Are we THAT hard up for cash?!

[TheWizard]

Saw this request linked on T w i t t e r earlier
Chinook Mk4 Scrounge • FighterControl • Military Aviation Forum (http://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=41964)

Are the CTT really that hard up that they have to appeal to photographers on a spotting website for 'official' photos to use in the new Chinook manuals?

Surely if it is for CBT and Aircrew Manuals an official photographer can be despatched to Boscombe or Fleetlands?!

I knew things were bad but even so............ :confused:

[Could be the last?]

It won't be the RAF/MOD on the scrounge it will be the company providing the CBT, trying to do it on the cheap and keep profits up!

[Finningley Boy]

Personally,

I can't think of a better source for aircraft photos!:ok:

FB:)

[predictable]

yes. yes we are.

[NutLoose]

I think the BBMF did similar the other year for their brochure. It is an excellent way to get some cracking photos that the in service providers may never get at places they wouldn't be at either..... Some of the photos I have seen far exceed those the services ever produced.......

Anyone remember the RAF Chinook MK3 recruiting posters that were produced and binned by the RAF when the HC1 came into service??? :p
I often wonder how Mark D**** is these days.

[chinook240]

Have to agree, some of the best and most dynamic photos are taken by amateurs, have a look at the UKAR site for proof of that. It might not be a case of cost for a service photog, but acknowledgement that we live in an internet age.

Nutloose,

Did they use a poster calling the Mk 1 a Mk 3 in the early 80s?

[500N]

I don't see anything wrong with asking if anyone has any photos, its just the same as going to a Photo Agency, but I would be surprised if they didn't pay anything for them. They should at least offer.

Another important factor is the person who took the photo needs to make sure that they maintain copyright in case they want to use it or sell it in the future and give permission for a "one off use" by whichever company wants to use it.

I notice quite a few of the spotters put the copyright logo on all of their images so some are obviously commercially aware.

.

[NutLoose]

Nutloose,

Did they use a poster calling the Mk 1 a Mk 3 in the early 80s? Errr yes and no , :uhoh: we had 3 Engineers called Mark on the OCU, to reduce the confusion they were nicknamed, hence they were referred to as Mk 1 Mk 2 and Mk 3.
At this time the Chinook was the new kid on the block and the RAF decided to publicise the new toy, so a mid air photo sortie was planned to produce a batch of Chinook posters for all of the recruiting offices windows etc...
Sortie done, Posters were duly printed ( pre photoshop days) and people gathered around to admire the new poster..... there clear as day written in big letters in the soot aft of the visible engine was Mk 111... of course he denied ever doing it and the posters had to be binned, but it would be nice to know he got a copy. :E

I notice quite a few of the spotters put the copyright logo on all of their images so some are obviously commercially aware.I do too, but you don't need too, had issues on here with one of my images that ended up as a 1/2 page spread in The Sun, but PPrune sorted it to both the site and my satisfaction.

[MG]

Delivery of the CBT is nothing to do with the CTT. The company delivering the CBT has just about all the photos it needs.

This just sounds like a 'send three and fourpence' story.

[TheWizard]

Considering the request comes from a member of the CTT (according to the post on FC anyway) then perhaps they don't!!

[MG]

As I said, the delivery of the CBT has nothing to do with the CTT, not a thing.

[TheWizard]

Fair enough. Someone is telling porkies then! :uhoh:

[good finish]

In my humble view anything that saves tax payers money should be looked at.
Why should the tax payer fund an 'official' photographer when better results can be obtained for free/cheaper
There is still huge waste in the military and this would be another example.
All available resources should be directed at the front line and not 'back office'.

[glad rag]

Uhuh, and what happens when the unplanned/unexpected drops in the "front lines" laps, who sorts it out whilst they carry on doing their "front line" stuff?

Some very narrow vision here.

Now, about that overseas aid budget...

[cazatou]

glad rag

I live overseas - how do I apply?:ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

glad rag

I live overseas - how do I apply?:ok:

Ah the irony :p