Cameras mounted externally
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cameras mounted externally
How easy is it to get approval from CASA to have externally mounted cameras such as in this video?
I'm inspired by this TAA tail camera ad back in the 80's to do the same if it's easy enough to do with a GoPro Hero camera.
I'm inspired by this TAA tail camera ad back in the 80's to do the same if it's easy enough to do with a GoPro Hero camera.
Judging by the number of Gopro cameras I see flying about the place on external mounts an engineering order must be easy ... 
Last edited by Aussie Bob; 6th Jun 2013 at 05:28.
Speed tape......
If its an experimental aircraft, just make sure the cameras are mounted when you receive your C. of A., otherwise anyone who fits anything without an EO or STC is making an unauthorised modification to an aircraft which is a felony offence of strict liability.
I will have to find the video, but there was a video of a pilot who mounted his go pro to the nose landing gear of a 744 freighter. It's amazing how strong the suction cap is.
Sunny, the beauty of speed tape: "Officer, what are you saying we fitted, and when, where, how do you say? Why would we even think of doing such a naughty thing?"
In Canada they strap boats, barn doors, dead bears and all else to Beaver floats and just crank in a bit of opposite rudder as necessary. EOs, yeah, sure.
In Canada they strap boats, barn doors, dead bears and all else to Beaver floats and just crank in a bit of opposite rudder as necessary. EOs, yeah, sure.
Canada? Not sure myself but I had heard the same about Alaska. An issue (perhaps still, not sure) for the FAA was that other govt departments operated airplanes and claimed that the regs did not apply to them.
An issue with the way that minor and major changes are dealt with by CASA. If it is minor then an EO is required. Incidentally, any, repeat any change is either major or minor so what I might describe as a trivial change has to be dealt with as a minor change therefore needs an EO. In the USA minor changes are dealt with much easier.
Worth reading the relevant bit of that new CAAP on EFBs:
"All" means all" - temporary or permanent.
Some more relevant reading is the new AWB 25-023 on the use of Velcro to mount ELTs.
You need an engineering order?!?!?
Worth reading the relevant bit of that new CAAP on EFBs:
7.9
All EFB mounts attached to the aircraft structure will require airworthiness approval (Subpart 21.M of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998). An unsafe condition must not be created when attaching any EFB control yoke attachment/mechanism or mounting device. For example, the weight of the EFB and mounting bracket combination may affect flight control system
dynamics, even though the mount alone may be considered light.
All EFB mounts attached to the aircraft structure will require airworthiness approval (Subpart 21.M of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998). An unsafe condition must not be created when attaching any EFB control yoke attachment/mechanism or mounting device. For example, the weight of the EFB and mounting bracket combination may affect flight control system
dynamics, even though the mount alone may be considered light.
Some more relevant reading is the new AWB 25-023 on the use of Velcro to mount ELTs.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that 747 nose gear vid is a rip off, the original is from a guy named Balleka on youtube, he is/was a B747F capt, and made quite a few very god videos. lots of gliding footage as well.
original is here, with acceptable soundtrack also.
my favourite. FE's
even this is cool, overtaking an MD11.
he made a making of video for the first vid, belly of the beast. but sadly it looks like he removed it, basically a camera, a contour, was taped on the nose gear leg, and he asked the ground engineer to start the camera on pushback for him.
Im pretty sure a gopro suction cup would not hold on above about 8000ft, something about the vacuum under the suction cap equalising with the outside air pressure. highest mine has held on for is 7500ft.
original is here, with acceptable soundtrack also.
my favourite. FE's
even this is cool, overtaking an MD11.
he made a making of video for the first vid, belly of the beast. but sadly it looks like he removed it, basically a camera, a contour, was taped on the nose gear leg, and he asked the ground engineer to start the camera on pushback for him.
Im pretty sure a gopro suction cup would not hold on above about 8000ft, something about the vacuum under the suction cap equalising with the outside air pressure. highest mine has held on for is 7500ft.
in the video at post between 0:52 and 1:08 there is a sequence where the nose gear is lowered without the body or wing mains cycling.
Pulling circuit breakers perhaps or can you select nose gear only?
Mr Google has come up with conflicting answers
Pulling circuit breakers perhaps or can you select nose gear only?
Mr Google has come up with conflicting answers
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in the video at post between 0:52 and 1:08 there is a sequence where the nose gear is lowered without the body or wing mains cycling.
Pulling circuit breakers perhaps or can you select nose gear only?
Pulling circuit breakers perhaps or can you select nose gear only?
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"
Haven't looked it up to find the relevant penalty but suggest it more accurate to speak of an indictable offence:Crimes Act 1900, s580E.
Kaz
anyone who fits anything without an EO or STC is making an unauthorised modification to an aircraft which is a felony offence of strict liability."
Kaz
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dark side of the moon
Age: 61
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi fvpdude
In Australia an Engineering Order is raised in consultation with what used to be a CAR35 Approved organisation,now is covered in CASR Part 21M.
They are the equivalent of the Transport Canada LSTC. (Limited Supplementry Type Certificate). It limits the modification to particular aircraft serial numbers rather than being approved for a type.
There is a listing of approved organisations on CASA web site.
It is common practice on light aircraft and helicopters that I have been involved with, and doesn't alter the C of A Type category.
Hope that helps
In Australia an Engineering Order is raised in consultation with what used to be a CAR35 Approved organisation,now is covered in CASR Part 21M.
They are the equivalent of the Transport Canada LSTC. (Limited Supplementry Type Certificate). It limits the modification to particular aircraft serial numbers rather than being approved for a type.
There is a listing of approved organisations on CASA web site.
It is common practice on light aircraft and helicopters that I have been involved with, and doesn't alter the C of A Type category.
Hope that helps
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts