Warrior with door off?

[here skip]

Is there a Warrior avalible in Melbourne with door off approval?
Secondly;
A guy that I know has approached me because he wants to do some aerial photography work. Say flying school 'x' has a warrior with door off approval, will they let me operate under their AOC and be happy that I'm hiring their A/C, or will they only let one of their own pilots fly?

Cheers
HS

[CHAIRMAN]

Never heard of a Warrior with door off approval before - good luck!

[Charlie Foxtrot India]

I've got door off approvals for the Warriors and the Archer but am not in Melbourne, sorry. They came as a flight manual supplement with the aircraft, but if you want to add it now you have to fork out for an engineering order.

Whosever AOC you use would have to have aerial photography on their AOC and be willing to employ you to fly it for these ops. Bear in mind a lot of these photographers think they are immune from the low flying rules. Payment in advance from them is a MUST as is a minimum daily rate.

Been there, done that - PM me for details if you like.

:hmm:

[Sunfish]

I seem to recall seeing a door off approval in the POH of at least one of RVAC's Warriors. I'n not sure if they would want to fly it for you or not.

Question: Why not do it from a C172? Window open in flight is legal.

[here skip]

sunny,
We've tried doing some test shoots out of a 172 with the door off, but found the wing and the strut get in the way of a lot of pics.
HS

[topdrop]

Surely, the photographer asked you to remove the wing and strut to stop them getting in the road.

[jetstar1]

Wing in the way from Cessna but not from Warrior?
If you want photos of the sky take them from the ground! :ok:

[brucekabuce]

Seriously,
Why would u take aerial photos from a piper warrior? low wing aeroplane? so what u gonna bank over 90 degrees to take photos of the ground? If you think that the wing strut on a 172 gets in the way how about a whole wing of a piper?

:p

[Clare Prop]

Have you ever tried? It works if the photographer knows what they're doing.

[here skip]

Because my friends the photography involved is taking photos of homesteads.
In a low wing you can bank the A/C over and take multiple shots in 1 orbit. In a high wing we found to try and get the shots we need we had to make 4 passes, with each pass being 90 degrees to the previous pass.

HS

[Horatio Leafblower]

Word of advice:

DON'T DO IT WITHOUT THE DOOR-OFF KIT!!!

"A person I know" :rolleyes: has tried this before, for exactly the same mission, and "my friend" would tell you that the increase in drag is rather surprising :uhoh:

[takeonme]

Ive got 400 hours of aerial photography in a Warrior/Archer with the door off. You dont need anywhere near 90 degrees AoB if your doing it properly. 45-60 degrees is fine for the job when your 500 feet above the deck.

When you bank in a Cessna the wing drops and gets in the way. In a Warrior, it drops out of the way. Makes sense when you think about it.

[here skip]

You may have mis-understood takeonme. I was talking about the tracking required when shooting the object.
BTW
Where did you hire the mentioned A/C you used?

HS

[Lando Calrissian]

Isn't the bank angle limited to 30 degrees with the door off?

[18-Wheeler]

Seriously,
Why would u take aerial photos from a piper warrior? low wing aeroplane? so what u gonna bank over 90 degrees to take photos of the ground? If you think that the wing strut on a 172 gets in the way how about a whole wing of a piper?
:p


Done it heaps of times many years ago in a Warrior 2.
Get the photographer to sit in the left seat and stick his/her lens out the storm window, and you fly from the right seat.
It gives about a 90° field of view which is usually more than enough.
Just takes a little fiddling to get the angles right, and maybe the odd touch of rudder. ;)

[HGFC1]

When you bank in a Cessna the wing drops and gets in the way. In a Warrior, it drops out of the way. Makes sense when you think about it.
Really? I was flying when my FI took this photo of Woonton Airstrip in the UK for me from about 2,000' in a C152 :D . I certainly wasn't in a steep turn at the time. It isn't as crystal clear as it might be because we were only taking it to prove to the CFI that we had actually found the strip which he claimed he had never been able to find :E :ok: The wing and strut certainly aren't in the way and there are four other similar photos. The only editing which has been done is size reduction to fit the width of this forum.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v604/DX_Wombat/3fa29661.jpg
Edited to add that it was a right hand turn at a bit over 30 degs AoB

[Cloud Cutter]

In most situations, a PA28 is far superior to at C172 for photography. There are changes in handling characteristics, such as buffet from the airflow past the open door hitting the tailplane, but I never had any problem with the increase in drag (no special kit used). You will only have 2 POB so the weight saving more than outweighs any increase in drag.

