Near Miss.

kneemos

How close is too close?


https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/aer-lingus-passenger-dublin-airport-15904589

dmn22

Near miss my hole.

A miss is as good as a mile.

orourkeda1977

It would have been way better if they had crashed.

seamus

So, not a near miss at all. Dublinlive is the web version of the Adrian Kennedy phoneshow.

Auguste Comte

Near miss? That wasn't even a near hit.

Mrcaramelchoc

orourkeda1977 wrote: »

It would have been way better if they had crashed.

And you were the one on it filming.how way better would that be.

1874

Closer than Ive seen any 2 aircraft as a passenger, I thought seperation was supposed to be 1000 ft vertically and measured in nautical miles horizontally either 3 or 5,
That distance is not measured in 1000's of feet or nautical miles for sure

Greentree_uk

this is news?

Boom_Bap

Jaden

Apparently it is for some. A blurry picture, taken by a nervous flyer, of some possible, maybe near encounter of another aircraft while flying, that no-on else on board noticed. Actual distance can be determined from the pic? Not a hope, but as sure it "looks" close.

"These are small, those are far away."

Literally everything wrong with modern society in a single article.

kneemos

1874 wrote: »

Closer than Ive seen any 2 aircraft as a passenger, I thought seperation was supposed to be 1000 ft vertically and measured in nautical miles horizontally either 3 or 5,
That distance is not measured in 1000's of feet or nautical miles for sure

A 1000 ft would be disturbingly close. You could see the pilots waving.

ohnonotgmail

kneemos wrote: »

A 1000 ft would be disturbingly close. You could see the pilots waving.

1000ft vertical separation.

smurfjed

Have any of you heard of TCAS?

kneemos

smurfjed wrote: »

Have any of you heard of TCAS?

Heard about it.

Didn't believe it though.

1874

Yes, I think thats where the 1000ft vertical seperation comes in, not sure about laterally

sjb25

Plenty of room you’d get an artic past that

Del2005

Jaden wrote: »

Apparently it is for some. A blurry picture, taken by a nervous flyer, of some possible, maybe near encounter of another aircraft while flying, that no-on else on board noticed. Actual distance can be determined from the pic? Not a hope, but as sure it "looks" close.

"These are small, those are far away."

Literally everything wrong with modern society in a single article.

And they held the phone wrong. Why do people record in portrait and not landscape

smurfjed

Yes, I think thats where the 1000ft vertical seperation comes in, not sure about laterally

Nope.

Force Carrier

1000 vertical feet.
But in that video the plane wasn't coming vertically. It was Diagonal.
400ft diagonally distant. Perfectly within limits.

JohnnyFlash

Getting into Leopardstown over Christmas. The first two inches were cold by the time I perched my arse on the shïtter.

1874

smurfjed wrote: »

Nope.

Im not saying it isnt time based or whatever, I looked it up and what I found said since TCASII was introduced, minimum vertical seperation was reduced to 1000ft at certain flight levels, you seem to be showing horizontally

Mint Sauce

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXypyrutq_M

pxdf9i5cmoavkz

Near miss = They hit and were "this" close to missing.
Near hit = They missed but were "this" close to hitting.




:pac:

smurfjed

Vertical separation is 1000 feet, we can happily pass aircraft with that separation, even allowing for altimeter errors we can cross them at 800 feet, but TCAS concept is based on closure rates.

kneemos

1874 wrote: »

Im not saying it isnt time based or whatever, I looked it up and what I found said since TCASII was introduced, minimum vertical seperation was reduced to 1000ft at certain flight levels, you seem to be showing horizontally

The London Shard is a thousand feet. Airliners would be practically swapping paint at that distance.

smurfjed

The London Shard is a thousand feet. Airliners would be practically swapping paint at that distance.

We do it all the time, thats the minimum required separation and is the basis for RVSM. (Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum's )

Now these are near misses!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fnZcHvXUX0

GBX

Here is a video of 3 planes at 1000 feet separation ...
37000ft - 38000 feet - 39000 feet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLGSoL7Z02E

:cool:

bear1

It was so close I almost thought I was about to be hit.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Really?? This isn't even a far miss, they were no where near each other.

Avatar MIA

Auguste Comte wrote: »

Near miss? That wasn't even a near hit.

Would you rather be nearly hit or nearly missed? :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

HOW is this a news story? I love spotting other planes when I’m flying. You can see that the other plane is way higher.

LollipopJimmy

seamus wrote: »

So, not a near miss at all. Dublinlive is the web version of the Adrian Kennedy phoneshow.

Which I once described as the After Hours of radio.. :pac:

Force Carrier

HOLLY (DRYLY)
I think you're closer than fifty
yards.

THORNBERG
So is that plane... practically.
Despite herself, she looks out.

HOLLY
Yeah. There's quite a few out there;
we're in a regular traffic jam.

THORNBERG
There's nothing regular about it.

Pherekydes

Force Carrier wrote: »

HOLLY (DRYLY)
I think you're closer than fifty
yards.

THORNBERG
So is that plane... practically.
Despite herself, she looks out.

HOLLY
Yeah. There's quite a few out there;
we're in a regular traffic jam.

THORNBERG
There's nothing regular about it.

I preferred her in Cliffhanger. :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Jays, on Twitter even RTÉ asking yer man if they can use the video.

Wheety

Looks cool.

Flying home from Vienna in December was the first time I saw another plane whilst flying. Was a good bit below us but it's good for seeing the speed we were travelling at. Very hard to judge when all you can see is cloud.

endacl

seamus wrote: »

So, not a near miss at all. Dublinlive is the web version of the Adrian Kennedy phoneshow.

I got as far as “nerve-wrecking” and gave up. The Journal wouldn’t have them sweeping the floor.

Force Carrier

endacl wrote: »

I got as far as “nerve-wrecking” and gave up. The Journal wouldn’t have them sweeping the floor.

Nerve wrecking is a symptom of Hansen's Disease. They should have that looked at.