Calculating the time at which 2 airplanes will be a specific distance apart from each other.











up vote
0
down vote

favorite
1














I am trying to find the time at which 2 airplanes could potentially collide with each other. When I say collide, I mean the circular region around an airplane overlaps with the circular region around another airplane. The circular regions all have the same radius. Assuming that all airplanes follow a straight path, I wanted to find the time at which the airplanes start colliding.

I have been thinking of different ways of approaching the problem:




  • Assuming the positions of an arbitrary plane A and plane B after time t were:


$$begin{pmatrix} a \ b end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} c \ d end{pmatrix} t$$
$$begin{pmatrix} x \ y end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} u \ v end{pmatrix} t$$
respectively, then the euclidean distance must be:
$$sqrt {(a + ct - x - ut)^2 + (b + dt - y - vt)^2} ge 2r$$
where r is the radius of the region around the 2 airplanes. After that, when both sides are squared and rearranged, I would end up with a quadratic equation which will give me 2 values of t(using the quadratic formula).




  • The second method was to take the Euclidean distance and differentiate it with respect to t and equate that equation to zero to find the minimum distance between the 2 airplanes.


These are the only two method I have been able to think of. For the first method, will there be only 1 solution to the equation, since the airplanes are travelling in a straight line? If there are 2 and both are positive, which one should I use?

Moreover, for the second method, I am afraid that it will yield a time that is too late since it will compute the time at which they are closest and not the time at which they start colliding. Is there a way to work around this? I would prefer that because the equation that I get is will only produce 1 solution so I will not have to go through using 2 values of t(I am writing a program so I would like it to run as fast as possible).

Finally, I just wanted to know whether there were any simpler and faster ways of doing this. A hint would be appreciated very much!

Thank you so much:)










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite
    1














    I am trying to find the time at which 2 airplanes could potentially collide with each other. When I say collide, I mean the circular region around an airplane overlaps with the circular region around another airplane. The circular regions all have the same radius. Assuming that all airplanes follow a straight path, I wanted to find the time at which the airplanes start colliding.

    I have been thinking of different ways of approaching the problem:




    • Assuming the positions of an arbitrary plane A and plane B after time t were:


    $$begin{pmatrix} a \ b end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} c \ d end{pmatrix} t$$
    $$begin{pmatrix} x \ y end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} u \ v end{pmatrix} t$$
    respectively, then the euclidean distance must be:
    $$sqrt {(a + ct - x - ut)^2 + (b + dt - y - vt)^2} ge 2r$$
    where r is the radius of the region around the 2 airplanes. After that, when both sides are squared and rearranged, I would end up with a quadratic equation which will give me 2 values of t(using the quadratic formula).




    • The second method was to take the Euclidean distance and differentiate it with respect to t and equate that equation to zero to find the minimum distance between the 2 airplanes.


    These are the only two method I have been able to think of. For the first method, will there be only 1 solution to the equation, since the airplanes are travelling in a straight line? If there are 2 and both are positive, which one should I use?

    Moreover, for the second method, I am afraid that it will yield a time that is too late since it will compute the time at which they are closest and not the time at which they start colliding. Is there a way to work around this? I would prefer that because the equation that I get is will only produce 1 solution so I will not have to go through using 2 values of t(I am writing a program so I would like it to run as fast as possible).

    Finally, I just wanted to know whether there were any simpler and faster ways of doing this. A hint would be appreciated very much!

    Thank you so much:)










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1







      I am trying to find the time at which 2 airplanes could potentially collide with each other. When I say collide, I mean the circular region around an airplane overlaps with the circular region around another airplane. The circular regions all have the same radius. Assuming that all airplanes follow a straight path, I wanted to find the time at which the airplanes start colliding.

      I have been thinking of different ways of approaching the problem:




      • Assuming the positions of an arbitrary plane A and plane B after time t were:


      $$begin{pmatrix} a \ b end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} c \ d end{pmatrix} t$$
      $$begin{pmatrix} x \ y end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} u \ v end{pmatrix} t$$
      respectively, then the euclidean distance must be:
      $$sqrt {(a + ct - x - ut)^2 + (b + dt - y - vt)^2} ge 2r$$
      where r is the radius of the region around the 2 airplanes. After that, when both sides are squared and rearranged, I would end up with a quadratic equation which will give me 2 values of t(using the quadratic formula).




