Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Account Questions:
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/01/08
Furthermore, 747 weights like 400 tons and flies 900 km/h so inertia should keep both planes from suddenly turning left or right.
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
my dad is a pilot for 747's (though he flies cargo) and a couple weeks ago the electronics on his plane all died too. He had to fly "blind" and landed the plane without any instruments. Little bit of a coincidence that this happened for two 747's now....
10/29/08
[en.wikipedia.org]
Reduced Vertical Separation Minima or Minimum (RVSM) is an aviation term used to describe the reduction of the standard vertical separation required between aircraft flying at levels between FL290 (29,000 ft.) and FL410 (41,000 ft.) from 2,000 feet to 1,000 feet...
This has been in effect since 2005 in the USA.
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
If the wx forecast for their route was for convective activity, I am sure they would have diverted, but it wasn't so they continued, making use of their other resources.
Flying close to another aircraft is nothing new or dangerous either. I am sure they had plenty of vertical and/or lateral separation, especially if they were in contact, as they usually are. (on 123.45 MHz)
I have crossed the Atlantic and the Pacific (to Hawaii) many many times with airliners within 1,000 feet of me. Same thing happens every day in US airspace.
"Flying Blind" = Just another case of the press having no idea what they are talking about. This is a complete non story.
10/29/08
Everyone freaks out when something .01% suspicious happens with anything to do with aviation any more. "OHMYGOD! We totally flew within the same STATE as another plane on our way to Cali. I think a terrorist was involved but they wouldn't tell me anything!"
Guess what people? Flying is a whole shitton less dangerous than most of any other form of transportation. A few thousand meters is plenty enough room between commercial aircraft. And the fact they were at different altitudes and that it was instructed makes it a whole lot less dangerous.
Now, bring them where they're wingtip to wingtip, and I'll start listening to this unintelligent, uninformed complaining.
The general population has zero, and I mean zero, clue what is going on here, or anywhere else in aviation, for that matter. So just sit back, shut up, and be glad that the experts aren't as stupid as you.
10/29/08
1) Yes, a plane can swing over fairly quickly when subject to a decent amount of bank.
You are neglecting to factor in the many thousands of hours of experience that the captains of those planes have. These are people that can hand fly their planes as accurately as the autopilot systems installed on their planes. It's not realistic to think that the captain in front would swing the plane erratically and without prior notice to the other plane.
2) Even if the planes were at the same altitude and the one in front (and more than a kilometer to the side) could swing the plane over at minimum turning radius and even reduce throttle and there would be minimal chance of the planes colliding. Add the fact that the following pilot can track every move of the plane ahead, and the risk of an incursion is minimal.
3) Wake turbulence is not dangerous from that distance. To be affected by the phenomenon, you would have to be flying on the same path and below the plane in front.
4) More about time. Planes do not come to abrupt halts when they have problems. Both of them were flying at the same speed. Even if the engines of the plane ahead went out, it would still have plenty of momentum to keep the plane decelerating at a structurally sound rate. If the plane could keep altitude at that rate, the following plane would still have minutes to react, not a few seconds.
10/29/08
Also, on the subject of gadget interference, I own my a brand new Cessna Caravan and pilot it while listening to music and taking calls (when I'm low enough) using the bluetooth connection in my headset. Now if bluetooth, a cellular call and music can't interfere with the avionics in a 2 million dollar airplane which I'm sitting next to them (which, by the way are very very similar to what these airliners have) there is no way your cell, laptop, mouse, iPod can even dream of interfering with the instruments in an Airbus.