Has anyone read this item on the BBC news?

Planes 'seen in close encounter'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660644.stm

To quote the article:"If there had been any incident of them being close together, there are all sorts of systems which would have gone off, both in the plane itself and at air traffic control - but there wasn't any report of an incident."

The spokesman said there was no question that either aircraft had strayed from its proper path, which should mean there was a distance of some two and a half miles between them.

Now look at this picture:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/06/uk_enl_1138567284/img/1.jpg

Do they look 2 and a half miles apart to you?

Obviously they where not, so why the blind faith in the technology which should have warned the planes and air traffic control!

computer says noooooo

Just been looking at the picture. The camera angle is probably very deceptive; if the planes were really as close as that picture makes them out to be, surely a crash would have been virtually inevitable, given the speed?

My estimation is that the two aircraft are indeed a considerable distance apart. And the fact that the photo appears to show them on top of one another is purely an optical illusion.
If you look at the patterns of shadow on the bottom of both planes, they look as if they were taken on different days, they are so different that either the photo has been doctored to look like that or the 2 aircraft are a considerable distance apart.

The spokesman made out that the automated controls only sound if the planes come within 2 and a half miles of each other and as none had gone off, the planes must have been that far apart. But by looking at the picture, there is no way the planes are that far apart!

If you look at the patterns of shadow on the bottom of both planes, they look as if they were taken on different days, they are so different that either the photo has been doctored to look like that or the 2 aircraft are a considerable distance apart.

It does look like the planes were pictured on different days, but the picture still looks very scary.

Both planes did land on the same day around the same time though, so the different day theory is a none starter, plus doctored images are very quickly shown up these days!

I don’t think the planes are as close as they look, its an optical illusion but they are also not 2 and a half miles apart are they?

...I don’t think the planes are as close as they look, its an optical illusion but they are also not 2 and a half miles apart are they?
I don't know, but what I do know is that it's impossible to tell from that photograph.

lol .. do you know how big the plane in the background would have to be to be 2 and a half miles away form the one in the foreground?

This reminds me of that father Ted sketch where he is trying to teach father Dougle how the toy cow is small and the cow out the window is far away.

I have sent the photo to aviation experts (plane spotters!) who will be able to identify both models of aircraft and give the dimentions, so it will be relitavely easy for anyone to estimate their seperation by the application of some easy trigonometry.

Will keep you posted..

I was thinking of the same ....

I’m no plane spotter, but have been on a few in my time and they look like (or equivalent sizes of) a 757, length 47.32m and a 737 length 31.01m. Going by shape etc, but like I say im no expert.

So if you measure the planes you should be able to disseminate the distance between the two planes.

lol .. do you know how big the plane in the background would have to be to be 2 and a half miles away form the one in the foreground?

This reminds me of that father Ted sketch where he is trying to teach father Dougle how the toy cow is small and the cow out the window is far away.
No, I mean it's impossible to tell because such a photograph could have been manipulated in some way, plus it's clearly also subject to the effects of optical illusion.

Also, if the planes were really as close as that photo makes them appear, surely the wake produced by the plane in front would be causing some serious turbulence, such that the other plane would have difficulty staying in the air?

There's a discussion of this here:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=208698

This is an aviation forum (sorry Mods - I know it's another forum, but it seems relevant)

The pilots discussing it here don't seem too concerned - they seem to think it's an optical illusion due to the photo being taken by a sports photographer with a huge telephoto lens

The article on the Beeb states :

The photographer who captured the image told the Sunday Mirror he started taking photos after seeing the planes apparently coming together "on a collision course".
So why do we not see any other pictures as there must have been several? Surely this would have given a better indication of the proximity of the aircraft to each other?

The photographer would have had to have been extremely lucky to get such a dramatic looking shot from simply pointing and shooting with a camera he/she likely took along to a football match!

Edit: Just read the post above and it seems that this could have been taken by a reporter with equipment more than capable of such shots ... but even so...

Just to add, if you look at this (http://www.proarena.com/p/modules/MOD_GALLERY/pictures/mod/pic28569.jpg) photo you can see another of these optical illusions - the planes in question were at least 750 feet apart, probably much more...

Who is Miss Coverup?

Can she please step forward...............

............mind you if she's near Heathrow 'appen she'll not be on't Forum.

Aircraft do not have to be seperated by 2.5nm, they can also be seperated by 1000ft vertically instead. If you are put into the hold, you would be flying round with aircraft that may be directly above or below you by 1000ft. It is quite easy to make such a photo as you just look outside on a clear day and watch for two aircraft that appear to cross each others path. One might me at 35,000 ft and the other at 37,0000 ft but they will appear from the ground to pass over each other. If you have a powerful lens, you can take a photo where they appear to almost touch. There is no real chance of a consiracy in these circumstances either, because this involved two foriegn airlines as well as ATC. If they did get so close that they almost touched it would not only be well known to both ailines but also to other aircraft on frequency, and even to spotters who listen in. The idea that they would manage to cover up something so close is a joke. Real "near misses" are rarely so close as this photo appears.

This whole story seems to be one made up by one of the sunday papers. Based upon the foreshortening effect of a large telephoto camera lens. Of the type used at sports events and papparazzi. These lenses distort perspective and can show two subjects a considerable distance apart both in sharp focus at the same time.

The Larger Japan airways plane has a 30% larger wingspan than the smaller DHL plane and thus they do appear to be 1000 ft apart which is where they should be.

The Pilots on PPrune seem to be extremely angry about these stories, as it creates unwarranted panic among the public. As usual journalists seem to be lacking in any technical thought at all.

This same foreshortening effect is the reason why people think that Rod Sewart is a short man. He isn't he's fairly tall. But over the years he's been on so many tabloid pages in shots taken through telephoto lenses which distorted the perspective and make him seem smaller.

The Pilots on PPrune seem to be extremely angry about these stories, .

The people (sometimes pilots) on PPrune are often angry about many things.