It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
You do have red lights, but whether they were switched on or not? In any case when you cross an active runway, you always look to see if any aircraft is on the final approach for landing.
originally posted by: intrptr
Dude must have ran a red light.
You mean they don't have those on runways?
originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: Nochzwei
Whoa, the pilot on the plane that diverted a disaster deserves a high five from all his passengers and a few drinks at the airport bar! He saved a plane load of lives!
You do have red lights, but whether they were switched on or not? In any case when you cross an active runway, you always look to see if any aircraft is on the final approach for landing.
Of course, the decision to land or go around is entirely the crew's decision, i would have landed.
originally posted by: [post=18116591]Ivar_Karlsen
Changed perception of distances due to use of telephoto lens.
The A340 is crossing near the end of that runway while the B767 is crossing the fence, more than 2500 meters away.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Ivar_Karlsen
Of course, the decision to land or go around is entirely the crew's decision, i would have landed.
The hell? You are fired.
As i said the use of telephoto lens and video editing made it look like the two planes were very close, while the distance between them were at least 2500 meters.
originally posted by: [post=18116938]Ivar_Karlsen
On many European airports it is quite normal to land on runways still occupied by departing, crossing or landing airplanes.
One situation i can think of is that the landing 767 hav got a late landing clearance, if that is the case a go around is mandatory below 50 feet (100 in my Company as per SOP)