      • The second method was to take the Euclidean distance and differentiate it with respect to t and equate that equation to zero to find the minimum distance between the 2 airplanes.


      These are the only two method I have been able to think of. For the first method, will there be only 1 solution to the equation, since the airplanes are travelling in a straight line? If there are 2 and both are positive, which one should I use?

      Moreover, for the second method, I am afraid that it will yield a time that is too late since it will compute the time at which they are closest and not the time at which they start colliding. Is there a way to work around this? I would prefer that because the equation that I get is will only produce 1 solution so I will not have to go through using 2 values of t(I am writing a program so I would like it to run as fast as possible).

      Finally, I just wanted to know whether there were any simpler and faster ways of doing this. A hint would be appreciated very much!

      Thank you so much:)










      share|cite|improve this question

















      I am trying to find the time at which 2 airplanes could potentially collide with each other. When I say collide, I mean the circular region around an airplane overlaps with the circular region around another airplane. The circular regions all have the same radius. Assuming that all airplanes follow a straight path, I wanted to find the time at which the airplanes start colliding.

      I have been thinking of different ways of approaching the problem:




      • Assuming the positions of an arbitrary plane A and plane B after time t were:


      $$begin{pmatrix} a \ b end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} c \ d end{pmatrix} t$$
      $$begin{pmatrix} x \ y end{pmatrix} + begin{pmatrix} u \ v end{pmatrix} t$$
      respectively, then the euclidean distance must be:
      $$sqrt {(a + ct - x - ut)^2 + (b + dt - y - vt)^2} ge 2r$$
      where r is the radius of the region around the 2 airplanes. After that, when both sides are squared and rearranged, I would end up with a quadratic equation which will give me 2 values of t(using the quadratic formula).




      • The second method was to take the Euclidean distance and differentiate it with respect to t and equate that equation to zero to find the minimum distance between the 2 airplanes.


      These are the only two method I have been able to think of. For the first method, will there be only 1 solution to the equation, since the airplanes are travelling in a straight line? If there are 2 and both are positive, which one should I use?

      Moreover, for the second method, I am afraid that it will yield a time that is too late since it will compute the time at which they are closest and not the time at which they start colliding. Is there a way to work around this? I would prefer that because the equation that I get is will only produce 1 solution so I will not have to go through using 2 values of t(I am writing a program so I would like it to run as fast as possible).

      Finally, I just wanted to know whether there were any simpler and faster ways of doing this. A hint would be appreciated very much!

      Thank you so much:)







      derivatives inequality vectors






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 12 at 10:54

























      asked Nov 11 at 22:54









      Maths2468

      767




      767






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          1
          down vote



          accepted










          Here's a vector-based approach based on the geometric figure below.



          vector diagram with circle and triangles



          Here, $A$ and $B$ are the initial positions of the two aircraft,
          with $A = begin{pmatrix} a\ bend{pmatrix}$
          and $B = begin{pmatrix} x\ yend{pmatrix}.$
          Let's assume the distance between $A$ and $B$ is at least $2r,$ since otherwise
          we can just say the aircraft have already "collided."



          For the purpose of finding time to "collision," we compute all speeds and distances in a frame of reference in which the aircraft at $A$ does not move.
          The vector from $A$ to $B,$ which is the initial position of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A,$ is
          $p = begin{pmatrix} x - a\ y - bend{pmatrix}.$
          The velocity of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A$ is
          $w = begin{pmatrix} u - c\ v - dend{pmatrix}.$



          Find the unit vector $hat w$ in the same direction as $w.$
          That is, set $hat w = frac{1}{lVert wrVert} w.$



          Find a unit vector $hat n$ perpendicular to $hat w.$
          A simple way to do this is a transformation on the coordinates of $hat w.$
          That is, if $hat w = begin{pmatrix} hat w_x\ hat w_yend{pmatrix}$
          then $hat n = begin{pmatrix} -hat w_y\ hat w_xend{pmatrix}.$



          It does not matter which side of the vector $w$ the vector $hat n$ points to;
          it just needs to be perpendicular.



