Twin Squirrel, Windermere.

[andyhelo]

On Lake Windermere yesterday, watching a deep blue Twin Squirrel flying low what appeared to be filming with a nose mounted camera. Made more interesting by the RAF Hawk, same hight, flying past it closer than what I would have been comfortable with.
Anyone know of a helicopter with that description and whether or not the two aircraft would have been on a common frequency?

[EESDL]

essentially 'see and avoid'
Filming aircraft would have notified their actions within a designated Low Flying Area by a CANP which the crew of the hawk would have briefed prior to flight so, assuming notification was received in timely manner and accurate, and crew fully briefed then 'see and avoid'

There was some progress with fitting some form of tcas to mil aircraft that might indicate filming aircraft ssr.

[Agaricus bisporus]

would have notified their actions

Well...
Its a while I admit since I did helo film work but then CANP although widely advertsied was about as useful as a chocolate fireguard.
It had to be notified the previous day iirc via a cumbersome procedure and specify exact timings and locations in lat/long. As everyone who has done filming will know it is an almost impossible thing to schedule to the day, let alone the hour and unless the location is a fixed point it can wander geographically too depending on all sorts of variables. Anything involving a route was impossibly complex to report, and on some occasions when we did use it we still got close encounters - though whether they were briefed on our presence we could not tell.

The CANP reporting will still have to be made in time to filter through the system to be disseminated and included in the crew brief and that can never cope with the "go now" weather window and the location/timing variables seem pretty much insurmountable too. No doubt ease of reporting has improved, but can it ever work as intended?
In short CANP was a good idea but pretty much unworkable.

Its not as if the FJ's schedules are enshrined in stone either for the same reasons.

[1helicopterppl]

description sounds like 355F G-TAKE, op for BBC by Arena from Redhill.

[andyhelo]

Thanks guys, learn something new everyday!

[JimBall]

More likely to have been BPRI from Stapleford working on aerial filming. Possibly, therefore, pilot will see this thread and tell you what we all think of CANP!

He's not my uncle.

[helihub]

Here's a photo of BPRI with a very ugly looking nose mounted camera. Wonder how many knots you have to throttle back with this?

http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1184512M.jpg

and here's the dark blue BBC one G-TAKE with a much neater arrangement - this photo from May 2011

http://www.abpic.co.uk//images/images/1291163M.jpg

For good measure (and yes, I know it's not dark blue) here' the SkyNews one

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/6/7/2/1863276.jpg

[JimBall]

BPRI is wearing a Wescam 24, most likely containing a film or Red camera. This mount can take most cameras and camcorders - which is why it's so large. And, importantly, it can carry big heavy film lenses for 35mm and Red. (Red is a 4000 line camera - as opposed to HD 1080 and SD PAL 625)

The mount in the pic actually has half the globe missing - so they must have been working on the install. Once back together it really is 24".

The 2 others carry manufactured balls : looks like the BBC get UltraMedia (standard def) whilst Sky appear to have spent Rupert's pocket money on a Cineflex HD V14.

I'll get my anorak.

[OvertHawk]

Is that a counterweight, to compensate for the Wescam mass, slung underneath the tail-boom on BPRI?
OH

[JimBall]

Yep. Or it may simply be where they keep the biscuits to stop the pilot & crew from being distracted in flight.

[mickjoebill]

BPRI is wearing a Wescam 24

Pictured is a 36 inch gimbal derived from a Wescam unit.
Helicopter Film Services also has a 24 inch version.


Mickjoebill

[uncle ian]

'Twas I.

CANP is slightly more use than a chocolate fireguard in that it positively attracts curious military aircrew to the site.

As stated, when filming over a large area such as the lake district and looking for a weather window, CANP is totaly impracticle. I rarely, if ever these days, bother with it.

I was carrying a Cineflex on a single pole nosemount; very neat but quite surprisingly the clumsy looking mount for the 24" Wescam doesn't degrade performance much although there is a considerable weight penalty.

I was filming "Beautiful Britain" for NBC who will use the material in their pre Olympic promotion. BTW neither the Hawk nor I was "low flying". As if I would! We saw each other at least a mile away and passed with a good 500' between us and a friendly "wing waggle" apiece.

If the Hawk jockey reads this I'd be delighted to see an acknowledgement.

[JimBall]

MJB: Pictured is a 36 inch gimbal derived from a Wescam unit.
Helicopter Film Services also has a 24 inch version

Agreed. 12 inches is difficult to measure........... 9.5 is my limit.:)

uncle ian: it's been a while since we've had a moan together. Have you failed the Olympic security test yet? From BHA briefing it seems you WILL have the "civilian" airspace to yourselves. Unless AFPEX actually catches up with the 21st century.....

[andyhelo]

uncle ian: looked cool from where I was. Thanks for the info and my apologies, I wasn't meaning you were low, just lower than my usual 2000'-3000' most days, definitely looked more fun! :ok:

[griffothefog]

I agree with Uncle Ian, I was CANP noticed doing bucket work (wet concrete)
near Perth along the A9 moons ago and had a Cat A airmiss with a Hunter that flew neatly underneath me while in autorotation with an empty bucket from the top of a hill... :eek:

Like flies round **** comes to mind....:{