View Full Version : Sky News Filming on Take-off
For my sins, I've just watched an online Syy News report entitled "Sky reveals air security loopholes", which I presume is being broadcast on television as well (http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-terror_p19253,00.html).
Eighty seconds into the footage and the reporter is covertly filming out the window, presumably with an electronic camera, as the BA aircraft lifts off. Isn't use of a film camera banned on takeoff? I'll happily lodge a complaint but want to get my facts right!
Helo
derekvader
18th Aug 2006, 10:21
Surprise surprise, the plane did not crash due to the use of electronic equipment. Another airline security myth debunked :ok:
You need to lose the bracked off the end of your URL by the way - should be
http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-terror_p19253,00.html
'll happily lodge a complaint but want to get my facts right!
We are all kinky for different things. But, pray, why would you bother?
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
18th Aug 2006, 10:27
Crikey, do I have to hide all the pics I've taken in the past or is this a new "security" thing? Got a cracking shot of the back garden at Buck House from a Midland 737..
Would only bother because their trashy journalism irritates me ... which of course will then lead to the next question, "why were you looking at their site anyway?", to which I answer that their only redeeming feature is that they tend to break news early.
the_hawk
18th Aug 2006, 10:46
So maybe there is a connection between people wanting breaking news very early and the low qualitiy of these quick news? Imagine...
paulthornton
18th Aug 2006, 10:51
I can see where you are coming from, but will the complaint get anywhere?
Yes, they disobeyed an instruction from the commander of the aircraft and there are rules enshrined in the ANO that means that in theory they go for a nice chat down at the nearest police station. Can you see it happening? I can't.
Any more than I can see the driver being hauled in front of a judge for them filming from a car doing 75mph down the motorway (unless they were driving it at the same time, of course).
Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, the press/media love the whole concept of anything to do with aviation and disaster or the threat of it however remote. They aren't all that interested in the boring old facts of the matter as that doesn't sell.
Just another lovely fact of life of the world we live in. On that depressing note, I'll shut up!
LD Max
18th Aug 2006, 10:55
This item has just appeared on Channel Five news at 11:30. (I believe Sky News produce the Channel Five news also).
I must admit the same question occurred to me.
The item was about a return flight to Brussels on a BA flight. So-called "banned items" (Water, Hair gel, Toothpaste, Shaving Foam), being screened out at Heathrow, but allowed to be carried in the hand luggage for the return journey.
On BOTH outbound and inbound legs, the reporter covertly filmed inside the aircraft.
I think the point he made was a valid one. The fact that UK security procedures are so unbearably OTT is not even having the desired effect - to protect aircraft within UK airspace so long as other states don't play the same game.
However, it makes a total mockery of the whole situation when he is able to bring a covert video camera with him to make the piece in the first place. I'm not bothered about it though. He jolly well SHOULD be able to take camera equipment with him, together with any other valuable electronic items any reasonable person would want to carry.
My own feeling is that the UK security procedures should be scrapped. I don't think they are either reasonable or effective. Frankly it makes no difference whether liquids, gels or creams are permitted items or not. Or whether your carry-on bag is big or small. There are plenty of ways to blow an aircraft out of the sky and since a total ban on hand luggage is patently unsustainable, it should be replaced by good pax profiling and better screening.
[Edit] "BOAC" made this post HERE (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2784973&postcount=542) which spells out what you are and are not allowed to carry. There's no restriction on portable electronic equipment any more. It makes the ban on other items even more totally bizzare.
GK430
18th Aug 2006, 11:13
This whole issue is getting ridiculous. Why is there such paranoia about filming/cameras etc. Let's face it, a photograph is just a method of storing an image that the eye has seen.
If you can't use video equipment onboard, how have documentaries been made? Discovery Wings would have so much less to show.....probably be censored in future, just in case it's seen as a terrorist training package:{ :ugh:
And what about the crew, has this put an end to so much we see on airliners.net and other sites? Close ups of contrailing in RVSM airspace and great views on the approach.