          Let $s = - p cdot hat w$ and $d = p cdot hat n.$
          In effect, this gives $A$ coordinates in a coordinate system centered at $B$
          with axes in the directions of $hat w$ and $hat n.$
          The number $s$ is also the distance from $B$ to the point of closest approach of the aircraft, labeled $D$ in the figure.



          If $s$ is negative, the point of closest approach is behind the aircraft at $B.$
          In that case, since we've already assumed the aircraft start at a distance at least $2r,$ we can say the aircraft are flying away from each other and will not "collide" at any future time.



          Since $2r$ is the maximum distance at which the aircraft's circular regions could overlap, if $d > 2r$ then the line projected from the vector $w$ never gets close enough to $A$ to cause a "collision."
          But if $d leq 2r$ we have at least one intersection of the line with the circle.



          Setting $q = sqrt{(2r)^2 - d^2},$
          the distance from $B$ to the closest point of intersection with the circle,
          namely $C,$ is $s - q.$



          To get the time at which the aircraft first "collide," we divide the distance to the start of the "collision" by the relative speed with which the aircraft starting at $B$ approaches that point. That is,
          $$ t = frac{s - q}{lVert w rVert}. $$






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Let's make this a little easier. Suppose that one plane is parked on the tarmac, on one of two parallel runways.



            The other plane approaches, on the other parallel runway. At some moment, $t_1$ it gets to be distance $2r$ from the parked plane. A few moments later, at $t_2$, it gets as close as possible to the parked plane. Then it begins to get farther away, and at time $t_3$ it's again at distance $2r$ from the parked plane. After that, things are safe again.



            $t_1$ and $t_3$ are the times generated by method 1, the quadratic approach. Time $t_2$ is the time generated by method 2, the "closest approach" method. YOu can see that these times are different, but that in general, we have that $t_2$ is between $t_1$ and $t_3$.



            "But what about the general case?" I hear you cry. Well...believe it or not, this is the general case. IF you express everything in a coordinate system that's centered at the (moving) location of plane 1, then plane 1's position, in this moving coord system, is constantly the origin. And plane 2's position, in this moving coordinate system, is $P(t) = (P_2 - P_1) + t(v_2 - v_1)$, where $P_1$ is the (fixed, global) location of plane 1 at time $t = 1$, and $v_1$ is the velocity vector of plane 1 in that global coordinate system, and similarly for $P_2$ and $v_2$.



            "OK, fine. But which is the right method to use, and can this be done more efficiently?", you ask.



            I think that method 1 is the right method, because it answers the question you asked, namely, "at what time are the planes at the critical distance?" On the other hand, if time is really critical, you may not want to go solving a quadratic, which takes a bit of algebra. So one thing to do is this:



            Use method 2 to find the moment $t_2$ when the planes are closest. Compute the squared distance $u$ between them at this moment, and compare to the (precomputed) constant $4r^2$. If $u > 4r^2$, then the planes never get close enough to worry about, and having solved one linear equation, you can quit.



            If $u le 4r^2$, the you can look at your quadratic,
            $$
            h(t) = at^2 + bt + c
            $$

            and know that the roots are at
            $$
            t_{1,3} = frac{-b pm sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a} = frac{-b}{2a} pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
            $$

            The amazing thing is that the number $frac{-b}{2a}$ is exactly the number $t_2$, so your solution is
            $$
            t_{1,3} = t_2 pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
            $$

            which saves you a tiny bit of computation in applying method 1 in those cases where the planes DO have a potential collision.






            share|cite|improve this answer





















            • Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
              – Maths2468
              Nov 13 at 13:50










            • And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
              – Maths2468
              Nov 13 at 13:51










            • I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
              – John Hughes
              Nov 13 at 14:13













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2994568%2fcalculating-the-time-at-which-2-airplanes-will-be-a-specific-distance-apart-from%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            1
            down vote



            accepted










            Here's a vector-based approach based on the geometric figure below.



            vector diagram with circle and triangles



            Here, $A$ and $B$ are the initial positions of the two aircraft,
            with $A = begin{pmatrix} a\ bend{pmatrix}$
            and $B = begin{pmatrix} x\ yend{pmatrix}.$
            Let's assume the distance between $A$ and $B$ is at least $2r,$ since otherwise
            we can just say the aircraft have already "collided."