[RatsoreA]

Goodness me man!!! What are you thinking?? A warrior?? :} Toughen up and use a Senecca II! :ok: REAR Door off approval already in the FM, and there is no wing/strut/landing gear/anything in the way. No noticable loss of performance, the photographer can lie down, and best of all, you are a little bit away from the breeze. You don't have to fly around with ANY AoB, so the point that Lando made about bank angle limits (Which is correct! :ok: ) is removed from the equation. Plus they can dawdle along at height at a surprisingly low speed for a six seat twin. I used to meat bomb with them, and I rate them highly! But it might cost more than your warrior!! :E aahhhh, I haven't vented a random opinion in ages!! Now wasn't that fun?! :O

[Gargleblaster]

Well, for me, in a C172, the darn runway always disappears when I turn base and final, so ...

I have also found myself having to do more orbits in a C172 than in a PA28 when wanting to take pictures.

BTW, the door isn't on the MEL, so not required ... no I'm being rather silly here...

Just my 10p...

[QNIM]

Gday 18-Wheeler
Most photographers I’ve flown have lenses that wouldn’t fit through the storm window, maybe there’s something about the size of a photographers lens compared to the size of pilots watches.
Use both Cessna and Piper for aerial photography much prefer the low wing except in cold weather.
Cheers Q

[Two_dogs]

18 Wheeler

I taxied a Warrier from the right hand seat once. After all, isn't it the seat closest to the door, and I was in a hurry. I went from one end of the parking area to the other, at a remote strip. Imagine my surprise when I went for the (not fitted to co-pilot side) toe brakes as I approached the far fence.:uhoh:

Two Dogs

[I Love This Show]

See if you can find a meat-bomb equipped C182.
I did this plenty of times 'back in the day'!
Basically, you put the photo dude in a tandem harness, strap it to the hardpoint used for the meatbombs takeoffs, and he can lean out the door with his foot on te step / wheel to his hearts content and take some cracker photos without any problems of wheel, wing or strut to confound him. I did this with both variety or aerial photodude, the land survey type (straight down) and the photo-art type (its all in the angles, aspect and emotion of the shot, but I don't expect you to understand since you're just a pilot), and they both came away with smiles :)

Apologies if coherence is difficult - absinthe tends to 'expand the mind' :} :} :yuk:

[OzExpat]

Whilst I must obviously concede the point made so vividly by HGFC1, I'd have to say that I've had better results from low-wing aircraft. I construct an orbit around the feature of interest and bank the aircraft just enough to get the wing out of the way... at heights between 500 and 1000 feet AGL, this isn't difficult and it gets easier when higher. I've got some absolute pearlers that I've taken over Sydney Harbour - from a low wing twin no less! I'll see if I can find one or two of them, to give you an idea.

In constructing my orbit, I use a maximum of 45 degrees of bank - and, so far, have never even come close to needing that! I find that some strategic "top rudder" helps too. :D

[OzExpat]

Here's a couple of my most recent efforts, toward the end of last year :-
Sydney Opera House
http://www.fototime.com/298375568923446/standard.jpg
Sydney Harbour Bridge
http://www.fototime.com/ECDFDEC35E5B38D/standard.jpg
North Sydney
http://www.fototime.com/7B2E82FB0C26887/standard.jpg
All taken from a bog standard BE76 - i.e. without anything removed. And, no, I don't even have Photoshop software on my computer! Yes, of course there are a couple where either the wing tip or the top of an engine cowl got in the way, but you don't seriously expect me to post the "reject" photos eh? :}

I alternate between the top two photos as my desktop themes.

[Bendo]

I take it that you have photos of Sydney as Desktop wallpaper to remind you that Port Morbid ain't that bad after all? :}

[FlugWeasel]

One other option I have seen used is the removal of the baggage door on a Cessna (172?) with the photographer sitting along the floor and shooting out of the door.

There is a Sydney based photographer that takes a lot of sailing photos off the coast this way.

I assume that the approvals required are the same as a door-off but it looks like it would be less distracting and noisy up front. And you probably need to do a bit of surgery with backseats etc to make some room.

Does anyone know anything more about this option ?

[OzExpat]

Bendo, maaaaate! Long time no news.

It was all just a bit of fun at the time I took the photos. But a strange thing happened when I put the harbour bridge photo on my desktop... I got a bit homesick! :eek: I s'pose there's gotta be a first time for everything! :} Solved that problem by changing to the opera house photo! :cool:

[HGFC1]

Nice photos OzE :ok: but they don't make me feel in the slightest bit homesick :E