PDA

View Full Version : Whoa! Near miss!



JesseJames
Sep 5, 2004, 12:50 PM
Nah, it's most likely an effect of the telephoto lens compressing distance.

Still pretty wild photo.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=652327&TopOfYest=yes

Here's another one.

First Officer: "Uh Captain? Maybe you had one too many at the sky-bar?"

link (http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=149179&WxsIERv=Qm9laW5nIDc0Ny00SDY%3D&WdsYXMg=TWFsYXlzaWEgQWlybGluZXM%3D&QtODMg=SG9uZyBLb25nIC0gS2FpIFRhayBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsIChIS0cgLyBWSEhIKSAoY2xvc2VkKQ%3D%3D&ERDLTkt=Q2hpbmEgLSBIb25nIEtvbmc%3D&ktODMp=SnVuZSAyMCwgMTk5OA%3D%3D&BP=0&WNEb25u=RGFyeWwgQ2hhcG1hbg%3D%3D&xsIERvdWdsY=OU0tTVBL&MgTUQtODMgKE=T29vcHMuIEFub3RoZXIgZW5naW5lIFN0cmlrZSEhICg8YSBocmVmPSIvc2VhcmNoL3Bob3RvLnNlYXJjaD9pZD0 xNDkxODAsMTQ5MTc5Ij5QaG90byAyIG9mIDI8L2E%2BKQ%3D%3D&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=MzY1OTA3&NEb25uZWxs=MjAwMS0wMy0xNg%3D%3D&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes&size=M)

This website is AWESOME man. A feast for the aviation buff. God I love the internet.


stoid
Sep 5, 2004, 01:02 PM
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's just a telephoto lens. The larger craft is far larger than it looks in that picture. Look at the cockpit sizes, I'm almost certain that both planes should have cockpit windows very close to the same size. However, in this image the Lufthansa jet has a noticeably smaller cockpit.

Still though, they are rather close, maybe even closer than they should be. I'm certain that passengers on each vessel could see the other plane, and in all my flying experience, that has never happened.
Doctor Q
Sep 5, 2004, 01:43 PM
Naw, it's just the newest sport: tandem piloting.
bubbamac
Sep 5, 2004, 01:44 PM
The runways at SFO are very close - this is not an unusual approach there - except for the size of the aircraft.
Royal Pineapple
Sep 5, 2004, 01:47 PM
Wouldn't that be a near hit?
a collision would be a near miss.

*CRASH* Look, they nearly missed
cslewis
Sep 5, 2004, 02:14 PM
Wow, that must suck to be in one of the planes, not sure if you will collide with another plane in mid-air moving at hundreds of MPH.
JesseJames
Sep 5, 2004, 02:29 PM
Wouldn't that be a near hit?
a collision would be a near miss.

*CRASH* Look, they nearly missed

Figure of speech. Don't want to get into semantics. ;)
Daveman Deluxe
Sep 5, 2004, 03:14 PM
These issues of perspective have nothing to do with the focal length of the lens. The airplanes would appear the same distance from each other whether the photo was taken with a 50mm lens or a 1200mm lens. It has to do with the distance from the lens to the subject, not the focal length of the lens--it's just that at great distances, people tend to use longer lenses.
wordmunger
Sep 5, 2004, 03:34 PM
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's just a telephoto lens. The larger craft is far larger than it looks in that picture. Look at the cockpit sizes, I'm almost certain that both planes should have cockpit windows very close to the same size. However, in this image the Lufthansa jet has a noticeably smaller cockpit.

I think you're right. Also, if it really was a "near miss" the wing of the Lufthansa jet would be poking through the American jet, not completely behind it, as it appears in the picture.

Daveman Deluxe--technically, you're right, but the point is, the photographer must have been at a great distance from the planes, and thus would have had to use a very high-powered lens.
OutThere
Sep 5, 2004, 04:34 PM
It's most definitely "Synchronized Flying", proposed for the 2008 olympics.
MongoTheGeek
Sep 5, 2004, 06:10 PM
it's just that at great distances, people tend to use longer lenses.