            For the purpose of finding time to "collision," we compute all speeds and distances in a frame of reference in which the aircraft at $A$ does not move.
            The vector from $A$ to $B,$ which is the initial position of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A,$ is
            $p = begin{pmatrix} x - a\ y - bend{pmatrix}.$
            The velocity of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A$ is
            $w = begin{pmatrix} u - c\ v - dend{pmatrix}.$



            Find the unit vector $hat w$ in the same direction as $w.$
            That is, set $hat w = frac{1}{lVert wrVert} w.$



            Find a unit vector $hat n$ perpendicular to $hat w.$
            A simple way to do this is a transformation on the coordinates of $hat w.$
            That is, if $hat w = begin{pmatrix} hat w_x\ hat w_yend{pmatrix}$
            then $hat n = begin{pmatrix} -hat w_y\ hat w_xend{pmatrix}.$



            It does not matter which side of the vector $w$ the vector $hat n$ points to;
            it just needs to be perpendicular.



            Let $s = - p cdot hat w$ and $d = p cdot hat n.$
            In effect, this gives $A$ coordinates in a coordinate system centered at $B$
            with axes in the directions of $hat w$ and $hat n.$
            The number $s$ is also the distance from $B$ to the point of closest approach of the aircraft, labeled $D$ in the figure.



            If $s$ is negative, the point of closest approach is behind the aircraft at $B.$
            In that case, since we've already assumed the aircraft start at a distance at least $2r,$ we can say the aircraft are flying away from each other and will not "collide" at any future time.



            Since $2r$ is the maximum distance at which the aircraft's circular regions could overlap, if $d > 2r$ then the line projected from the vector $w$ never gets close enough to $A$ to cause a "collision."
            But if $d leq 2r$ we have at least one intersection of the line with the circle.



            Setting $q = sqrt{(2r)^2 - d^2},$
            the distance from $B$ to the closest point of intersection with the circle,
            namely $C,$ is $s - q.$



            To get the time at which the aircraft first "collide," we divide the distance to the start of the "collision" by the relative speed with which the aircraft starting at $B$ approaches that point. That is,
            $$ t = frac{s - q}{lVert w rVert}. $$






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              1
              down vote



              accepted










              Here's a vector-based approach based on the geometric figure below.



              vector diagram with circle and triangles



              Here, $A$ and $B$ are the initial positions of the two aircraft,
              with $A = begin{pmatrix} a\ bend{pmatrix}$
              and $B = begin{pmatrix} x\ yend{pmatrix}.$
              Let's assume the distance between $A$ and $B$ is at least $2r,$ since otherwise
              we can just say the aircraft have already "collided."



              For the purpose of finding time to "collision," we compute all speeds and distances in a frame of reference in which the aircraft at $A$ does not move.
              The vector from $A$ to $B,$ which is the initial position of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A,$ is
              $p = begin{pmatrix} x - a\ y - bend{pmatrix}.$
              The velocity of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A$ is
              $w = begin{pmatrix} u - c\ v - dend{pmatrix}.$



              Find the unit vector $hat w$ in the same direction as $w.$
              That is, set $hat w = frac{1}{lVert wrVert} w.$



              Find a unit vector $hat n$ perpendicular to $hat w.$
              A simple way to do this is a transformation on the coordinates of $hat w.$
              That is, if $hat w = begin{pmatrix} hat w_x\ hat w_yend{pmatrix}$
              then $hat n = begin{pmatrix} -hat w_y\ hat w_xend{pmatrix}.$



              It does not matter which side of the vector $w$ the vector $hat n$ points to;
              it just needs to be perpendicular.



              Let $s = - p cdot hat w$ and $d = p cdot hat n.$
              In effect, this gives $A$ coordinates in a coordinate system centered at $B$
              with axes in the directions of $hat w$ and $hat n.$
              The number $s$ is also the distance from $B$ to the point of closest approach of the aircraft, labeled $D$ in the figure.



              If $s$ is negative, the point of closest approach is behind the aircraft at $B.$
              In that case, since we've already assumed the aircraft start at a distance at least $2r,$ we can say the aircraft are flying away from each other and will not "collide" at any future time.



              Since $2r$ is the maximum distance at which the aircraft's circular regions could overlap, if $d > 2r$ then the line projected from the vector $w$ never gets close enough to $A$ to cause a "collision."
              But if $d leq 2r$ we have at least one intersection of the line with the circle.



