I shall divorce her.....

[Monocock]

Tonight I came in from work at about 7pm. I walked to the fridge, reached for a cold Carling, went to the drawing room, picked up the newspaper and opted for a quiet five minutes.

Enter her ladyship.....

Wife :"Darling, I've got something to show you that you're going to love".

Mono: "Oh, yes. What's that then darling?" (Slurp on beer)

Wife: "It's a really lovely photo"

Mono: "Oh not of the fathers race in sports day I hope?" (Slurp on beer)

Wife : "No, look at it. Isn't it great".

Mono is handed said photo.....

Mono: (choking on last slurp) "What the ****** is this?!" as he glares at the aerial shot of his house.

Wife: "Oh it was a really sweet guy who popped round and told me that he wanted to show how nice the house looks from the air so he took a photo. He said he hired a plane specially to do it and he only wanted £30".

Mono: "Did you get his number darling or a business card (Biting beer can)

Wife: "No but I asked him to take one of your parents house as the picture was so good".

Mono: "OK darling that's a really nice thought".

I dont know who you are or where you are from. If you even dare come round again I really will deposit your zoom lens where a flash is required.....

:suspect:

[GARDENER]

I am guessing you do not want the picture of your parents house then ;)

[Flyin'Dutch']

M,

You tight git.

Your thirthy quid goes towards keeping a fATPL holder in house and home and your wife obviously appreciates that an aerial view is beautiful and worth some money!

Just think how much cheaper an aerial picture is than a divorce, the money of which would only go to those rich legal folks.

;)

FD

[MLS-12D]

Better than coming home to find out that she's signed you both up for a timeshare (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4772424-102272,00.html) presentation. ;)

[Genghis the Engineer]

Oh the presentations are fine, Mrs.G and I had a lovely weekend in a posh hotel for nothing last weekend in exchange for sitting through an hours sales pitch. I'm hoping to get enough of these freebies to eventually get blacklisted by the companies - but certainly not buying one.

A colleague of mine, who has his own runway once took great delight in pointing out to an aerial-photos salesman the hangar and end of the runway in the top of the photo. Then bought the picture anyway, because it was far better than any he'd taken himself.

G

[Whirlybird]

I bought one for the same reason - with the up and down drafts you get in a steepsided valley I've just never managed to fly low enough to get a good shot of my house. Just being able to fly doesn't mean you're a good aerial photographer, especially in the mountains.

[MLS-12D]

Gengis, glad to hear that your experience has been better than those horror stories (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031128.wbtimeshare/BNPrint/SpecialEvents2) I keep hearing.

If things become too pressured during a sales presentation, you could always try telling them that you'd love to sign up but first have to get permission from your Trustee in Bankruptcy ... that might put them off. :p

[Cusco]

In the 25 years I've lived in this house I've had 3 blokes turn up at the door offering me photos of the house.

Two of them were brilliant and one was a bit iffy but they make an excellent photographic record of nearly a quarter of a century of our house.

During this time we've extended the house , trees have been chopped down and new ones in their place, driveways have been enlarged, houses have been built in in-fill plots next door::a real evolution.

I kinda wish , looking back that I could have had a photo every two or three years.

So/ you sad git, think forwards, buy the photo and do the same every few years and get a permanent living record of 'down your way'.

And keep a pilot in work.

Edit: Oh and I forgot to say the photos are light years ahead of any sad efforts I've tried to take from 1500 ft overhead.

[IO540]

ST

From the report, the Tornado was doing "IAS of 434 kt". I don't think that an incoming projectile with the frontal area of a Tornado would have been visible to the Cessna pilot, so whether he was taking pictures at the time is IMHO immaterial.

In reality this could happen to anybody. A 100kt plane with a human observer in it cannot take avoiding action in time against another one, head-on, doing 400kt. It was the Tornado pilot's fault, if anybody's.

So this example proves exactly nothing at all.

As for taking pictures while flying, I once filmed the entire coast of Spain from Malaga to Alicante while flying alone (on autopilot). Perfectly safe. I could have stuck the camera onto the window with suction cups.

