this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
359 points (96.1% liked)
Mildly Interesting
17436 readers
68 users here now
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is this standard procedure or an emergency situation?
OMG I wasn't expecting this much answers! Thank you all ๐
SOP (like 99% sure). Many airports have parallel runways with more than enough clearance for two simultaneous landings. I have been a passenger in this scenario at least four times that I can think of, and I don't fly that much. I think those were in Denver, SFO and LAX. I don't recall there being any situation that would be considered an emergency on any of those.
Yeah, this is SFO and these runways are 750 ft / 230 m apart. Definitely not a lot of room for error, but the telephoto zoom makes this look a lot closer than it really is
The runways are likely pretty far apart. Telephoto lenses compress depth and make objects appear closer to each other. It's why telephoto lenses are used for portraits to make facial features look more attractive and with slightly less depth.
Well you use 50 mm (in the old system) because that was considered the "correct" perspective. Less would give you the fisheye lense distortion.
Gotta love the nifty fifty.
50 on a 35 with some 800 in the back... โค๏ธโค๏ธโค๏ธ
Looks like San Francisco. There are two main runways there, this is common. I think it's just time and chance to land at the same exact moment like this.
SFO was my first thought too. It's usually not quite this well timed in my experience; this is still a cool shot to catch.
So the Alaska is a e175 which is about 70 people vs the United which is about 170 people. It looks close because of the angle and some camera tricks. Landing on parallel runways happens all the time.
They are called Precission radar monitoring approaches and they start doing them when things get super congested. Requires us to listen to another radio so atc can tell us to break-out if someone crosses the no go zone in between the runways.
I've done this (sitting in a passenger seat), it's normal. This video is a bit of an optical illusion, the planes are nowhere near as close as they look.
There are certain airports where it's standard procedure.
Landing an airplane from a passenger seat takes mad skill! Respect!
Likely just an issue with the perspective of the video, I bet these planes have plenty distance between them if you were to see them from the front
It looks dangerously close due to the camera lens.
In reality it wasn't.
Captain Joe has a good video on PRM and SOIA approaches.
Not necessarily standard, but not likely an emergency. Loads of places have the setup required for parallel landings / takeoffs, it's just usually more efficient to have them alternating
Here's a list of the places that have parallel runways (bottom of the page)
My thoughts too. I figured that the FAA would prevent this from happening for any reason except emergencies
Edit: c'mon folks, I'm not asserting that this is an emergency or that this is against regulations. I thought it was, but if this is a normal landing then it's simply a surprise to me that it happens.
That has to be an emergency. I can't see how any pilot would risk it unless they had to.
The runways are probably 300 m apart.
Ah, so it's perspective trickery. Still scary AF to watch.