              Setting $q = sqrt{(2r)^2 - d^2},$
              the distance from $B$ to the closest point of intersection with the circle,
              namely $C,$ is $s - q.$



              To get the time at which the aircraft first "collide," we divide the distance to the start of the "collision" by the relative speed with which the aircraft starting at $B$ approaches that point. That is,
              $$ t = frac{s - q}{lVert w rVert}. $$






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                1
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                1
                down vote



                accepted






                Here's a vector-based approach based on the geometric figure below.



                vector diagram with circle and triangles



                Here, $A$ and $B$ are the initial positions of the two aircraft,
                with $A = begin{pmatrix} a\ bend{pmatrix}$
                and $B = begin{pmatrix} x\ yend{pmatrix}.$
                Let's assume the distance between $A$ and $B$ is at least $2r,$ since otherwise
                we can just say the aircraft have already "collided."



                For the purpose of finding time to "collision," we compute all speeds and distances in a frame of reference in which the aircraft at $A$ does not move.
                The vector from $A$ to $B,$ which is the initial position of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A,$ is
                $p = begin{pmatrix} x - a\ y - bend{pmatrix}.$
                The velocity of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A$ is
                $w = begin{pmatrix} u - c\ v - dend{pmatrix}.$



                Find the unit vector $hat w$ in the same direction as $w.$
                That is, set $hat w = frac{1}{lVert wrVert} w.$



                Find a unit vector $hat n$ perpendicular to $hat w.$
                A simple way to do this is a transformation on the coordinates of $hat w.$
                That is, if $hat w = begin{pmatrix} hat w_x\ hat w_yend{pmatrix}$
                then $hat n = begin{pmatrix} -hat w_y\ hat w_xend{pmatrix}.$



                It does not matter which side of the vector $w$ the vector $hat n$ points to;
                it just needs to be perpendicular.



                Let $s = - p cdot hat w$ and $d = p cdot hat n.$
                In effect, this gives $A$ coordinates in a coordinate system centered at $B$
                with axes in the directions of $hat w$ and $hat n.$
                The number $s$ is also the distance from $B$ to the point of closest approach of the aircraft, labeled $D$ in the figure.



                If $s$ is negative, the point of closest approach is behind the aircraft at $B.$
                In that case, since we've already assumed the aircraft start at a distance at least $2r,$ we can say the aircraft are flying away from each other and will not "collide" at any future time.



                Since $2r$ is the maximum distance at which the aircraft's circular regions could overlap, if $d > 2r$ then the line projected from the vector $w$ never gets close enough to $A$ to cause a "collision."
                But if $d leq 2r$ we have at least one intersection of the line with the circle.



                Setting $q = sqrt{(2r)^2 - d^2},$
                the distance from $B$ to the closest point of intersection with the circle,
                namely $C,$ is $s - q.$



                To get the time at which the aircraft first "collide," we divide the distance to the start of the "collision" by the relative speed with which the aircraft starting at $B$ approaches that point. That is,
                $$ t = frac{s - q}{lVert w rVert}. $$






                share|cite|improve this answer












                Here's a vector-based approach based on the geometric figure below.



                vector diagram with circle and triangles



                Here, $A$ and $B$ are the initial positions of the two aircraft,
                with $A = begin{pmatrix} a\ bend{pmatrix}$
                and $B = begin{pmatrix} x\ yend{pmatrix}.$
                Let's assume the distance between $A$ and $B$ is at least $2r,$ since otherwise
                we can just say the aircraft have already "collided."



                For the purpose of finding time to "collision," we compute all speeds and distances in a frame of reference in which the aircraft at $A$ does not move.
                The vector from $A$ to $B,$ which is the initial position of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A,$ is
                $p = begin{pmatrix} x - a\ y - bend{pmatrix}.$
                The velocity of the aircraft at $B$ relative to $A$ is
                $w = begin{pmatrix} u - c\ v - dend{pmatrix}.$



                Find the unit vector $hat w$ in the same direction as $w.$
                That is, set $hat w = frac{1}{lVert wrVert} w.$



                Find a unit vector $hat n$ perpendicular to $hat w.$
                A simple way to do this is a transformation on the coordinates of $hat w.$
                That is, if $hat w = begin{pmatrix} hat w_x\ hat w_yend{pmatrix}$
                then $hat n = begin{pmatrix} -hat w_y\ hat w_xend{pmatrix}.$



                It does not matter which side of the vector $w$ the vector $hat n$ points to;
                it just needs to be perpendicular.