[TonyR]

Mono are you OK?

Just you have been a bit quiet since the Sandown fly-in, your not off colour or anything.

[Send Clowns]

IO540

This is a well-known case. He had been recorded aparently flying illegally low in the past. he had just been banned from one club, this was his first flight as PIC from his new club. He had almost certainly been taking photographs while at the controls, as the only pilot, seriously degrading his flying. He was doing aerial work without a CPL. He was operating at low level in an area where a lot of fast movers fly at low level. He did not request a FIS, though he had been briefed that one was available. These circumstances killed not only him but the two crew of a Tornado.

If you take the occasional photo, fine, although filming a whole coast I suspect you degraded your lookout. Fly low if you need, or even for fun. Don't do both together. If you are flying low you should be doing nothing but looking out of the window, and occasionally glancing at the engine instruments and DI if necessary. It's a dangerous environment, especially in a low-level corridor.

I am not sure how you blame it on the Tornado crew, operating legally and in compliance with normal aviation practice. He was not doing so.

[Monocock]

TonyR

No, not really.

Had an EFATO last week at 100 ft.

Nuff said.

Still shaken.........:sad:

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

IO540, I think some others have summed it up quite nicely:

Hanging out of the window taking photos of the ground is, at best, bad airmanship. At worst, you are breaking the most fundamental Rule of the Air.

[TonyR]

Hanging out of the window taking photos of the ground is, at best, bad airmanship. At worst, you are breaking the most fundamental Rule of the Air.

I love taking photos and I often get the camera out and snap when on my own, as does every pilot I know.

As long as one is not flying low in busy airspace and spending minutes setting up a shot then where is the problem?

Do you ever look at ground fetures to check your position, ie. map to ground and ground to map possibily for a minute or so you have not looked for traffic.

Why do some of you winge moan and quote rules every time someone does anything other than fly A - B at 2000 ft

Taking photos (usually very bad ones) of friends property etc, is a nice thing to do and people like to see their home from the air.

Most people will still buy a good one anyway, I have.

Tony

[FNG]

Mono, check your PMs. Nuff respec', Tory dude.

[bookworm]

With regard to your comment about not spotting other traffic because it is too fast, sorry but it is not true, unless you don't look out, in which case relative speed is largely irrelevant.

This is nonsense. The relationship between closing speed and the probability of detection is clearly demonstrated in a number of papers on the subject, and is obvious if you stop to think about it for a minute.

At a closing speed of 7.5 nautical miles per minute, the Tornado would have been about a mile away just 8 seconds from impact. A Tornado head-on at a mile has an angular size of about 1/1000: in other words it's like trying to spot a stationary penny from about 30 ft away.

The biggest threat to GA is from tabloid-readers who have no understanding of risk and its implications for transport safety. The second biggest threat is from pilots who believe they are superhuman, and will continue to protest that they are superhuman all the way up to the point that their rights to fly are finally taken away by regulators who realise that they are not.

[TonyR]

ShyTorque

If you are that worried about midairs, then please do yourself a favour and stop flying.

How many midairs per 1000 crashes?

I enjoy looking at the ground, its how I fly when I fly the Rallye, no GPS, just Roads (and the odd road sign), Roundabouts, Rivers, Railways and all that.

Do you never look at the ground?

If you are unluckey enough to have a 500 knot jet on the nose your F....d anyway. And if he is up your arse what are you going to see.

Sorry about this thread Mono, but, back to the wife. The alternative would probibly be worse, so you might as well keep her and like the rest of us just keep on saying YES DEAR.

The Sun has just come out so I'm off flying.

Tony

[The Nr Fairy]

I think, without wishing to get drawn into too deep, that there's a difference between an approach to flying which mitigates risk as far as is possible, and wanton risk-taking - no prizes for guessing which side of the fence I think the gent in the Cessane falls on.

Given that, I think Tony R's comments are unwarranted.

Anyhow Mono - I'm still expecting my first engine failure - respect for getting it down and living to tell the tale.

[TonyR]

Which comments?

[FNG]

Don't be so tense, chaps. Check Tony's posts here and you'll see that he's also a pilot of long and varied experience, and he's not advocating reckless photo-flying such as that which led to the demise of the Cessna bloke and two unlucky Tornado guys. Anyway, you are missing the serious points in this thread, which are:

(1) Monocock almost cashed his chips this week but survived the pilot's worst nightmare, an EFATO, so well done him;

and, even worse,

(2) his missus is spending his lordly inheritance on mere baubles and frippery. Alas, for the demise of the landed gentry!

[witchdoctor]

As somebody currently involved as a pilot for an aerial survey company (no, we don't do the speculative stuff, knocking on doors - not that kind of outfit), the debate sparked off by Monocock's posting is interesting to me.

I know the incident well, and it is one that I have firmly at the forefront of my mind every time we have a low-level tasking to complete, particularly as our local area of ops is a highly active fast jet area.

Any pilot trying to complete an aerial survey/photographic assignment whilst acting as sole pilot (in this incident I don't believe that was the case) needs his/her head examined. Surveys are time consuming and require considerably more prep than just sticking a digi-camera out the window and snapping away occasionally as you bimble along. I'm inclined to agree with TonyR that this latter activity isn't spectacularly dangerous, but you can hardly refer to it as aerial surveying.

You cannot safely (please note the word safely) fly an aircraft, especially at low level (not 2000' or 3000' plus) in an active area of military low-level ops whilst you are farting about with a camera, setting up repeated shots of the target, without the slightest idea of what is going on about you.

Contrary to some of the comments here, it is perfectly possible to see fast moving, low-level traffic at a distance which would allow evasive action to take place, although in a C150 you won't evade very far away. The key is a disciplined lookout, proper monitoring of the R/T and the receipt of a FIS as a minimum from an ATC unit. Our aircraft is transponder equipped, and we always take a service from a radar-equipped unit if at all possible. Most of the military guys are professional enough that they have the sense and courtesy to call civvy units to let them know if they will be blasting by, and ATC always let us know if they have traffic headed our way, particularly if it is a mil unit we are using.

Your safety is enhanced by knowing exactly where you are, and making sure that everybody else does too. At the first sign of traffic heading your way, make sure you're looking the right way (knock off the survey too) and give out a precise position report so the other guy can do the same.

Yes it is a dangerous environment, so when you're done, get out. Pilots who ignore the dangers and do nothing to protect themselves are just asking for trouble. The industry has a lot of cowboys and unfortunately it tars all of us with the same brush.

[Andy_R]

Monocock

Well done for getting yourself back down in one piece.

And don't divorce her, just reduce the housekeeping ;) :p

[bookworm]

Which category do you think I am in then? From your profile and username you don't appear to be a pilot so are you commenting from personal experience or something you read in a book?

If you believe you can reliably spot a fast jet approaching you at a closing speed of 450 knots in time to do something about it, I think you're putting yourself in the superhuman category, ShyTorque.

Am I a pilot?

In 1982 a really sweet guy popped round and told a wife that he wanted to show how nice the house looks from the air so he took a photo. The wife told him that her son was interested in flying, so, unrequested, when he delivered the photo he dropped in a copy of the Pilot Yearbook.

And thus it turned out that the £20 for the photo was the thin end of a very expensive wedge. So if you feel that you'd rather not be sharing the skies with a mere mortal that doesn't think he can reliably spot a fast jet approaching at 450 kt in time to do something about it, blame the really sweet guy and the generosity of a husband who reacted differently from Monocock.

[Papa Charlie]

MC,

I only heard yesterday from a mutual friend about your EFATO. Glad you were able to walk away to tell the tale.

PC

[BRL]

Guys, PLEASE..This has gone well off now. From the first post about aerial photography it has now reduced to people having a pop at each other. Continue it via PM's guys, willy waving doesn't really fit into this thread.

Mono, like above, I also heard about your incident yesterday. Good to hear your down in one piece. :)

[Monocock]

Thanks BRL.

Looks like the devil didn't want me that day...:uhoh:

[ShyTorque]

My apologies. I have deleted my posts

[Monocock]

You needn't have done that Sir.

By the way, is your name a phonetic version of "Shy Talk" or "****e Hawk"?

:confused:

[Kolibear]

'****e Hawk' is a derogatory and undeserved name for the (Black) Kite. Kites are some of the most amazing flyers in the bird world. In contrast to many birds of prey, they are fully aerobatic. To see a Kite in action, with wings going in different directions, forked tail twisted through 90 degree as it performs a stall turn with a roll off the top, prior to diving down to a pick up food, is a privilege.

Drive up the M40 if you want to see a Red Kite, but we did see one over Wycombe/ Booker once.

[map5623]

Mono, did UG survive OK, as you seem to have, well done. Has the adenaline started to return to normal.

Mike

[Monocock]

Mono, did UG survive OK

Err, not really. She fell on her sword to keep me in one piece and she's looking slightly worse for wear now.:sad:

[david viewing]

Aerial photography has other hazards.

A friend of mine rented a Cessna to a photographer whose camera lens fell off, going through the roof of a house!

'Scuse me, ma'am, would you like to buy this photo (its a bit blurred)? And could I have my lens back?

[BeauMan]

Monocock - just wanted to say well done to you for coming through your EFATO unscathed. Doing the drills while training for my Skill Test was hard enough, but having it happen for real... sheesh, that's rather worrying... Hope the aeroplane's fixable, but just relieved to hear you're in one piece.

Witchdoctor - this thread seems to have been quite an emotive one. Thanks for putting the aerial surveyors point across in such an informative and thought out way. If nothing else, it's made me think a bit harder about how accurate I should make my position reporting when I ask for an FIS; you never know who or what else is lurking out there...

[phoenix son]

Sorry to sound ignorant, have I missed something? I've just read through this thread and it jumps from Aerial Photography to what I presume was a near-miss with a Tornado? Can anyone enlighten me? Ta...

PHX

[witchdoctor]

Beau Man

First time anybody has classed my random mutterings as informative and well thought out. I think I shall go for a lie down.;)

Phoenix Son

The link is that the fatal collision between the Tornado and a Cessna is that the Cessna was thought to have been conducting a low level photography detail at the time.

[phoenix son]

Witchdoctor,

Ta...Makes a lot more sense now...

PHX

[ShyTorque]

Mono,

My username could be either. I am a little shy :O .

I lived and worked for a while in the far east and we had Black-Eared Kites (****e Hawks, as Kolibear says) living on our roof. I also used to display fly a semi-aerobatic heli, some of the manoeuvres the Hawks did seemed similiar to what the heli could do. I later went to a job where we hovered around looking for a certain "class" of person, so the name ShyTorque, which is a slightly less rude version for general use, came into being. :ok:

[MLS-12D]

If you are flying low you should be doing nothing but looking out of the window, and occasionally glancing at the engine instruments and DI if necessary. It's a dangerous environment, especially in a low-level corridor.Difficult to argue with that advice.

Here (http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/2000/a00o0057/a00o0057.pdf) is a link to a report of a rather notorious mid-air collision that occured when a highway traffic reporter/pilot wasn't watching where he was going (it's a miracle that no one was injured).

Although I am usually against attempts to legislate safety by introducing all sorts of rules and restrictions, I don't understand why it is legal for someone to simultaneously fly an aircraft and spot road traffic and report on it and broadcast advertisements (which obviously involves reading from a prepared text). Clearly, it's just an accident waiting to happen. :ugh:

[Slowsafecruise]

Monocock... where did your EFATO happen? you all ok?

[skyviews]

Hmm!!!

As a single crew aerial photographer, yes you guessed who i work for it doesnt take a rocket scientist, a few points about some of the comments made:

1. All crews are extremely professional.

2. Is it any more dangerous than flying jump planes and throwing live humans out.

3. The CAA are very aware of our work and have no problem with it.

4. yes we are pilots trying to get to the airlines.

5. any company allowing single crew with less than a thousand hours is irresponsible.

