No photos on the Tarmac
 

The family was travelling from Ayers Rock recently and I tried to take a few photos of the family boarding the 717 in front of the plane.

QF ground staff rushed up in a rude huff and told me in no uncertain terms I was not allowed to take photos.....

I asked why? I was told it was because of re fueling and danger of explosion!!
When I pointed out that we were not refueling she didn't care and I got the impression security was about to be summoned to boot me out.

In 30 years of flying I've never heard this before......

Yes I have often watched in dismay as the ground staff at YAYE shoo away tourists trying to take photos of the 737 I just bought in. They claim they don't want people hanging around on the tarmac area. It's ridiculous really and they seem to delight in the power.

It has been going on for years there. :ugh:

Never heard the fuel reason though.

Do me a favour and next time you are there nip down and take a few pikkies in front of your 73 and then smile at the ground staff……….

I'd be interested to see if they tell you off as well.:}

Cabin crew do it all the time ....they say nothing......

Rarely to we board a Gold Coast flight without some of our passengers taking a snapshot of the front of the aircraft.

I try to give them a friendly wave but risk scaring the kiddies. Good face for the PA.

It must be some sort of standard procedure to not allow the punters to use mobile phones or cameras on the apron using refuelling as the justification. Certainly nothing in the current transport security regs preclude anyone from taking photos airside. However the airport operator can decide who may and under what conditions can take photographs. So rather than use any common sense to allow an acitivity to occur when it is safe, a blanket ban is much easier to enforce.:ugh:

The exclusion for radios, mobile phones etc around the fuel truck and delivery point on the aircraft from memory is 15m so if you are outside that arc, I fail to see what the problem is. No shortage of ramp rats running around with radios which I'll bet my left one are NOT certified as intrinsically safe.

Risk management - when was the last event on an Australian airport that caused a major fire/explosion or other incident from a mobile phone or digital camera.?

I believe it is a security risk to have the general public taking photos of the airport.

Cant remember where I read it, or if it applies to all airports?

Which one

TBM

Are you alluding to the fact there have been few if any incidents, because of the policy of not allowing phones cameras etc?

Or: Are you suggesting that because there have been few if any incidents, a ban on such instruments is not necessary?

M

It is a local airport direction at AYQ and I believe ASP. The history is that lots of tourists like taking the photo's and it was difficult to marshall pax safely and actually board the aircraft in a timely manner. 1 Marshaller vs 115 pax. I know this because we were training staff from AYQ and they couldnt believe that we allow photo's at our port.
A pretty big overkill-why not use tensa barriers or the like and let the passengers take the pictures-Great free advertising

Hawker, there's nothing in the relevant Acts here, although a number of other countries ban it.
It is an offence to record or take photographs in a Customs Controlled Area, but that only applies to the barrier areas at international airports.

Bad PR for the sake of being officious, IMHO (unless one of the baggies was sporting a camel suit :E). Other, bigger airports allow it as long as you don't linger or leave the pax walk area. Maybe there's not enough to do at Ayers Rock airport...

The RAAF and USAF get a bit funny about legions of airport staff turning up with cameras but I've never known a civillian operator to mind. Surely the more happy photos of your aircraft in circulation the better it is for the operator? :confused:

Have been told in no uncertain terms in Darwin that photos on or in the direction of the northern side is not allowed... The guy was a douche though...

On another note lingering passengers at other than controlled ports can be a real problem when they decide they need to walk backwards whilst taking photos... Creeping ever closer to the spinning props of an unconcerned scenic or charter 210. Heaven forbid you tell them to continue taking photos as long as common sense is used - only for them to lose their **** at you and carry on anyway. The first time you chuckle, the second time you find suddenly your telling people no photos as the rules dictate they leave the Tarmac asap!!

It may be a lie from the cc etc but it sure as hell is a lot easier than dealing with a hundred roaming punters with their eyes glued in a lense with no concept of reality taking place around them!!

It was mainly the way in which I was rudely told off that got under my skin. The QF ground staff on the ramp were rude without cause. What ever happened to common sense and plain PR.

I wasn't walking backwards toward any spinning props, wasn't holding anybody up etc, I was standing at the bottom of the steps beside the nose of the 717 wanting to take a quick picture of my family boarding the plane.

We Pax ( staff travel or full fare ) pay their wages and a little more respect or common courtesy would have been nice.

They carry on like the Security boffins in the terminal ,way too much power and it goes straight to their heads.

The Anangu people request that you do not take pictures of Uluru or enter the area. When disembarking the first thing people do is take a picture from the airstairs or tarmac, the QF staff are simply being respectful by obliging the request of the locals, if they didn't then imagine the uproar.

It is very normal for airports to have a no photos airside policy, has nothing to do with fire/explosion risk and everything to do with 'perceived' security threat.:hmm:

Nitpicker -
qf staff or 717 ?? Cannot have both...

Ayers rock is an uncontrolled port with scenic flights etc departing frequently - the sooner the punters get of the Tarmac the safer for everyone and less headaches for the crew...

As for the rudeness of the the crew - well I haven't seen a nice one yet when I'm paying a fare - ironically when I travel free or in a position on the flight that I would expect no service I have recieved red carpet treatment... In fact the last fare I paid I went business and had a bag from the overhead locker dropped on my head as I slept - rather than an apology I got nothing but the usual rude service and angry antics of a prehistoric cc...

Flying isn't what it used to be...

Yeah except for the fact that the scenic flights are all departing from a seperate apron and there is no danger whatsoever from a tourist stopping for a minute inside the security designated walk area and taking a great PR photo.

There are zero headaches for us crew as we are usually taking photos ourselves as it seems to be a crew favourite place to get a snap next to the aircraft as it is one of the few airports without aerobridges.

It is embarassing to watch the heavy handed 'move along' antics of the staff to happy tourists just arrived...

I cringe

As far as the 'fire risk' is concerned, it's like the old nonsense about not using cellphones at service stations.

I one saw a petrol attendant refuelling a car with the fuel hose in one hand and a cigarette burning in the other, many years ago in a small dorpie in South Africa.

QF people or 717? You can't have both????????

I don't know what you are taking about?

I was trying to take a photo of my family walking up the steps of their Aircraft which happened to be a Qantaslink Boeing 717. The ramp staff were QF employees........so which part don't you get?

As for the locals not wanting pictures of the Rock!!!!!!!
Sorry but utter bull, they request that you don't climb the Rock BUT nothing I've read at the Rock says not to take any photos!!! By god there must be millions of photos taken already, some by the locals themselves for their own PR purposes......

And besides, the Rock wasn't in my Camera lens, only
a 717 and my family.

What a shame that security has come to this. There would be zillions of pix around from years gone by of people snapping away even at the guy refueling the plane itself well b4 security became stupid!!!!
What's the flash point of kero? Around 38 deg's or so. So for a Mob Ph to be of any real threat the day would have to be damned hot, vapors would have to be present with virtually zero wind & a source of ignition for the juice to explode, a Mob Ph is the least of anyone's concerns. Sh*t how many planes have been fueled whilst there has been a source of ignition within striking range? There's not enuf ink in my keyboard here to type it out:ugh:
What about servo's? hot day, petrol (which has a flash point way blw zero meaning it can ignite just looking at it!) & any No of people using their Mob Ph's not to mention plenty of other sources of ignition within close prox.
And don't get me started on Mob Ph having to be turned off in flight!!!:ugh::ugh::ugh:
The worlds gone nuts...........:sad:

Kero & Mob Ph's, yep damn dangerous, ban 'em both!:ugh:



Wmk2