                Let $s = - p cdot hat w$ and $d = p cdot hat n.$
                In effect, this gives $A$ coordinates in a coordinate system centered at $B$
                with axes in the directions of $hat w$ and $hat n.$
                The number $s$ is also the distance from $B$ to the point of closest approach of the aircraft, labeled $D$ in the figure.



                If $s$ is negative, the point of closest approach is behind the aircraft at $B.$
                In that case, since we've already assumed the aircraft start at a distance at least $2r,$ we can say the aircraft are flying away from each other and will not "collide" at any future time.



                Since $2r$ is the maximum distance at which the aircraft's circular regions could overlap, if $d > 2r$ then the line projected from the vector $w$ never gets close enough to $A$ to cause a "collision."
                But if $d leq 2r$ we have at least one intersection of the line with the circle.



                Setting $q = sqrt{(2r)^2 - d^2},$
                the distance from $B$ to the closest point of intersection with the circle,
                namely $C,$ is $s - q.$



                To get the time at which the aircraft first "collide," we divide the distance to the start of the "collision" by the relative speed with which the aircraft starting at $B$ approaches that point. That is,
                $$ t = frac{s - q}{lVert w rVert}. $$







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 14 at 3:24









                David K

                51.2k340113




                51.2k340113






















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    Let's make this a little easier. Suppose that one plane is parked on the tarmac, on one of two parallel runways.



                    The other plane approaches, on the other parallel runway. At some moment, $t_1$ it gets to be distance $2r$ from the parked plane. A few moments later, at $t_2$, it gets as close as possible to the parked plane. Then it begins to get farther away, and at time $t_3$ it's again at distance $2r$ from the parked plane. After that, things are safe again.



                    $t_1$ and $t_3$ are the times generated by method 1, the quadratic approach. Time $t_2$ is the time generated by method 2, the "closest approach" method. YOu can see that these times are different, but that in general, we have that $t_2$ is between $t_1$ and $t_3$.



                    "But what about the general case?" I hear you cry. Well...believe it or not, this is the general case. IF you express everything in a coordinate system that's centered at the (moving) location of plane 1, then plane 1's position, in this moving coord system, is constantly the origin. And plane 2's position, in this moving coordinate system, is $P(t) = (P_2 - P_1) + t(v_2 - v_1)$, where $P_1$ is the (fixed, global) location of plane 1 at time $t = 1$, and $v_1$ is the velocity vector of plane 1 in that global coordinate system, and similarly for $P_2$ and $v_2$.



                    "OK, fine. But which is the right method to use, and can this be done more efficiently?", you ask.



                    I think that method 1 is the right method, because it answers the question you asked, namely, "at what time are the planes at the critical distance?" On the other hand, if time is really critical, you may not want to go solving a quadratic, which takes a bit of algebra. So one thing to do is this:



                    Use method 2 to find the moment $t_2$ when the planes are closest. Compute the squared distance $u$ between them at this moment, and compare to the (precomputed) constant $4r^2$. If $u > 4r^2$, then the planes never get close enough to worry about, and having solved one linear equation, you can quit.



                    If $u le 4r^2$, the you can look at your quadratic,
                    $$
                    h(t) = at^2 + bt + c
                    $$

                    and know that the roots are at
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = frac{-b pm sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a} = frac{-b}{2a} pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    The amazing thing is that the number $frac{-b}{2a}$ is exactly the number $t_2$, so your solution is
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = t_2 pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    which saves you a tiny bit of computation in applying method 1 in those cases where the planes DO have a potential collision.






                    share|cite|improve this answer





















                    • Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:50










                    • And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:51










                    • I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                      – John Hughes
                      Nov 13 at 14:13

















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    Let's make this a little easier. Suppose that one plane is parked on the tarmac, on one of two parallel runways.



                    The other plane approaches, on the other parallel runway. At some moment, $t_1$ it gets to be distance $2r$ from the parked plane. A few moments later, at $t_2$, it gets as close as possible to the parked plane. Then it begins to get farther away, and at time $t_3$ it's again at distance $2r$ from the parked plane. After that, things are safe again.



