLR is also unnecessary. It's simply A321LR.
Airplanes don't have isles, they have aisles.
 
User avatar
cjg225
Posts: 1832
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:59 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:15 am

Quoting HOmSaR (Reply 11):
Not this again.

It's a near miss because near refers to the distance by which they missed (they were near each other).

Now, if they said nearly missed, that would be different. But they didn't, so the thread title is correct.

Just as it is every other time this comes up.

You did a better job than me of explaining this...

Yes, a "near miss" is an adjective-noun pair with "miss" being the noun and "near" the adjective describing the miss.

"Nearly missed" is an adverb-verb pair with "missed" being the verb and "nearly" describing how something missed... or, rather, "nearly" missed, implying that they didn't miss.
Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:31 am

Near miss? So it actually hit?
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3135
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:33 am

Quoting HOmSaR (Reply 11):
Not this again.

Then it would be a near hit, or a near collision. Not a "near miss" because they did not nearly miss each other, they nearly HIT each other.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Posts: 2251
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:48 am

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 14):
Then it would be a near hit, or a near collision. Not a "near miss" because they did not nearly miss each other, they nearly HIT each other.

  

Let's try this again.

Quoting HOmSaR (Reply 11):
It's a near miss because near refers to the distance by which they missed (they were near each other).

Now, if they said nearly missed, that would be different. But they didn't, so the thread title is correct.
Quoting cjg225 (Reply 12):
Yes, a "near miss" is an adjective-noun pair with "miss" being the noun and "near" the adjective describing the miss.

"Nearly missed" is an adverb-verb pair with "missed" being the verb and "nearly" describing how something missed... or, rather, "nearly" missed, implying that they didn't miss.
Near and nearly are not the same word.

[Edited 2013-06-21 20:50:43]
The plural of Airbus is Airbuses. Airbii is not a word.
There is no 787-800, nor 787-900 or 747-800. It's 787-8, 787-9, and 747-8.
A321neoLR is also unnecessary. It's simply A321LR.
Airplanes don't have isles, they have aisles.
 
muzyck
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:54 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:00 am

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 1):
Does anyone have a link to the live atc recording?

Live ATC.net archives. Try JFK ground / tower June 13, 18:30 UTC. It is about 5 minutes into the playback at about 14:35 local time. DAL172 from Narita. Runway 4L.

[Edited 2013-06-21 22:05:10]
 
goboeing
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 5:31 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:05 am

Much ado about nothing.
 
copter808
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 1:14 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:17 am

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 17):
Much ado about nothing.

Exactly. Two airplanes who saw each other and controllers who were aware of the incident. And when the loss of separation occurred they were already turning away from each other.
 
Caspian27
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 3:48 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:21 am

They were 1/2 a mile away from each other. Granted that's close in aviation-land, but the news reports are WAY over sensationalizing this. I saw multiple computer video renderings on the news that made it appear that they were coming nearly head on and almost colliding.

This is the media just trying to sell news on a slow news day.
Meanwhile, somewhere 35,000 ft above your head...
 
muzyck
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:54 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:23 am

Quoting copter808 (Reply 18):
Exactly. Two airplanes who saw each other and controllers who were aware of the incident. And when the loss of separation occurred they were already turning away from each other.

What makes you come to the conclusion that "they saw each other"? DAL172 never confirmed anything visual.
 
Mcoov
Posts: 142
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:14 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:30 am

Wow. Someone's been watching too much George Carlin me thinks.
 
copter808
Posts: 1384
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2000 1:14 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:30 am

Quoting muzyck (Reply 20):
What makes you come to the conclusion that "they saw each other"?

OK, my error. According to the quoted article they were "aware of each other". That's only slightly different.
 
wiseman85
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:59 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:41 am

People need to stop with this crap. It ruins the forums!!


