1

At night, I look at the planes in the sky and count them. I can normally spot between 2-5 planes, never more.

As the visible sky is always a constant area and there are security distances and aerial ways, is it possible to use a formula/approximation to determine the maximum number of visible planes in the sky?

Assume horizon to horizon visibility.

EDIT - Note to all those who spent some time for me

I didn't imagine this question would be such broad... this was just a though I had last night in my garden.

So, I have no idea how to be more precise... I learned some things of your comments, I am now reading some articles to learn what all that means (new words, moreover in English), and I will enrich the question some further day.

Thanks to all !

Benj
  • 111
  • 4
  • 2
    This actually depends a lot on which airspace you are looking at, since separation minima vary with a number of factors (procedural/surveillance airspace, controlled/uncontrolled airspace, PSR/SSR equipment, precision of surveillance equipment, wake turbulence minima, RVSM/VSM, ... the list goes on). Try specifying the exact area, and if possible please specify how large an area you are able to visually observe. Even with these details, an answer would be purely theoretical (and probably much larger than you might think) – 60levelchange Sep 26 '16 at 14:42
  • 1
    I think the tag [tag:separation] would be what you want since the maximum number of airplanes is primarily restricted by aircraft separation regulations. – SMS von der Tann Sep 26 '16 at 14:43
  • 3
    The airspace around London is one of the busiest airspaces in the world, but there is still physically room for many, many more planes. Feel free to start counting for yourself: https://www.flightradar24.com/51.64,-0.22/8 – 60levelchange Sep 26 '16 at 14:48
  • 4
    With usually dozens of available Flight Levels (outside mountainous terrain), you can have far more than 5 planes right above you - let alone in the visible sky. There are 3 main dimensions of separation: vertical (flight levels), lateral and longitudinal. But with planes flying in different directions at different speeds, the separation limits do not practically convert to a maximum plane density. – MSalters Sep 26 '16 at 14:50
  • 1
    @J.Hougaard Oshkosh has been known to have a few airplanes, too – Dan Pichelman Sep 26 '16 at 15:42
  • 3
    When pilots fly in formation, well... – kevin Sep 26 '16 at 15:51
  • 2
    To approximate the maximum amount of aircraft flying overhead (barring special flights), you have to take the volume of the sky that you can see and divide that by the minimum separation distances between aircraft. – SMS von der Tann Sep 26 '16 at 16:05
  • 2
    Go to Atlanta. You'll see a lot more than 2-5 planes. :) I enjoy flying over the Atlanta airport at high altitude at night and watching the huge swirls of traffic on approach to the various runways (they usually have 3 runways doing arrivals and 2 doing departures.) – reirab Sep 26 '16 at 16:40
  • 1
    @SMSvonderTann Minimum separation can become quite small in formation, though. :) As far as how many airplanes were ever visible at once (from a near-sea-level position on the ground, rather than, say, the ISS,) I'm guessing some of the bombing runs over Japan or perhaps Germany in WWII probably win. By 1945, a single bombing run over Japan could have several hundred B-29s accompanied by hundreds more P-51s. The USA built almost 4,000 B-29s and over 15,000 P-51s (in addition to 12,700+ B-17s.) But these numbers would still be very far from a theoretical maximum. – reirab Sep 26 '16 at 16:53
  • 1
    As the visible sky is always a constant area what if you're in a valley or on the top of a mountain? – egid Sep 26 '16 at 17:21
  • 1
    Duplicate to http://aviation.stackexchange.com/q/11748/572 possibly... – SentryRaven Sep 27 '16 at 06:42
  • @SentryRaven my question is not intended to be seen in a controller point of view but from a single noob as me in his garden ;) – Benj Sep 27 '16 at 21:44
  • @egid The question is, as it has been tagged, too broad to get this parameter. I assume I'm in my garden, in a more-or-less flat terrain. – Benj Sep 27 '16 at 21:46
  • @Benj Okay, just thought this might help you get more info :) – SentryRaven Sep 28 '16 at 06:25
  • @SentryRaven sure, I learned a lot of things reading the post you linked to :) Thanks – Benj Sep 28 '16 at 07:33

0 Answers0