                    $t_1$ and $t_3$ are the times generated by method 1, the quadratic approach. Time $t_2$ is the time generated by method 2, the "closest approach" method. YOu can see that these times are different, but that in general, we have that $t_2$ is between $t_1$ and $t_3$.



                    "But what about the general case?" I hear you cry. Well...believe it or not, this is the general case. IF you express everything in a coordinate system that's centered at the (moving) location of plane 1, then plane 1's position, in this moving coord system, is constantly the origin. And plane 2's position, in this moving coordinate system, is $P(t) = (P_2 - P_1) + t(v_2 - v_1)$, where $P_1$ is the (fixed, global) location of plane 1 at time $t = 1$, and $v_1$ is the velocity vector of plane 1 in that global coordinate system, and similarly for $P_2$ and $v_2$.



                    "OK, fine. But which is the right method to use, and can this be done more efficiently?", you ask.



                    I think that method 1 is the right method, because it answers the question you asked, namely, "at what time are the planes at the critical distance?" On the other hand, if time is really critical, you may not want to go solving a quadratic, which takes a bit of algebra. So one thing to do is this:



                    Use method 2 to find the moment $t_2$ when the planes are closest. Compute the squared distance $u$ between them at this moment, and compare to the (precomputed) constant $4r^2$. If $u > 4r^2$, then the planes never get close enough to worry about, and having solved one linear equation, you can quit.



                    If $u le 4r^2$, the you can look at your quadratic,
                    $$
                    h(t) = at^2 + bt + c
                    $$

                    and know that the roots are at
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = frac{-b pm sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a} = frac{-b}{2a} pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    The amazing thing is that the number $frac{-b}{2a}$ is exactly the number $t_2$, so your solution is
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = t_2 pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    which saves you a tiny bit of computation in applying method 1 in those cases where the planes DO have a potential collision.






                    share|cite|improve this answer





















                    • Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:50










                    • And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:51










                    • I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                      – John Hughes
                      Nov 13 at 14:13















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote









                    Let's make this a little easier. Suppose that one plane is parked on the tarmac, on one of two parallel runways.



                    The other plane approaches, on the other parallel runway. At some moment, $t_1$ it gets to be distance $2r$ from the parked plane. A few moments later, at $t_2$, it gets as close as possible to the parked plane. Then it begins to get farther away, and at time $t_3$ it's again at distance $2r$ from the parked plane. After that, things are safe again.



                    $t_1$ and $t_3$ are the times generated by method 1, the quadratic approach. Time $t_2$ is the time generated by method 2, the "closest approach" method. YOu can see that these times are different, but that in general, we have that $t_2$ is between $t_1$ and $t_3$.



                    "But what about the general case?" I hear you cry. Well...believe it or not, this is the general case. IF you express everything in a coordinate system that's centered at the (moving) location of plane 1, then plane 1's position, in this moving coord system, is constantly the origin. And plane 2's position, in this moving coordinate system, is $P(t) = (P_2 - P_1) + t(v_2 - v_1)$, where $P_1$ is the (fixed, global) location of plane 1 at time $t = 1$, and $v_1$ is the velocity vector of plane 1 in that global coordinate system, and similarly for $P_2$ and $v_2$.



                    "OK, fine. But which is the right method to use, and can this be done more efficiently?", you ask.



                    I think that method 1 is the right method, because it answers the question you asked, namely, "at what time are the planes at the critical distance?" On the other hand, if time is really critical, you may not want to go solving a quadratic, which takes a bit of algebra. So one thing to do is this:



                    Use method 2 to find the moment $t_2$ when the planes are closest. Compute the squared distance $u$ between them at this moment, and compare to the (precomputed) constant $4r^2$. If $u > 4r^2$, then the planes never get close enough to worry about, and having solved one linear equation, you can quit.



                    If $u le 4r^2$, the you can look at your quadratic,
                    $$
                    h(t) = at^2 + bt + c
                    $$

                    and know that the roots are at
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = frac{-b pm sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a} = frac{-b}{2a} pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    The amazing thing is that the number $frac{-b}{2a}$ is exactly the number $t_2$, so your solution is
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = t_2 pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    which saves you a tiny bit of computation in applying method 1 in those cases where the planes DO have a potential collision.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    Let's make this a little easier. Suppose that one plane is parked on the tarmac, on one of two parallel runways.