ADJECTIVE -

ad·jec·tive
Pronunciation: aj-ik-tiv
Function: noun
: a word that modifies a noun by describing a quality of the thing named, indicating its quantity or extent, or specifying a thing as distinct from something else

------------

NEAR - Used as and adjective

a : not far distant in time, place, or degree
b : almost happening : narrowly missed or avoided
c : nearly not happening

2
: closely related or intimately associated
3
a : being the closer of two
b : being the left-hand one of a pair
4
: direct, short

-------------

NOUN

: any member of a class of words that typically can be combined with determiners to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept

--------------

MISS - used as a noun

1
chiefly dialect : disadvantage or regret resulting from loss
2
a : a failure to hit
b : a failure to attain a desired result

------------

So using our new found knowledge lets place the puzzle back together.

NEAR MISS

Remember "Miss" is being used as a NOUN. I repeat.....a NOUN. There was a miss (noun - a failure to hit) over JFK. Now to help understand we need to know what type of miss it was. Was it a miss by a large or small distance? It was a NEAR ( adjective - not far in distance) MISS ( noun - failure to hit). So it is was a - Failure to hit in which the objects are not far in distance.

Does everyone understand now?

I will keep this in my clipboard and repost it every time someone starts this foolishness. Stop acting as if the words "NEAR MISS" destroy all you ability to comprehend what the post is about.
 
softrally
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:32 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 5:55 am

Lord, why can't we just stop with this "near miss" argument? Every single time two planes almost collide, and we have a post here, there's someone arguing about that it should be "near hit" instead.
Flown on: 738, 744, 762/763, 772, 77W, 788, A306, A318/319/320/321, A332/333, E145, E190, CRJ700
 
Rara
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:46 am

Quoting softrally (Reply 24):
Lord, why can't we just stop with this "near miss" argument? Every single time two planes almost collide, and we have a post here, there's someone arguing about that it should be "near hit" instead.

As far as I remember, it's because a comedian had a routine about it, and some people apparently think he was being serious. I agree it's getting old... some folks can't distinguish between comedy and proper language use.
Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
 
Koosi
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 12:57 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:02 am

Quoting wiseman85 (Reply 23):
NEAR - Used as and adjective

a : not far distant in time, place, or degree
b : almost happening : narrowly missed or avoided
Quoting wiseman85 (Reply 23):
Failure to hit in which the objects are not far in distance.

Then again, using the definitions in your post, it could also mean a narrowly missed or avoided failure to hit, i.e. an actual hit   I don't really side with either group, but the definitions you provided show that the term near miss can have more than one meaning.
 
art
Posts: 3038
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:36 am

This semantic debate is silly. The meaning and use of the phrase "near miss" is clearly established. A debate might be justified if there were some confusion as to its meaning. There isn't.

What was unusual about this incident was that it occurred because 2 aircraft elected to go around at almost the same time. I wonder how often that occurs.
 
shufflemoomin
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:04 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 11:57 am

Quoting Mark2fly1034 (Reply 8):

If it was a near miss that means they would of hit... So it was a near hit.

If I had my way, everyone who brought up this stupid argument would be banned. It comes up every time, it's been explained why you're wrong, please, STOP IT.
 
Koosi
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 12:57 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:24 pm

Quoting art (Reply 27):
This semantic debate is silly. The meaning and use of the phrase "near miss" is clearly established. A debate might be justified if there were some confusion as to its meaning. There isn't.

   Now that I agree with.
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 685
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:21 pm

The reason it keeps coming up is that the phrase is not precise, in that some people, myself included, interpret it differently. If you have to keep explaining it, maybe it needs to be improved to avoid possible mis-interpretation.    Just because a phrase is popular, doesn't mean it is correct, proper English.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:24 pm

Quoting copter808 (Reply 22):
OK, my error. According to the quoted article they were "aware of each other". That's only slightly different.

Both aircraft are equipped with collision avoidance systems. The alarms go off and tell the pilots which way to turn to avoid the other. These have been aboard commercial aircraft for many years. Usually the system activates before the tower says anything.

