Use of video camera on commercial flight

[washingtondave]

First of all apologies if I'm posting this in the wrong thread.

However, having seen lots of videos clearly taken through the window by passengers on well known airlines, I am eager to know if this is officially sanctioned or have they been done without the knowledge of the cabin crew. Also, I notice by the clarity, that lots of these must have been taken by cameras securely mounted. Can someone tell me how this is achieved, as whenever I fly I usually hear the crew requesting all electronic devices to be switched off.

You may guess that I would like to record some of my own trips inflight, but want to do it legally.

Once again apologies if posted in wrong thread/forum.

[TOWTEAMBASE]

This was discussed a while back. The areas of concern are the take offs and landings that are caught on camera, as the crew clearly tell you to turn them off for these stages of flight,but may be used with flight safe mode during.

[mixture]

they been done without the knowledge of the cabin crew.

I think you know that is the answer. :E

The pre-flight announcements are pretty clear about electronic equipment being OFF for take off and landing and flight-mode for the rest.

May I humbly suggest you Google "your_favourite_airline electronic devices" ... pretty much all the major carriers and many of the minor ones have their policies clearly published on their websites.

[washingtondave]

Thanks for the replies. You both more or less confirmed what I suspected, but I am still amazed at the large number of videos on YouTube, clearly taken through the window of the passenger cabin, in all phases of flight.

I appreciate airlines set their own policies, but there are even more examples of videos taken from the flight deck, so I cannot understand the stance of cameras interfering with flight instrumentation. Obviously the videos from the flight deck are sanctioned by the airlines concerned, and the airlines doing so include the big world wide carriers..

So where is the problem? If you look at the publicly viewable videos it is fairly obvious that the camera(s) used are not secretly hidden, as the stability of most shows that they must be clamped to some sort of suction device.

As an infrequent flyer, I enjoy the view out of the window (cloud cover permitting) and merely want to record some of the interesting sights I see.

[TrakBall]

You may find this article informative.

Can I Take Pictures on a Commercial Airplane (http://photography.lovetoknow.com/Can_I_Take_Pictures_on_a_Commercial_Airplane)

[washingtondave]

Thanks for that link Trakball.

It's still a grey area about the reasons for using video cameras or not. As I said previously, I have watched many videos on youtube taken from the flightdeck, which by their nature, must have the full approval of the airlines concerned.

Whether the videos taken from the passenger cabin were allowed or not is difficult to say, but surely if it is allowable on the flightdeck there appears to be no sound reason to impose a ban on use by passengers.

[Fester Karbunkle]

Rather than look for reason not to follow the rules, which are quite clear, you should perhaps accept the reasons given (in many threads before) as being valid ones.

[Torque Tonight]

if it is allowable on the flightdeck there appears to be no sound reason to impose a ban on use by passengers

This is not valid logic. Flight deck crew and passengers are not subject to identical rules and regulations. Many examples of this and the reasons behind it should be blindingly obvious.

Some of the reasons behind the restrictions on the use of electronics in the passenger cabin include (but are not limited to):

Distraction of the passenger from the safety briefings.
Lack of situational awareness of passengers during safety critical phases of flight due to concentration on electronics, rather than their surroundings and cabin announcements.
Physical risk to other passengers from loose items flying around the cabin in an emergency.
Objection of cabin crew to being filmed while they are trying to do their job They are there for flight safety, not for performances.
The terms and conditions of carriage on the passengers' ticket or contract.
The unknown threat of interference to aircraft systems.

None of these apply equally to the flight deck. You'll argue that the last one does, but if an electronic item in the flight deck causes any sort of problem it can be switched off immediately. Not so easy when the item is in an unknown location in the cabin.

[mixture]

a grey area

I dispair. :ugh:

What gray area ? Its pretty black and white.

You = Passenger
You = Subject to airline policy on passenger use of PEDs
∴ End of Story

Stop sticking your nose into what other people on board (flight or cabin crew) may (or may not) be doing. Because the truth is you don't know both sides of the coin, and your assumptions are therefore likely to be woefully inadequate.

[Torque Tonight]

if it is allowable on the flightdeck there appears to be no sound reason to impose a ban on use by passengers


To further illustrate the flawed logic, a fire axe is allowable on the flight deck. You think passengers are therefore allowed to use one in the cabin.

This issue has been done to death many times.