                    The other plane approaches, on the other parallel runway. At some moment, $t_1$ it gets to be distance $2r$ from the parked plane. A few moments later, at $t_2$, it gets as close as possible to the parked plane. Then it begins to get farther away, and at time $t_3$ it's again at distance $2r$ from the parked plane. After that, things are safe again.



                    $t_1$ and $t_3$ are the times generated by method 1, the quadratic approach. Time $t_2$ is the time generated by method 2, the "closest approach" method. YOu can see that these times are different, but that in general, we have that $t_2$ is between $t_1$ and $t_3$.



                    "But what about the general case?" I hear you cry. Well...believe it or not, this is the general case. IF you express everything in a coordinate system that's centered at the (moving) location of plane 1, then plane 1's position, in this moving coord system, is constantly the origin. And plane 2's position, in this moving coordinate system, is $P(t) = (P_2 - P_1) + t(v_2 - v_1)$, where $P_1$ is the (fixed, global) location of plane 1 at time $t = 1$, and $v_1$ is the velocity vector of plane 1 in that global coordinate system, and similarly for $P_2$ and $v_2$.



                    "OK, fine. But which is the right method to use, and can this be done more efficiently?", you ask.



                    I think that method 1 is the right method, because it answers the question you asked, namely, "at what time are the planes at the critical distance?" On the other hand, if time is really critical, you may not want to go solving a quadratic, which takes a bit of algebra. So one thing to do is this:



                    Use method 2 to find the moment $t_2$ when the planes are closest. Compute the squared distance $u$ between them at this moment, and compare to the (precomputed) constant $4r^2$. If $u > 4r^2$, then the planes never get close enough to worry about, and having solved one linear equation, you can quit.



                    If $u le 4r^2$, the you can look at your quadratic,
                    $$
                    h(t) = at^2 + bt + c
                    $$

                    and know that the roots are at
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = frac{-b pm sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a} = frac{-b}{2a} pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    The amazing thing is that the number $frac{-b}{2a}$ is exactly the number $t_2$, so your solution is
                    $$
                    t_{1,3} = t_2 pm frac{sqrt{b^2 - 4ac}}{2a}.
                    $$

                    which saves you a tiny bit of computation in applying method 1 in those cases where the planes DO have a potential collision.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered Nov 12 at 12:09









                    John Hughes

                    61.5k24089




                    61.5k24089












                    • Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:50










                    • And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:51










                    • I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                      – John Hughes
                      Nov 13 at 14:13




















                    • Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:50










                    • And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                      – Maths2468
                      Nov 13 at 13:51










                    • I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                      – John Hughes
                      Nov 13 at 14:13


















                    Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                    – Maths2468
                    Nov 13 at 13:50




                    Yes, you are completely right! If the planes were to go through each other then there would be 2 moments where they are exactly 2r away from each other! I didn't even think of that. Also regarding the t2 being equal to -b/2a, you are completely right, they are the same! How did you notice that?
                    – Maths2468
                    Nov 13 at 13:50












                    And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                    – Maths2468
                    Nov 13 at 13:51




                    And thank you so much for the help! I really appreciate it:)
                    – Maths2468
                    Nov 13 at 13:51












                    I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                    – John Hughes
                    Nov 13 at 14:13






                    I noticed it because if you draw a horizontal line through an upwards-facing parabola, meeting at points $L$ and $R$, then the midpoint $frac{L+ R}{2}$ will lie directly above the "vertex" (lowest point) of the parabola. More formally, if $x=p$ and $x=q$ are the roots of $y = K$, where $y = ax^2 + bx + c$, then $(p+q)/2$ is the $x$-coordinate of the minimum value of $y$ (regardless of your choice of $K$). Since the roots have the form $frac{-b pm sqrt{ldots}}{2a}$, their average is $frac{-b}{2a}$, and that's the result we need.
                    – John Hughes
                    Nov 13 at 14:13




















                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded



















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2994568%2fcalculating-the-time-at-which-2-airplanes-will-be-a-specific-distance-apart-from%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    mysqli_query(): Empty query in /home/lucindabrummitt/public_html/blog/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 1924

                    How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

                    Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?