I didn't think aircraft were allowed to get this close?

[Urban Sports]

Doesn't seem dangerous I just didn't think they would be allowed to get as close as these 2 do?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1JXE4sDHJI&fea...

[davepoth]

SFO has 4 runways. They're arranged like this:



Which means that the planes will be within 750ft on approach.

[Eric Mc]

And the Airbus wins by a short head.

That was quite cool - I think

[anonymous-user]

I assume both were locked on to Autoland at the same point, hence they just track each other down?? And if so, lovely flair by the MD-80, perfect ! (give the software guys a bonus ;-)

[xr287]

That was very very cool

[pacman1]

Now this is a close call!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

[JB!]

pacman1 said:

Now this is a close call!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

"we have smirnoff"

[anonymous-user]

Max_Torque said:

I assume both were locked on to Autoland at the same point, hence they just track each other down?? And if so, lovely flair by the MD-80, perfect ! (give the software guys a bonus ;-)

What are you talking about?

Why would they be doing autolands the weather is gin clear?

You only do an autoland in Fog or very low visibility.

[AlexC1981]

pacman1 said:

Now this is a close call!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

Looks like a big fat duck taking off

[pacman1]

I guess they paid the airport tax to use the runway and decided to get their money's worth. Every tarmac'd inch of it!
The tower guys were great.

[pacman1]

davepoth said:

SFO has 4 runways. They're arranged like this:



Which means that the planes will be within 750ft on approach.

Unusual, they're not expecting too many crosswinds then..

[R1 Loon]

Blimey, that was really scary, it reminded of a time when I was on the motorway with another car to my right no more than 10 feet away. Now that was a close call

There's a parallel take off on the suggested clips , so it looks like it's an every day occurrance

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cId1lDPJK0Y&fea...

[Fossilface]

In flight I think they have to be at least 1000ft in altutude and 1 mile horizontal seperation or something like that.
It's inevitable that at an airport the are going to get closer.
It isn't exactly Red Arrows close though is it.

[Smiler.]

pacman1 said:

Now this is a close call!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

Excellent, do you know where that was filmed?

[mattdaniels]

pacman1 said:

Unusual, they're not expecting too many crosswinds then..

Not quite sure what you mean. It's precisely because of crosswinds that the pairs of runways are at 90 degrees to each other.

[FuzzyLogic]

davepoth said:

SFO has 4 runways. They're arranged like this:



Which means that the planes will be within 750ft on approach.

View from above SFO:

[Simpo Two]

mattdaniels said:

pacman1 said:

Unusual, they're not expecting too many crosswinds then..

Not quite sure what you mean. It's precisely because of crosswinds that the pairs of runways are at 90 degrees to each other.

I think he meant that one plane might be blown into the other - but a crosswind would affect both.

[mattdaniels]

Simpo Two said:

mattdaniels said:

pacman1 said:

Unusual, they're not expecting too many crosswinds then..

Not quite sure what you mean. It's precisely because of crosswinds that the pairs of runways are at 90 degrees to each other.

I think he meant that one plane might be blown into the other - but a crosswind would affect both.

I'm not a commercial pilot, but I'd venture to suggest that if the crosswind component was sporting enough, the aircraft might not actually be landing side by side in formation. Just a thought.

[pacman1]

Smiler. said:

pacman1 said:

Now this is a close call!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM

Excellent, do you know where that was filmed?

One of the 'toob comments suggests Canberra.

Edited by pacman1 on Saturday 12th March 19:31

[pacman1]

mattdaniels said:

pacman1 said:

Unusual, they're not expecting too many crosswinds then..

Not quite sure what you mean. It's precisely because of crosswinds that the pairs of runways are at 90 degrees to each other.

Given crosswind's erratic nature and gusting, wind sheer etc, using the runways parallel to eachother in anything other than fairly good wind conditions seems like madness, even if they are hundreds of meters apart. In bad conditions I'd have thought one runway would be the safest operation that could be hoped for.

Depending on the local weather conditions, surely that parallel runway layout would only see the benefits of increased traffic in relatively good weather?

Edited by pacman1 on Saturday 12th March 19:43