May 20, 2004 at 6:23 pm
Heard a report from someone earlier on of a near miss at LHR today. A Royal Jordanian A340 was on short finals, whilst a BA 777 was not clear of crossing the runway.
If anyone knows anymore. please post here. 🙂
By: KabirT - 23rd May 2004 at 08:03
yup had the same thing while landing in Delhi on UA 767 from HK.
By: steve rowell - 23rd May 2004 at 06:33
This happened to me at LHR last summer on an Air Canada 333. We were on approach to the northern runway, heading west, and were nearly there when full thrust was applied and we banked right while climbing. Of course, a minute later the pilot comes on and told us it was an aircraft that did not vacate the runway in time that caused the go around. Not exactly the same situation but close.
Exactly the same thing happened to me on an America West A320 while landing in San Francisco
By: RIPConcorde - 23rd May 2004 at 00:38
Think about nearly missing a bus. You only say that when you’ve actually caught it, not if you have actually missed it.
By: slink - 23rd May 2004 at 00:32
I am so glad this has come up. It stinks of the same irony as the CAA printing “Intentionally Blank” on a page in their documents. Shouldn’t that be “Intentionally Printed On”?
As far as a near miss (which, I would tend to agree, means that they collided, but only just), or near hit (they missed, just) is concerned, perhaps that’s why we’re now supposed to refer to them as an Airprox?
Steve.
By: concordesst - 21st May 2004 at 17:37
Never understood why people say a ‘near miss’. It is something of a clique.
If you think about it, it make no sense unless 2 objects collided.
I guess what we should be saying is a near collision! 🙂
No it really is ‘Near Miss’ They missed when they were very near to each other.
I must say it seems a bit close for comfort. Was The BA to to expidite the crossing.
By: ACA345 - 21st May 2004 at 17:08
This happened to me at LHR last summer on an Air Canada 333. We were on approach to the northern runway, heading west, and were nearly there when full thrust was applied and we banked right while climbing. Of course, a minute later the pilot comes on and told us it was an aircraft that did not vacate the runway in time that caused the go around. Not exactly the same situation but close.
By: Mark L - 21st May 2004 at 10:08
Happens pretty frequently really, crossing from T4 to use the North runway is the bane of ATC and pilots life at LHR, sometimes people are slower crossing and quicker landing than expected, have seen this happen once or twice before.
By: wires2 - 21st May 2004 at 09:15
I was driving along the M25 on Wednesday afternoon at about 3.30 and saw an unmarked 737 taking off but on the other runway closest to T4 was a A340 that also appeared to be taking off (couldn’t catch the livery, too far away). This suddenly banked left before reaching the motorway and headed off quite low in a south easterly direction. I presume it was an aborted landing. Wonder if this was the incident in question?
By: RIPConcorde - 20th May 2004 at 21:03
Yeah, what Duxfordhawk said! 😀
By: duxfordhawk - 20th May 2004 at 20:56
RIPConcorde,
You’ve lost me? What’s the bloody difference?
If you nearly to something you don’t do it,Hence i could nearly hit you but miss that would be a near hit,but if i did hit you but ment to miss you yet hit you that would be a near miss,technically you can not nearly miss anything
as it would be a hit.
By: green320 - 20th May 2004 at 20:55
Its just you!! There is no difference, except you think that near collision sounds more dramatic!!(doesn’t in my eyes!)
By: RIPConcorde - 20th May 2004 at 20:53
Is it just me or does ‘near miss’ not suggest somethings that almost avoided each other but still collided? They nearly missed each other.
Whereas ‘near collision’ suggests somethings that almost collided but manged to avoid it? They nearly collided.
:confused: 😉
By: T5 - 20th May 2004 at 20:43
RIPConcorde,
You’ve lost me? What’s the bloody difference?
By: RIPConcorde - 20th May 2004 at 18:42
Never understood why people say a ‘near miss’. It is something of a clique.
If you think about it, it make no sense unless 2 objects collided.
I guess what we should be saying is a near collision! 🙂