Did I witness a near miss?

70s

On 3 April at approx 12.09 pm, I was sitting outside with my children and we were observing jet trails in the sky, which was cloud-free (a rare sight!). I live 30 miles from Dublin Airport. I spotted a jet that had left Dublin Airport, and another going towards the Airport and they appeared to be heading for each other! I watched in horror as the planes actually "met", but obviously (thankfully!) one was higher up than the other and both continued on their journeys unharmed.
I can only imagine the horror and the aftermath of the alternative.
I've been told a near miss is calculated if planes travel within one mile of each other. There couldn't have been 1 mile between the heights of those planes when they superimposed!
How can I find out if a near miss was reported that day?

PCros

Do you live in Drogheda? If so you are directly under a busy route where hundreds of aircraft pass each day, its a popular route for aircraft going to and from USA-Europe. It has nothing to do with Dublin airport.

They would have been well apart.

70s

I live in Athboy.

Bob the Builder

The word near-miss does not spply if:
1) Both planes are taking off from the same airport, and are in the airport catching area, otherwise there would be hundreds of near-misses in DubINTL every day

2)If the destination is the same, and the planes are within the catchment area of that airport.

3) If the "near-miss" had been planned, and that the planes are of different categories. Like such, an Boeing 747 flying, and a Harrier aircraft is planned to do a fly-by beside that plane.

Silverfish

Its hard to guage distances when looking up at planes - there could have been miles between them in height.

I mean, if you look at these two planes landing, would you believe there's at least 250 metres between them?

Bob the Builder

Silverfish wrote:

Its hard to guage distances when looking up at planes - there could have been miles between them in height.

I mean, if you look at these two planes landing, would you believe there's at least 250 metres between them?

-250metres??? Are you serious?

Steyr

Aircraft have a separation distance of 1km in all directions ( forward,back,left,right,above,below ) at all times.

70s

I understand parallax, and figure that if I had been watching from a different angle, the planes might not look like they criss-crossed each other. As a matter of interest, how many kms high up would a plane be when 10 minutes in flight?

FlutterinBantam

The correct terminology is "airmiss"... lets get it right.

FlutterinBantam

70s wrote:

I understand parallax, and figure that if I had been watching from a different angle, the planes might not look like they criss-crossed each other. As a matter of interest, how many kms high up would a plane be when 10 minutes in flight?

it wouldnt have a jet trail....

Steyr

70s wrote:

I understand parallax, and figure that if I had been watching from a different angle, the planes might not look like they criss-crossed each other. As a matter of interest, how many kms high up would a plane be when 10 minutes in flight?

Depends on the type of Aircraft but id say your looking at 20-25Mins to get to 27,000FT for the Contrail to start forming.

therecklessone

Steyr wrote:

Aircraft have a separation distance of 1km in all directions ( forward,back,left,right,above,below ) at all times.

No they don't. Lateral separation within Irish airspace (and most of Europe) is stated in Nautical Miles (NM), vertical separation in feet.

Sounds like this happened in Shannon High level airspace, where the minimum radar separation applied is 5NM lateral OR 1000ft vertical.

Separation standards for IFR movements can be reduced in the vicinity of an aerodrome in certain circumstances.

kraggy

YES. Sounds like they were separated vertically which would have been 1000ft minimum (which is approx 300m) or a minimum of 2000ft if above FL290 and one of the aircraft is not RVSM equipped.

random_banter

Silverfish wrote:

Its hard to guage distances when looking up at planes - there could have been miles between them in height.

I mean, if you look at these two planes landing, would you believe there's at least 250 metres between them?

That picture is awesome. Out of curiosity where did you get that picture and do you know where they were landing?

Steyr

I think it was in the US as its on Airliners.net, very good picture of them going onto the runways at the same Airport

peter1892

This is the link to the original photo above:

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

Taken at KSFO (San Francisco intl). There are two pairs of parallel runways, 28R & 28L were operational in this case. Standard procedure, and the probable use of a lens with a long focal length causes the illusion of the two a/c being closer together than they actually were.

There was a report of a near miss over London a few years ago - a photographer at West Hams ground noticed two aircraft high in the sky above the stadium - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660644.stm - I don't have a link to the exact story but it was assumed that he would have been using a telephoto lens and this would have caused the shortening of assumed distances in the image.

Anyway...a near miss (a real one) would be a serious incident & would eventually make the papers & would have to be investigated by the relevant Aviation Authority.

Davidth88

I too saw the article mentioned below .

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

It was proven to be exactly what is mentioned , forshortening thru long focal length lenses. The CAA had no reported near misses.

The East London hold for LHR goes right over there , I have spent quite a few hours of my life sitting over east/northeast london and you can usually see 4-5 aeroplanes below you and your paths often cross with vertical seperation because it's like a corkscrew as you descent. You can follow the aeroplanes in front and watch them peel off into the actual approach on a clear day , so you know when you are coming off the hold.

( I am one of those sad people who always get a window seat )

SouperComputer

now this is a near miss.

aphex™

What you guys think of this?

kraggy

Nice alright.

But that's air traffic for you.

1000ft vertical separation is all that's required but i'd say there's more than that with the aircraft overhead as they look quite small.

Henry Ford III

peter1892 wrote:

Taken at KSFO (San Francisco intl). There are two pairs of parallel runways, 28R & 28L were operational in this case. Standard procedure...

I was flying out of that airport a few years ago, and was staying nearby as it was an early morning flight. The planes were coming in two by two. I sat outside a restaurant and it was a most impressive sight.