[washingtondave]

Whilst I didn't necessarily expect a positive response, I didn't expect some of them to be facetious.

Torque Tonight. Let's not compare apples and pears, a small sports camera does not equate to a fire axe. On your other points:-

Distraction during safety briefing - what more can the cabin crew inform passengers who have flown often.
Lack of awareness - in the event of an emergency no one is going to be more concerned about using a camera than their own safety.
Physical risk from loose items - a fair point, but I'm sure that on an average flight there plenty of other loose items just as dangerous.
Cabin crew - my original question had no intention of filming cabin crew, other passengers or whatever, merely to record the things I could see out of the window.
Terms and conditions - I never disputed that, just merely asked if it was possible, and if not, why not.
Unknown threat of interference - I don't know enough to comment on that (who does), but they have been allowed on the flight deck, although I accept your point of them being accessible (although, by the nature of my question, it would not be my intention to "hide" any camera I used).

Mixture. I am not "sticking my nose into" anything, merely posing a question and exploring options. This a forum, and I have every right to do so.

Fester. I do obey the rules where they apply, but in my opinion they are not clear, as rules, or how they are applied, vary between carriers.

[NZScion]

Dave, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not a vexatious troll, and respond to your points:

Distraction during safety briefings is a valid concern. The vast majority of customers, including frequent travellers are unfamiliar with the onboard equipment. Even some aircraft of the same type within an airline have variations that need to be pointed out (i.e. door operation, location of lifejackets). Airlines have a legal obligation to give a briefing to pax, and to do all possible that the passengers listen to and understand the briefing.
There are also examples of passengers involved in emergency evacuations recording the evacuation (Polish Wheels-Up landing is a recent example available online). Obviously, passengers should be free from all distractions, particularly when involved in an evacuation. A passengers only conscious thought should be getting out.
Loose items are a real threat, not just in a crash scenario, but also in non-normal situations such as a rejected takeoff. The cabin crew instruct you to store your items in overhead lockers or under the seat in front of you for this reason. Passengers are permitted some objects, such as books, as these tend to be relatively soft and less liable to cause injury. Your phone/camera in its hard plastic case is a different story.
The threat of interference is a real one, although instances of interference are not likely to be reported in publicly accessible domains. Your point regarding crews recording from the flight deck is moot. Some airlines have differing policies regarding PED use for crew versus passenger use, as some risk is mitigated by having the device under the control of a crew member. Furthermore, whilst there are examples of flight deck videos which were undoubtedly sanctioned by the airline concerned, I'd suspect that many videos were in fact recorded by crews acting outside their company policies and/or illegally.

At the end of the day, passengers (and crew) are required to follow the rules in force at the time. If they do not, they do so at their own jeopardy. I would suggest to you that next time you are on a flight and you feel that there is a "grey area" around what you can or cannot do, you ask a crew member. They will tell you in black and white what is acceptable.

[Efe Cem Elci]

I've always tried to explain the "peace-of-mind" aspect.

The cabin crew and fellow passengers don't have to worry about, try to figure out, or get agitated about whether you're filming a video or have your phone turned on and connected to your provider. Otherwise it becomes yet another factor in why it is just easier to have everyone turn off all PED during takeoffs & landings and some for even all of the flight.

[Di_Vosh]

Dave, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not a vexatious troll, and respond to your points:

+ 1 to that.

Dave, you do appear to be trying to justify your actions. Just a few of your points...

Obviously the videos from the flight deck are sanctioned by the airlines

Wanna bet? Many of the flight deck videos are NOT sanctioned by the airline involved. Pilots, just like passengers, like showing stuff on youtube. Many of them get disciplined for doing so. SOME of the videos online are ones done for training and/or PR and have found their way onto the internet.

And so what if they have/do? What possible relevance has this got to do with you when you're told to turn off your electronic device prior to take off? IMHO, you're the same as a motorist complaining to the traffic cop about getting a speeding ticket because somebody else sped the other day and didn't get a ticket.


Distraction during safety briefing - what more can the cabin crew inform passengers who have flown often.

ROFLMAO! :} :} :} Firstly, not everyone is a frequent flyer. Second, you may be shocked at how little knowledge some frequent flyers have about the safety procedures of the aircraft they're in.


Lack of awareness - in the event of an emergency no one is going to be more concerned about using a camera than their own safety.