I once someone use a 1' lens to try and take a picture of a leopard 3' away.
Abstract
Sep 5, 2004, 08:37 PM
So these guys are a distance apart, but the lens makes them appear closer? What?

Anyway, I always thought that if 2 planes touched, both planes would probably fall apart on contact as they're both going so fast and carrying a lot of energy and momentum. And its not like they're using super thick sheets of metal on the outside, you know?
Daveman Deluxe
Sep 5, 2004, 08:58 PM
I once someone use a 1' lens to try and take a picture of a leopard 3' away.

I said "tend to". I've done similar things with long lenses at short distances.
comictimes
Sep 5, 2004, 08:59 PM
looking at the cockpit window sizes, yeah, they're definitely further from each other than they appear, but it seems that they're still pretty close! at least closer than they should be....
OutThere
Sep 5, 2004, 09:05 PM
I once someone use a 1' lens to try and take a picture of a leopard 3' away.

I've used a lens that was 10 inches long (physical size) to take a picture of a flower that was like a foot away. The lens had a macro feature so that I could get really really close in.
wdlove
Sep 5, 2004, 09:07 PM
It looks just like one of those great shots of perspective. Makes for a great discussion. It could also be a photoshop job.
MrMacMan
Sep 5, 2004, 09:34 PM
It looks just like one of those great shots of perspective. Makes for a great discussion. It could also be a photoshop job.

Nah, that is quite legit.

And they are infact very close to eachother.
Mr. Anderson
Sep 5, 2004, 09:53 PM
They are relatively close - but it is a case of a telephoto lens and position. Also, if you notice, the 747's wing is behind the other plane....so they're not right on top of each other.

D
bubbamac
Sep 5, 2004, 10:45 PM
OK, more information. The runways at SFO that these guys are using are about 500' apart (don't have access to better info at this time) so that's probably about how far apart the airplanes are.

Keep in mind that the 747 has a wingspan in excess of 200' - and the 757 in the foreground isn't a small airplane when there's not a 747 sitting next to it.

The arrivals to these runways include a fairly gradual narrowing of the approaches - the 747 is the one that was "moving closer," the 757 is the one that stays on the runway centerline.

I've been inside the airplane doing this once, it's pretty cool, actually. It's very stable (nobody's doing any wild turns), and well talked about/briefed way before it's flown, because it is unusual. Quite safe.
MongoTheGeek
Sep 6, 2004, 07:27 AM
I said "tend to". I've done similar things with long lenses at short distances.

The guy had his window down and was scanning the horizon for a leopard we pointed towards. He didn't realize it was in the ditch next to the road...

:)

Never seen a window go up that fast before or since.
G5orbust
Sep 6, 2004, 02:15 PM
Whoa... crazy man! That takes some skilled piloting. Thank God they dont let our pilots fly drunk!
wdlove
Sep 6, 2004, 02:33 PM
Whoa... crazy man! That takes some skilled piloting. Thank God they dont let our pilots fly drunk!

It is very possible that they were Air Force trained pilots. That they learned on a jet fighter. In that type of flying they need to learn precision in formation. Still an amazing shot by the photographer. That would definitely get pilots excited. Though it may not be so comforting to the general flying public. :D
homerjward
Sep 6, 2004, 03:47 PM
I once someone use a 1' lens to try and take a picture of a leopard 3' away.
that guy's crazy. not cause of the lens but cause of the leopard 3' away lol
MongoTheGeek
Sep 7, 2004, 08:29 AM
that guy's crazy. not cause of the lens but cause of the leopard 3' away lol

The guy didn't realize it was 3' away. We were sitting on the far side of the road from it after watching the thing cross. A car came from the other direction and sat right next to the leopard. They rolled down a window asked what we looking at and we said leopard and point. Down went then window out came the camera. He was scanning the horizon and worked his way down to see it right there. Close enough to pet. (Not that anyone was stupid enough to want to