Video of two parallel jumbo jets landing at exactly the same time


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Um, neither of those aircraft is a jumbo jet. Just saying. Cool though.


#3

Please tell me you mean “cameras” not “cannons”


#4

Probably not. It’s used for low visibility landings.


#5

Came to post the exact same thing.

Though it did get me thinking, what is the official definition of Jumbo jet. I’ve always thought it to be the 747 or larger (like the A380), but is there an official threshold?


#6

I think it’s mostly just good ATC getting them lined up initially and then the autothrottles pegging the published approach speed in both aircraft. At a guess ATC aim to have them land roughly at the same time to avoid wake turbulence from one aircraft interfering with the other and it just so happened that these ones touched down at exactly the same time.


#7

I think only the B747 is referred to as the Jumbo Jet. The A380 is sometimes referred to as a Superjumbo.


#8

Not to put too fine a point on it, and no, I do not care what current nomenclature is, a Jumbo jet is a 747.

Source - Life long Seattleite


#9

Yes, was thinking same thing…yikes!!


#10

Yeah there are wide bodies with two aisles between the seats (767, 777, DC-10, L-1011 (for those children of the 1970s among us)), and Jumbos (747):

Also – both of those airplanes are 737s, so it’s no small wonder the flight profiles are nearly identical.


#11

The one filming is a 737 (can tell by the split winglets) and the other one is a 757. Both are narrow-body. Definition of jumbo can be broadly defined as wide body (or ‘heavy’ in airline parlance) in which case 747,767,777,787, A330,A340,A380 all apply.

This is pretty common for SFO approaches as these runways are parallel with the same landing speeds at 120-140 knots (typically). Just coincidence that the two planes happened to turn into the final at exactly the same time.

Edit: looking closer the other plane is also 737. Had to look closer at the tail shape.


#12

NOBODY’S UPSET THAT SOMEONE WAS FILMING DURING A LANDING! THEY DIDN’T TURN OFF THEIR ELECTRONICS!!! EVERYONE COULD HAVE DIED!!!

Are we prevented from posting in all caps?


#13

YES!

 


#14

NO!


#15

didn’t seem in synch to me. the one on the left landed a tad later.


#16

One of the problems with being old is that things like this start to seem ordinary. I’ve seen this exact thing happen more than once at SFO, and also at LAX. It was pretty exciting the first time. Sorry for being a buzzkill… :slight_smile:


#17

:rotating_light:

…YES!

…NO!

:rotating_light:


Let’s stay in the spirit of the thread, here, people.


#18

Yep, as a near lifelong Bay Area resident, I’ve seen this plenty, mostly from the ground, though. Still, pretty cool.

Welcome to San Francisco, the current time is ten twenty five AM. Please gather your belongings…


#19

Beschizza, you magnificent bastard! This would be SUCH a great short film. The ringing of the peg legs on the aluminum deck! The piratical whine of the little air nozzles! The taut commands as the captain of the fat, rich East India 747 orders the cabin attendants to cross-check and prepare to repel boarders!

LOCK YER TRAY TABLES, YE LUBBERLY COACH CATTLE


#20

“Heavy” generally refers to wide bodies, but there are some narrowbody planes that get the moniker. There were 707s and DC-8s that were heavy, and the 757 is handled as a heavy plane. The A300 “didn’t” get the heavy moniker even though it was a widebody, because it was light. Concorde had its own special designation for wake turbulence.