As another writer said---much ado about nothing. The media loves to sensationalize these things and make everyone think they were looking death in the eye. Plus half of America seems to have CNN on speed dial.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
LuisKMIA
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 4:58 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:57 pm

I was rolling my eyes when I saw CNN report this yesterday in such an unnecessary sensationalist fashion. The crew was calm in the audio. NYC is always congested and ATC-pilot communication is an art and a science. More lessons learned, and hopefully less incidents.
 
bohica
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 3:21 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:01 pm

Let's be thankful the near miss didn't involve a 787. If it involved a 787, this near miss would be a complete media circus and this thread would have about 1,325 replies by now. (Sarcasm off)

It was a near miss. We drive on parkways and park in driveways. Case closed.
 
filejw
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2000 2:58 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:42 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 31):

Not always. Below certain altitude the RA or resolution feature of TCAS is inhibited.
 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:51 pm

Quoting filejw (Reply 34):
Not always. Below certain altitude the RA or resolution feature of TCAS is inhibited.

Very true. I lost an uncle who was an Eastern Airlines captain in a mid-air collision over Carmel, NY in 1965. A TWA 707 ripped the tail off his Constellation and he managed to pancake the aircraft onto a field in North Salem, NY. No one was hurt on the 707--it landed at JFK with its left wing torn off right up to the #1 engine.

On the Eastern aircraft 4 died--one of which was my uncle. After landing the aircraft it broke up and caught fire--he went back into the burning aircraft to get a young army recruit out that had a jammed seat belt. They found his body just inside the forward entry door and the body of the young recruit right behind him. Another few feet and he would have been saved. His name was Captain Charles J. White and I am extraordinarily proud of him.

[Edited 2013-06-22 08:56:23]
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:53 pm

Quoting muzyck (Reply 20):
What makes you come to the conclusion that "they saw each other"? DAL172 never confirmed anything visual.

If you listen to the ATC recording, the DL pilot indicated that he was aware of where the RJ was with the TCAS system when ATC gave him the traffic advisory.
PHX based
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:02 pm

I find it somewhat puzzling that, if you believe the NYCAviation article, JFK doesn't seem to have a well-defined procedure for simultaneous go-arounds on parallel runways that would keep both aircraft away from LGA traffic. That would be the main thing I'd take away from this as far as improvements go.

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 31):
Both aircraft are equipped with collision avoidance systems. The alarms go off and tell the pilots which way to turn to avoid the other.

Current TCAS systems only give vertical guidance, not horizontal. The horizontal accuracy isn't sufficient for it.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
cornutt
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:57 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:33 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 37):
I find it somewhat puzzling that, if you believe the NYCAviation article, JFK doesn't seem to have a well-defined procedure for simultaneous go-arounds on parallel runways that would keep both aircraft away from LGA traffic.

I was just thinking the same thing, and I'm wondering how many airports with parallel runways have procedures for simultaneous go-arounds. I can't help but think that the reasoning for not doing it is "how likely are two aircraft going to fly a missed approach at the same time?" Well, as we've just seen, it can be pretty likely if you have weather conditions effecting the whole airport.
 
Mir
Posts: 19491
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: 747 Near Miss Over NYC Last Friday

Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:51 pm

Quoting 777STL (Reply 36):
If you listen to the ATC recording, the DL pilot indicated that he was aware of where the RJ was with the TCAS system when ATC gave him the traffic advisory.

You can never be aware of where another aircraft is with TCAS. You can be aware of where it's likely to be, but unless you can see the other airplane, or are responding to an RA, it doesn't count. "I've got the traffic on TCAS" is a completely worthless statement.

-Mir

EDIT: Actually, I'll amend that - it's not completely worthless, since it does tell ATC that you're aware of the traffic's presence, and seeing a target on TCAS does make it easier to find it visually, but you can't separate yourself from traffic based on TCAS alone - you have to actually see the other airplane. And ATC can't issue visual separation based on your report of having the traffic on TCAS.

[Edited 2013-06-22 09:55:43]
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos