'Hobby' Aerial photography business

[pinkpilot150]

I would like to set up a 'hobby' business doing aerial photography. I am part way through my CPL and have a share in a suitable aircraft. I have some experience doing aerial photography and have all the right equipment and lots of enthusiasm.

I have done enough research (and trawling the almost incomprehensible ANO) to tell me if I were to 'employ' a CPL/ATPL pilot to fly me round (and I take the photo's) - this is classed as both 'Aerial Work' and 'Public Transport' - and the later means that I need to have an Air Operators Certificate - which even when you own your own aircraft is difficult and expensive and really means some serious commitment.

However, if I fly myself in my own aircraft (when I eventually get my CPL), is it legal for me to then 'employ' somebody to take the photo's as a paid passenger?

I understand how the former translates into the 'Public Transport' cat, as effectivley, I woud be paying to be carried as a passenger in the aircraft. The latter however, would seem to be possible, and would remain in the 'Private' category (although still Aerial work requiring a CPL pilot), but it would mean that I would no need an AOC?

Has anybody else looked into this and am I interpreting the ANO correctly?

Cheers

[As I See It]

I would suggest that in both cases you are well within the aerial work category, with the ATPL/CPL being an employee of your company and you being the photographer of the company. The same as you being the CPL and hiring a photographer. Only if the ATPL/CPL carries fare paying passengers either A to A or A to B for the purpose of public transport would you need an AOC.
Hope this explanation helps


If nothing else it's 'As I See It'

[pinkpilot150]

I agree that both cases are Aerial Work which requires a CPL/ATLP pilot.

Unfortunatly thought, I don't agree with the rest of your opinion - careful scrutiny of ANO section 130 (particularly para 1 and 2) state:- 'the flight is public transport [and therefore operators require an AOC] if valuble consideration (say money) is given or promised for the carriage of passengers on that flight.

The definition of passengers any 'non- crew' and is defined in an earlier section of the ANO.

Following this through, if you are not crew (and a photographer, is specifically not defined as crew) - you are a paying passenger (the fact that you happen to be operating a camera is neither here or there.) The flight is public transport and therefore an AOC is required.

I am fairly happy with that now - having spent many sleepless nights trawling through the ANO and associated document, but the question of the legalities of flying your owned (sharded ownership aircraft) and paying somebody to take the photos sounds like a reasonable thing to do - and I don't think an AOC is required?

Does anybody do this for a living/hobby who could help clarify things?

[As I See It]

This all depends on whether you would be considered as crew or not, you could make it company policy that all flights are to have two crew, pilot and navigator, the navigator having the dual role of navigator and cameraman, just a thought!

[skyviews]

No need for an AOC.

Aircraft must be on Public transport reg though.

CPL needed as carrying out aerial work.

We employ photographers and pilots to fly them no requirement for an AOC.

Things to be considered 50hrs checks must be done by licenced engineer.

Its bloody hard work and not as easy as people think to take pictures that are sellable.

I believe for commissioned work you venture into the realms of AOC territory.

Feel free to contact for more advised.

[cwatters]

Here in Belgium we had someone knock on our door offering to sell us an aerial photo of our house. The photos were taken from a helicopter, then someone came round with a contact print to get your order, then they came back with the framed print. Going door to door must be the worse part. I imagine it would be impossible to photograph every house in a road one after the other using a fixed wing.

[skyviews]

Simple if you follow set format. Some shots will be upright, by that I mean the camera on its side, others will be horizontal.

The trick is to do all uprights in one run then all horizontals in the next, change the film in the turn.

Hellicoptors whilst very easy to manipulate position are 1) very noisey 2) can cause other probs like camera shake due to vibration ( so ive been told, never tried) 3) very expensive, they are maybe more suited to landscape /scenery type of work all depends on the type of work you want to do.

selling will be the hardest part, competition, low percentage of film makes a sale.

[buzzc152]

It's a hard job and a cut throat business.

[As I See It]

Used to work in general aviation as an engineer, but very into the hobby of photography. I was asked to photograph a golf course by one of the company pilots, so we set off in the C206 with door removed. When almost at the club I decided to get my medium format gear ready and assume a photo taking position. No problems snapping and changing lenses, different views etc, job done and set of back, it was than that I realised I wasn't strapped in!!!!:uhoh:

[Piltdown Man]

Just out of interest, what do you call a suitable aircraft? I used to work for a well established operator flying their 172 (pilot to the right, cameraman to the left: less slipstream therefore less shake) and I'd suggest that this the bare minimum, even when the rear seats are removed.

[Jetstream Rider]

My parents had a guy come around and offer a framed pic of the house for £30.

They said it was too expensive (it was) and he went away. Two days later he knocked again and offered it for a tenner.

We got it.

In talking to the chap it appeared that he needed any cash he could get, as his business wasn't doing too well as most poeple didn't want to shell out the cash. This guy used a 152 with two of them on board and they had photograhed a larde portion of the neighbourhood.

Having said that, commission work would be very different than cold calling.

Good luck.

PS this was in NE London.

[skyviews]

C152 is the best aircraft to use for high intensity filming, more power than 150 very easy to turn tightly lots of rudder authority, cheaper to rent /run.Especially handy single crew.

I use a c172 for one reason only and that is to make the transits up and down the country quicker and more comfortable.

152 very cosy with two of you though, after 6-7 hours it gets a little cramped, i say 6-7 hours because thats the kind of time you need to put in to make a small profit margin.

buzz's comments are spot on!!!!

[Raggyman]

Could suggest one thing, which I am learning to do at the moment, and that is flying 60 scale remote control helicopters. These things can apparently carry 3 house bricks, so a camera isn't going to be a big issue.

Still learning to fly at the moment, which is damn lot harder than it looks. Had one crash already, but that was due to a mechanical failure mid flight. Very nasty, and pretty expensive, at £400 so far for repairs. Ended up getting a 30 scale chopper, for about £500 all told, and alot cheaper to fix, but so far, fingers crossed haven't crashed it yet.

The plan will be to put a 8 megapixel camera on board, with a live video feed so you can see what your taking photos of. Also need to build the platform to keep things steady.

[Aesir]

I used to work for a well established operator flying their 172 (pilot to the right, cameraman to the left: less slipstream therefore less shake)

Uhh.. I don´t fly fixed wings anymore but isn´t the commander´s station in the left hand seat on the 172?

What does the AFM say about minimum crew and pilot position!

You have to be careful when changing the operation parameters the manufacturer has set in the aircraft flight manual, it´s illegal!

[paddyboy]

Really...:confused:

In days gone by I'd always solo a Warrior/Arrow from the right hand seat!

Nearer the exist of course.;):ok:

[Daysleeper]

What does the AFM say about minimum crew and pilot position!

Dont have the precise wording in front of me but its something like "must be able to manipulate all switches controls and circuit breakers." Which in a single cessna is easy from either seat.

[pinkpilot150]

My 'suitable aircraft' is a C150 (1967). Its got a good slow loiter speed, high wing, windows open right up to the wing for an unrestricted view (apart from the strut which has to be shot around) and although transit time could be much better (I could walk!), I already own a part share so I am paying circa £35p/h wet, and its got a Public Transport C of A - so this makes it OK for aerial work.

OK, its cosy but I only fly with friends (if they aren't at the start of the flight, they are by the end!) Space in the back is plenty for a couple of digital bodies with lenses attached. Even the Canon 70-200F4 (L) does not weigh that much despite how much it costs!

Skyviews, could I ask if you rent your aircraft, or own, and I would be looking or commisioned work only, I don't fancy the idea of pre-shooting and then going door to door (unless I could get my hands on a blonde female student type to do the dirty work) - hmm, that didn't come out quite the way I expected.

Daysleeper - according to AFM, does that mean I can fly my Cessna 150 sitting in the luggage compartment, or maybe on top of the wing?

Actually, W + B might be an issue flying from the luggage compartment.;)

[Maude Charlee]

No such thing as a 'hobby' business - it's either one or the other. If you have the slightest intention of approaching with anything less than 100% professionalism, you're going to end up as an accident statistic. It's a difficult and dangerous way to spend your time in the air, more so when it is single pilot (I wish the CAA would outlaw that practice), and the less 'cowboy' operators there are the better. There are curently too many gash operations which give the entire photography/survey business a bad reputation because of their halfwit antics clowning around at minimum level, busting controlled airspace and producing shoddy, over-priced results.

If you want to do it, do it properly, and stop trying to cut corners and get it done on the cheap. Otherwise you're liable to find out the hard way whether or not your great idea is legal or not.

[skyviews]

MC

whilst I agree with most of your post I have to strongly disagree with respect to your comments about single pilot ops.

I think there is also a habit of assuming that aerial photography is the same as Survey work, the two are very different.

We wont go over the old ground of s/crew verses two crew....will we??

regards

[pinkpilot150]

Thank for your view on this topic Maude, however, I think that you need to make the distinction between professional and profesionalism.

[AlanM]

So what if then....

if I offered my services to PP for free..... would it then be OK?

(a serious offer!) :)

[Daysleeper]

Daysleeper - according to AFM, does that mean I can fly my Cessna 150 sitting in the luggage compartment, or maybe on top of the wing?

If your legs are long enough! :O