LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

You decide:


Looks to me like it could be a hoax picture.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/picture_gallery/picture_gallery/0,,70141-1210748-1,00.html

Would www.snopes.com pick up on this?

I'll go with a fake.

It's a little bit grainy to tell, but it looks like the underwing shadows are going in slightly different directions. I don't know what they are, but whatever all of those ridges are (the things smaller than engines), they're casting shadows on the underwing in different directions.

Also, if two jets get that significantly close, there's an issue with jetwash, like in Top Gun. It just seems to close, and considering someone took a picture at that moment... too many things don't add up.

gotta be a hoax

Here is the entry on Snopes.com:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/closedhl.asp

Doesn't say it's 100% fake yet.

my take is that if it is a real picture, the white plane is much larger and further away. they might be separated by hundreds of feet or more, just due to size difference, seem like they're about to start their own mile high club. or somebody just photoshopped it.

Bingo. This was on airliners.net already.

UofMLaxGoalie11 wrote:my take is that if it is a real picture, the white plane is much larger and further away. they might be separated by hundreds or feet or more, just due to size difference, seem like they're about to start their own mile high club. or somebody just photoshopped it.

Ahh... good point.

UofMLaxGoalie11 wrote:my take is that if it is a real picture, the white plane is much larger and further away. they might be separated by hundreds or feet or more, just due to size difference, seem like they're about to start their own mile high club. or somebody just photoshopped it.

Ahh... good point.

also, now that I looked at it again, the logos are very different. The one on the white plane is fairly small in comparison to the total fuselage, while the other one reaches almost all the way back to the wing. Thereby only adding to my previous hypothesis. Yes im trying to get into a science field, why do you ask?

C'mon Dan,

You think the proportion (logo:fuselage) changes over distance?

So by extension, when you're in goal, the opponents long sticks don't go higher than the players waists while your teams defenders have what appear to be normal length defense sticks even though they all bought them at the same store before the game.

The property of perspective (the appearance to the eye of objects in respect to their relative distance and positions) will shrink all objects over distance.

Two different logos.

I'm pretty sure that you guys are saying exactly the same thing. I guess when you're stuck in that goal watching the game you build up a lot of angst.

I think you're both right, contrary to my previous beliefs.

I think we are both arguing for the same thing, but ill try to clarify my point. just cause it made sense in my head doesnt mean it will in others. my thinking is that they want the logo to be of fair size. on the white plane, the logo might be the same size or bigger, but since the plane is much larger, it takes up less space on the fuselage. on the other one, the logo must take up much more of the plane in order to increase the size of the logo so it is clearly visable from a distance. so I would think that the logos are possibly the same size, or the logo on the white plane is bigger. so the white plane would be bigger, meaning in order for them to look like the same size, it would have to be further away. making the near miss completely bogus. I hope that cleared it up.

oh and thanks for introducing me to snopes. I spent lots of time there last night rather than studying for a physics test. Or doing other homework due today. which i must get back to now.