6. Confusion over the incident, jag and c150 both killed neither illegally operating.

7. Its 500ft horizontally and vertically outside towns. ( this means if i so desired i could take a picture at 200ft as long as i were no where near person or vessal by 500ft)


HOWEVER WE WOULD NOT DO THIS AS THAT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE!!!

8. i would rather fly with a guy with 2000 hours low level exp than a 250hr guy who is lucky enough to get a airline job( reasons: better situational awareness, handling skills, EXPERIENCE)

9. Jets dont fly at 2000/3000 ft and miss airliners or other light a/c wake up boys. Flying has its dangers no matter what type, if you dont like it, dont do it!

And Finally i could name at least 20 capts for major airlines who have done this job as a means of career progression. With 250 hours and a nice shinny IR your only qualified to start learning anyone who believes otherwise is either very arrogant or a fool ( I was there once and have learnt more about flying, airmanship in this job than i did in training).

If you dont actually do this kind of work you have no idea whats involved and are unqualified to blanket criticise the industry.

p.s many of aerial survey companies today ( not all) originated from one major company back in the eighties.

regards

[S-Works]

skyviews. Your comments are well made but I am still not sure I would agree that single pilot photo work is safe.

I have friends who are multi thousand hour ariel photo work guys and they always work 2 crew as they believe that a pilot taking photographs does not have sufficient situational awareness to be safe.

[skyviews]

bose-x

I started with a photographer and had the same opinion as many posts here, it wasnt safe!

However after 3 mobths of going round in left hand orbits ask yourself this question,

How mind numbingly boring does it get when the aircraft is trimmed and effectively flys itself?

Yes you have temps etc to monitor but it doesnt stop you from becoming relaxed or when youve not had any traffic passed to you by the FIS.

Ive worked a military service before without a single transmission for over an hour, plus there are two of you so a false sense of security can occur where two eyes are better than one!

But single crew your workload is so high you never have time to relax your edge is constantly there, temps/pressures/carb/photo/lookout.

The best method I have found for the military aspect is to call the local FIS provider on entering an area, inform them that you are in the area and if unable to keep two way radio that you will call ops normal hourly. This works very well, often i can here the station inform me of traffic but unable to reply.

Wales is a great place to work I have a beautiful shot of a hawk 100ft below me near valley.

Incidently Last year I had an encounter that was far to close for my liking ( wake turbulance expeirenced by two f-16's passing apx 15-30.ft under me) And guess what I was recieving a FIS.

See and avoid boys see and avoid!!

[IO540]

That's because an FIS is essentially worthless. Take London Info; most of the people that talk to them are PPL students with instructors, PPL students flying solo, new PPL holders who were taught to call up everybody en-route, people going abroad chatting about flight plans. I reckon at least 90% of the traffic doesn't talk to them; if they did the service would collapse.

[Final 3 Greens]

IO

I think that you are being a little unfair.

Sure, the FIS experience is a little variable, but if you are in a AIAA and taking it from the mil or local vis, its far better that your description of London Info, although I agree that the latter has its issues!

[Right Stuff]

So, skyviews, let me get this straight - you're making a strong case for single pilot ops and then admitting you've had two very near misses with fast jets.

I think you've unwittingly settled this one for us!

[witchdoctor]

Are you sure it was that close and not just because you were peering at them through a telephoto lens?:D

[skyviews]

NO thats not what i was doing.

I happened to be to crew at the time and getting FIS BLAH BLAH
and I still had a close encounter.

My arguement is there is little to be gained (IN MY OPINION) by two crew and the only time I have had an issue with this is when i was two crewing and thats in 2 1/2 years.

I trust myself and myself only when Im up there no matter who im flying with.

Regards

[Sliding member]

I think Skyviews, that you have to remeber that FIS is purely info only, if you call them up (most LARS stations)and ask for that they often aren't intrested in you, often all you get is the regional and maybe a squark code. I normally find its upto me to maintain listening watch and interperate where potential conflicts may be. Expecting to be told of every conflict is a bit much to ask.
It doesn't fill me with confidence to think A/C are flying around with the pilot looking down a 'photo lens.