come to think of it, why on earth do people start threads based on Newspaper stories? ..... if a subject/story doesn't come from a reliable Aviation source, why waste the valuable resources of pprune, going through Newspaper reports that no one seems to want to read or hear about, let alone believe ???
Probably because the newspapers alerted us to a story which nobody else on PPrune had seen. How the papers report the story is up to them.
What is more important is that a professional ATCO, or crew or both reported a situation where they felt the safety of their aircraft was compromised and a possible collision risk had occurred. (From lost grey cells I think that is the definition of an Airprox. )
Interesting to see comment here that
“the minimum horizontal separation was 3 miles, then there is no airprox.” Yes there was. It was filed with the CAA.
Also interesting to see that the NATS press neddy reports that
The National Air Traffic Services (Nats), which provides air traffic control for the UK, said in a statement that the safety of both aircraft was not "compromised" during the incident.
So why did someone file an airprox ?
Perhaps a more realistic approach is from the CAA who say
"These details are subject to assessment by the independent UK Airprox Board. The board will decide on the seriousness of the incident and report later in the year. "
In the meantime thanks to the various news organisations who brought this to our attention.