I can see I am going to have to send all my camera gear by FedEx when i head to Avalon, Paris and Dubai shows in '07:*
MaxRange120
18th Aug 2006, 11:25
LD Max
Looks like Ryanair agree with your view on carry on bags.
I have just seen bbc online item http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5261908.stm
Ryanair states the present cabin bags situation is not a viable one in the long term.
MR120
putt for dough
18th Aug 2006, 11:33
Who says Sky News didn't get permission to film
onboard anyway?
lomapaseo
18th Aug 2006, 11:44
For my sins, I've just watched an online Syy News report entitled "Sky reveals air security loopholes", which I presume is being broadcast on television as well (http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-terror_p19253,00.html).
Eighty seconds into the footage and the reporter is covertly filming out the window, presumably with an electronic camera, as the BA aircraft lifts off. Isn't use of a film camera banned on takeoff? I'll happily lodge a complaint but want to get my facts right!
Helo
I don't think so.
Isn't it more like that it's up to the crew? And in this case since the crew didn't mind or were unaware that only a chewing out at the time of the infraction might be warranted?
View From The Ground
18th Aug 2006, 22:58
I also saw the report and was interested to note that the reporter actually broke the law in the report by placing his cigarette lighter in his hold baggage! The CAA issued a reminder re the potential danger of cigarette lighters being placed into hold baggage earlier in the week.
Re the filming I wonder did he buy his camera at airside duty free???
Suprise suprise the latest BAA security update relaxes the rules on the carriage of duty free liquids....quelle suprise...yet at the same time they are now going back to x-raying 100% of both passenger AND staff shoes! Profit before safety permissable for the BAA but not for the airlines......
gordonroxburgh
20th Aug 2006, 11:23
it makes a total mockery of the whole situation when he is able to bring a covert video camera with him to make the piece in the first place.
I think you will find a standard (small) domestic camcorder would have been used to film on board like quite a lot or tourists still do when going on holiday.
It was a good piece that actually made a very valid point, normally called good journalism in my book.
gregers
23rd Aug 2006, 03:29
I have to admit that i have taken pics with a digital camera during flights and have never heard any anouncements about no use of digital photography or camcorders during any part of the flights. in fact one of the Stewardesses on one flight (FlyNiki, with the cool sci-fi uniforms :ok: ) was asking me about the type of camera and would i recomend it. they did state no use of mobile phones though, even for photography with camera phones.
all the best.
Greg
Memetic
28th Aug 2006, 00:24
I have to admit that i have taken pics with a digital camera during flights and have never heard any anouncements about no use of digital photography or camcorders during any part of the flights. :hmm:
Do you have one of those all mechanical digital cameras? You know the ones that are not included in the "All electronic items must be switched off for take off and landing" announcments? :rolleyes:
Lucifer
28th Aug 2006, 01:40
Surprise surprise, the plane did not crash due to the use of electronic equipment. Another airline security myth debunked
Commercial filming requires permission, and applies to any private property - private filming is (generally) banned, but realistically is at discretion.
rufus.t.firefly
28th Aug 2006, 10:55
As a frequent traveller who enjoys taking the odd photo whilst in flight ,
maybe We should all just be given a blindfold for the entire flight ! ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT SWITCHED OFF - does that include hearing aids , digital watches etc ! I agree with mobile phones being switched off - for the sheer annoyance factor to fellow passengers.
Come on lets get real about this .... you get to see parts of the world whilst in flight you will never see from that viewpoint so you should be able to record it !!
:ugh: :ugh:
Memetic
28th Aug 2006, 12:45
Rufus, I too have taken photos in flight and would be hacked off at being told I could not. I also agree that the All electronic equipment off for take off and landing is, now, not really possible - half the devices now only go to standby rather than off even if you switch them off.
But for somone to imply digital cameras, or even modern film camera's don't count as electronics seemed a bit odd!