Answered already, but once again prepare to be shocked. Do not underestimate the importance some people place about uploading stuff onto their facebook page. In fact, the large number of videos (from the passenger perspective) of aircraft landings where there was a declared emergency should rebut your point.


I do obey the rules where they apply, but in my opinion they are not clear, as rules, or how they are applied, vary between carriers.

And that is the point, really. You want to video parts of the flight and you're desperately trying to find reasons to be able to do so.

It's called confirmation bias. As far as I can see, you've come on here asking how you can video take-offs and landings because you really want to do this. You've not received a single positive answer. Many of your respondents are either airline pilots or flight attendants. But you're not listening to them, and keep on coming back with some rubbish arguments (justifications?) so that you can do exactly what you want to do.

[ExXB]

I'm not convinced all books are benign. My Steve Jobs biography weighs in at almost a kg, much heavier than many electronic devices. However I have never been asked to secure this dangerous object. (No, I'm not talking about the content)

[Basil]

Distraction during safety briefing - what more can the cabin crew inform passengers who have flown often.
Please, please: pay attention to the safety briefing, check your surroundings and exits, look at your lifejacket stowage - this could be the last chance you will have to prepare mentally for an evacuation.
Bas, (ex seaman, RAF pilot, civil pilot) listens and checks the safety card every trip as pax.

Due to design, experience and training, air travel is very safe.

If you are travelling by sea or land it's also a good idea to have a look around at exits. Up front in the average ferry you can see out but how do you GET out if it is struck and rolled over?

[washingtondave]

Ok, this thread has run it's course, and I have received a number of responses, none approving, mostly reasonable and one or two bordering on the abusive. So I will make this my last response on this matter.

Let me state firstly that I take safety very seriously. As a PPL holder, albeit currently not valid for flying, I know that aviation is based on rules, procedures, and compliance with instructions. My views on the flight safety briefing were from my own perspective, not a general one. I make myself fully aware of where the nearest exits are, and that apart there is really little else that is new to inform anyone. I still remain unconvinced that there would ever be a case, maybe with the exception of the brilliantly handled ditching of an A320 in the Hudson River,and of course operations such as North Sea helicopter flights, where life belts would ever be helpful in a commercial flight, but that's another issue. I think large commercial aircraft are a different scenario to the time when my father became a member of the Goldfish Club when he successfully ditched his Beaufighter in the North Sea in 1943.

To NZScion, thank you for your understanding of my situation. I am indeed not a troll, or someone looking for material to tell a story to the Daily Mail. If I had been maybe I would not have felt the need to make my initial post and know "this issue has been done to death many times"(Torque Tonight). Before posting, I did a search of Pprune, and had onlt 2 hits, one of which was "private flying videos", where I originally posted with apologies in the hope that a moderator would move it to an appropriate forum.

Di Vosh, I was indeed hoping for some positive news but I'm not going to delve into the psychological aspects of "confirmation bias".

Just for the record, the PED I would have liked to use, is a small sports video camera (as small as the palm of my hand which can be safely secured via a suction cup) which is used by a firm mounting in car, strapped to a bike or a helmet whilst skiing. Unlike a phone, or Ipad (which I now see are being used for EFBs), it does not transmit either a wi-fi, 3G/4G or bluetooth signal. The electronics of the camera are merely used to record video. I do accept that Cabin Crew cannot be expected to have the knowledge to differentiate between different devices, and therefore err on the side of caution with a blanket ban.

Whilst I can accept that some flightdeck videos "are NOT sanctioned" by the airline involved, the frequency of some of them by the same person suggests some of them were by pilots who have not been disciplined. To comply with moderation rules, I will not name names or airlines, but there is one person who has stated he has the sanction of his employer, and has many videos both from the the flightdeck and the cabin when, like ourselves, he/she was SLF.

Again for the record, I had no intention of posting anything on Youtube or Facebook, merely a desire to record some of the things I see and enjoy through the window, such as the sight of Paris from the port side travelling south, or manouvering around a towering CumuloNimbus on a flight from NCE-NCL, or the snow covered Jura and Alps whilst in the hold prior to a long downwind for runway 05 at Geneva.

Simple pleasures.

[Torque Tonight]

Simple pleasures indeed. Please realise that most of the rules and regulations imposed on you as an airline passenger are there not to ruin your fun and to be a killjoy, but so that you benefit from many years of flight safety experience that has been achieved at a great cost of lives, money, time and knowledge.

We frequently have passengers who think that for whatever reason they know better, or the rules should not apply to them as they are somehow more special than the average passenger. They may challenge a rule because they think they know the reason behind it but disagree with that reason. They generally have never even contemplated the existance of the twenty other good reasons for imposing that rule. This sort of passenger causes the cabin crew as many headaches as the drunks, disruptives etc.

You've been offered a number of reason behind the restrictions on electronics but discounted them. These are not opinions but facts. Blanket restrictions are applied to err towards safety and to be workable. We can't give dispensations to every individual who knows better or 'has a good reason' not to comply.

Your seatbelt comment is just daft and doesn't really warrant debate. You try a rejected takeoff without a seatbelt on and see how you get on. You are required to pay attention to the safety brief so it is fresh in your memory when you need it. Same reason we brief takeoff emergencies in the flight deck every time. Same reason that you as a PPL brief an EFATO before you takeoff. (Do you?) You are not as familiar with the aeroplane as you think you are.

Threads concerning the restrictions on electronic devices on flights are ten a penny. If you only found two then your search terms were too narrow.

I hope this helps you to understand the reasoning, appreciate that the compliance of passengers is required to try to maximize everybody's safety.

For a very measured explanation read this: What Alec Baldwin doesn’t know about air travel - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/2011/12/13/what_alec_baldwin_doesnt_know_about_air_travel/)

Unfortunately if you still don't like the reasons given, the bottom line is 'because we say so'. You are legally obliged to obey the lawful orders of the crew.

Finally, go to Advanced Search. Use electronics as the keyword and search in Passengers and SLF forum. You will get plenty of hits. Nearly half of them will be directly relevant to this issue.

[strake]

TT, I'm sure "Outraged of Somewhere or Other" will be along soon but if you feel you really must film your experience, the odds of your little Videocam bringing a 747 to the ground would appear to be pretty thin given the number of people who have been doing similar since the late 1970's. I would think that so long as you're not being loud, a nuisance or some other equally obnoxious trait, most crew won't give a damn as they'll be busy getting on with other more important things. If a member of crew does take objection and tell you to turn it off, nothing lost by saying sorry and doing so.
However, to place you completely in the clear, I offer you this as a substitute
File:BolexH16.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BolexH16.jpg)

[Torque Tonight]

Strake, you're talking to the wrong person. I flew 840 hrs this financial year. The last thing I want to do is video it and then spend 840 hrs watching it again in my own time.:zzz:

[mixture]

most crew won't give a damn as they'll be busy getting on with other more important things.

Oh dear ! :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Perhaps you might consider the possibility that they appear that they don't "give a damn" ... but infact its only because they don't have eyes on the back of their head and are busy with other duties.

I'm sure they would be more than happy to enforce the policy if they had a spare moment.

I would call that suggestion... taking advantage !

he odds of your little Videocam bringing a 747

Re-read this thread, please ! :ugh:

We're not just talking about electrical interference.

If a member of crew does take objection and tell you to turn it off, nothing lost by saying sorry and doing so.

There is a lot wrong with that.

Instead of adhering to the safety briefing as you should have, you have just been given a lawful order by a member of the crew. Consider it your first strike.

They might not show it outwardly out of politeness and good training, but believe me..... they won't be best pleased that you've ignored the airline policies that are widely published and that you've been reminded of during the safety briefing.

Also another question, what happens during an emergency? Are you going to leave your camera behind like you should or are you going to insist on taking your precious little toy with you (perhaps even wasting time packing it into a padded case). Assuming of course it hasn't gone flying around the cabin and hit someone on the head.

Washingtondave did say one good thing though.......

this thread has run it's course

Perhaps we should let the thread die as he suggested.

[washingtondave]

Oh dear, I said it would be my last, but I just have to reply to clear up some confusion.

Torque tonight, I mistyped life belt in my haste for life jacket. I think if you read the line in the context it was stated you could have worked that out. For your information I keep my seat belt, which is what you implied I meant, loosely fastened throughout every flight. As I said, I take safety, especially my own, seriously. So please don't call me stupid.

I don't have the luxury of 840 hours annual flying, so flying to me, airport hassles side, is still of interest so don't rubbish my views (pun intended).

As for being more concerned about saving my little camera at the expense of my own and everyone else's safety, please at least give me the credit of more common sense than you suggest.

Formulating search queries is a black art at the best of times, so I'm sorry if I wasn't clever enough to hit on the right terms. Maybe with your imparted wisdom I will be more successful in future.

[radeng]

I always find the 'switch off electronic equipment' amusing in its failure to consider what it means. Does it REALLY mean 'ALL electronic equipment?'


Wrist watches. Pacemakers/Defibrillators. Hearing Aids. Other medical implants e.g. those for control of Parkinson's disease, sphincter control etc....

Typically, the people who write the briefing haven't thought of these .......

[mixture]

radeng,

I think you need look no further than the words "portable electronic devices".

Fairly obvious they refer to external rather implanted devices.

Also, if you look at JAA/CAA guidance documents and/or airline policy statements, they'll state something along the lines of "Restriction does not apply to approved medical devices".

[strake]

Apologies TT...age and in-flight radiation perhaps taking their toll.

So washingtondave, the Bolex16 (Im sure extremely well priced) would appear to solve the problem - but possibly not for our resident head-banger methinks...

[mixture]

Certain people here have convinced themselves that what they want to do is OK and are not prepared under any circumstances to countenance any opinion to the contrary, instead preferring to make obscure and unsubstantiated claims that such alternative opinions are a "grey area" or ignoring the fact that we're not simply talking about "bringing a 747 to the ground" here.

Multiple people here have attempted to reason with the insistent camp with zero effect. So what else can one reasonably do apart from despair at such a display of arrogance where people have already made their minds up about the answer they want to hear and are just coming here to gather more of the supporting views they seek and ignore the opposite views as noise.

Just to keep you happy, one more headbang...:ugh: .... and I'm outta here !

[strake]

Do calm down dear, it's only a point of view.

Those of us here that do actually fly quite a lot as passengers (as opposed to those who pretend they do) are very able to ensure that they behave appropriately.

[Leftofcentre2009]

Wow - assuming some of the comments here are from forum members that are Cabin Crew, you are quite rude arent you!

The OP asked a question. Why the abuse and personal assumptions?

Not nice :(

[Di_Vosh]

washingtondave you're quite a funny bloke...

Di Vosh, I was indeed hoping for some positive news but I'm not going to delve into the psychological aspects of "confirmation bias".


Well perhaps you should. What you've posted on this thread is a classic example. Even after saying

and I have received a number of responses, none approving

you're still coming up with stuff like the below:

Whilst I can accept that some flightdeck videos "are NOT sanctioned" by the airline involved, the frequency of some of them by the same person suggests some of them were by pilots who have not been disciplined. To comply with moderation rules, I will not name names or airlines, but there is one person who has stated he has the sanction of his employer, and has many videos both from the the flightdeck and the cabin when, like ourselves, he/she was SLF.

Again for the record, I had no intention of posting anything on Youtube or Facebook, merely a desire to record some of the things I see and enjoy through the window, such as the sight of Paris from the port side travelling south, or manouvering around a towering CumuloNimbus on a flight from NCE-NCL, or the snow covered Jura and Alps whilst in the hold prior to a long downwind for runway 05 at Geneva.

Just for the record, the PED I would have liked to use, is a small sports video camera (as small as the palm of my hand which can be safely secured via a suction cup) which is used by a firm mounting in car, strapped to a bike or a helmet whilst skiing. Unlike a phone, or Ipad (which I now see are being used for EFBs), it does not transmit either a wi-fi, 3G/4G or bluetooth signal. The electronics of the camera are merely used to record video.

All of which boils down to "Others do it so why not me?", "It's just for personal use", and "It's only a small camera."

None of which is relevant to your situation.

DIVOSH!

[Leftofcentre2009]

Fantastic contribution to the thread, there sunshine.

A bit like yours mate. Nice to hear a "Captains" response. Very proffesional i may add. Keep it up :D

[Di_Vosh]

Leftofcentre2009

Wow - assuming some of the comments here are from forum members that are Cabin Crew, you are quite rude arent you!

The OP asked a question. Why the abuse and personal assumptions?

Fantastic contribution to the thread there sunshine. :yuk:

If you bothered to read the thread you'd have noticed that the responses were pretty informative and neutral until WD kept on posting that he knew better. The tone of the responses went downhill after that.

DIVOSH!

[ExXB]

My goodness boys. Play the ball, not the player.

[Di_Vosh]

LOL!

I've made several contributions to this thread, where all you've managed to do is (out of nowhere) abuse several people.

All you could do in reply to me is more of the same, in spite of my comments regarding how the tone of the thread changed in response to WD's intransigence.

Flight and Cabin crew have to deal with all kinds of passenger issues and this one comes up regularly. I've disembarked passengers who refuse to comply with lawful instructions, and have had others met by police at the other end.

One day, if you ever find yourself the Captain of an aircraft you might understand...

DIVOSH!

Exxb, I agree. However this thread started as a legal issue which later morphed into a thread about a person and his desire to do something even though he knew it wasn't allowed. Then some random comes in with abuse...

[Leftofcentre2009]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You take the bait like a Minnow.

And like i said, you are a "Captain".

Very proffesional. Keep it up :D

[Di_Vosh]

Mate, come back if you've got something adult to contribute...

DIVOSH!

[Leftofcentre2009]

Oh dear Mr Captain boy

If you cant cope with a bit of banter, i dread to think how you'd cope in a seriously stressful situation :\

I feel sorry for the FO on your flights :oh:

Next . . .

[TightSlot]

Leftofcentre2009 has left the building (permanently)

[Hipennine]

Trying to be totally objective here, back in the days before PED's etc, etc. It was quite commonplace to see pax with box brownies or more sophisticated (heavy as bricks) SLR's, or even bulkier super 8 cine cameras, happily snapping through the cabin windows without any request to do otherwise.

Even today, I see CC requesting people to switch off PED's, but there is no request to stow them away. I have also seen people using binoculars, and been left to it, while compact camera users etc have been requested to turn them off.

This would seem to suggest that the arguments about objects flying around the cabin or distraction of users are not of concern to the authorities, but it is only the electrical interference issues (and that's good enough for me to do as I'm told)..

[L4key]

Another point not stressed enough about these regulations and rules is that they have to be written with the 'lowest common denominator' in mind.

The public are sadly, morons. (I speak as one of the public, not as crew btw - but I'm sure they are morons too in some cases away from aviation)

Look at the behavior around the airport and in life in general -


Around the baggage carousel 1cm from the belt
Jostling to be first out of the plane only to sit on a bus outside or wait at immigration anyway.
Wearing shorts to travel in (only acceptable if both arrival and destination is within the tropics) :ok:
Wearing a football shirt if over the age of 25 outside of a football ground
Driving down the middle lane of the motorway with the inside lane free of traffic.
Not realising that EVERY petrol pump in the country will stretch to the other side of the car.
The Only Way is Essex


...to illustrate, I could go on, sorry for the drift.

It just illustrates that rules have to be written with the most stupid in mind as a starting point as sadly common sense cannot be relied upon any more.

I'm just sorry that people think that the rules shouldn't apply to them or want to continually question - do they really think they are there to stop others fun?

No wonder crews are maligned for being a bit grumpy sometimes, they have a lot of plonkers to assist and serve - and don't lets even start on the erosion of common manners and decency in society.

I feel a little better now. Carry on.

[Flyaways]

The pilots say 'Cabin crew please be seated for landing' or something like that. That's when you know they're sitting down so can't see you videoing the landing :ok:

[washingtondave]

Thank you L4key. After the character assassination by Divosh you have just demonstrated I am not a moron as I do NONE of the points you highlighted.

Sometimes you just wish you hadn't been polite enough to ask a reasonable question.

[L4key]

Sorry Dave, I think you need to read my post again... I wasn't attacking you individually but it was hardly supportive!!

That you would consider my tongue in cheek list it a genuine measurement of of whether a moron or not kind of reinforces the point!

Unless you were being ironic/sarcastic etc in which case, apologies.

Don't film in the cabin if that's the rule.

You've had a few genuine and reasonable answers to the reasonable question. You only started getting on peoples tits when you didn't accept those answers. I'm sorry you got flamed, it's never nice warranted or not, but remember where you are!

[mixture]

Sometimes you just wish you hadn't been polite enough to ask a reasonable question.

You just don't get it do you !

You did post a reasonable question.

Your attitude to those who posted reasonable answers that were technically correct, but not inline with your expectations was not reasonable.

End of story.