Legalities on using a camera during take off and landing

[bealine]

You are not alone - many "security" employees on the railways make the same mistake.

Quite........but let's turn the discussion around for a minute.

1. In the UK, airports and railway stations are at a "Severe Alert State", meaning that a terrorist attack is highly likely.
2. Anti-terror laws have been introduced to make an effort to disrupt reconnaissance activities by terrorist groups.
3. Most airport/railway workers, or for that matter police officers, cannot recognise the difference between a "professional photographer", a "criminal photographer" or an "hobby photographer". However, you can hardly blame anyone for that - how can you tell the difference between an aeroplane enthusiast, a terrorist or a spy? - a sad fact that has got more than a few young lads in trouble overseas on a number of occasions!

So, to exercise fairness, and ensure you can take your aeroplane pictures without hindrance, the BAA have introduced a permit system - indeed, if you were to check with the intrepid group of aviation enthusiasts who brave the elements at the airport perimeter every weekend, they are delighted to fully co-operate with airport staff and police in watching for any suspicious vehicles, activities or bogus plane spotters!

I can understand the BAA wanting anyone with tripods and stuff to have Public Liability cover - if someone trips over your kit, on those hard hard floors in Terminal 5, there could be a nasty injury for which the BAA would not want to be held responsible - and why should they be? In these days of "where there's blame, there's a claim", the PIL requirement is as much for your protection as for theirs! I am also pretty sure that our of our band of aeroplane enthusiasts, very few probably have PIL.

[Hotel Tango]

Most airport/railway workers, or for that matter police officers, cannot recognise the difference between a "professional photographer", a "criminal photographer" or an "hobby photographer".

So because of their inadequacies Joe Public is prevented from going about their law abiding business? Isn't that effectively surrendering our basic freedoms to the terrorists? I guess they're winning the war then!

I have no problems with an i/d check, but I do become agitated if some ignorant job's worth tries to move me on when I'm on public property engaged in a legal activity.

[bealine]

So because of their inadequacies Joe Public is prevented from going about their law abiding business? Isn't that effectively surrendering our basic freedoms to the terrorists? I guess they're winning the war then!

I have no problems with an i/d check, but I do become agitated if some ignorant job's worth tries to move me on when I'm on public property engaged in a legal activity.

I have tried to answer this thread civilly, but I am finding it ever more difficult. If you only knew it, you have far more "freedom" to engage in this highly intrusive and invasive hobby in the UK than almost anywhere else on the planet...........indeed, there are places quite close to home where photography at an airport could see you shot dead!

For your information, Airports, Railway Stations, Bus Stations and land owned by the Crown Estates or various Civil Service Ministries is not designated public land.

Certainly, at Heathrow Airport we have a duty to ensure that our celebrity guests can enjoy a bit of privacy without their every movement appearing in the next day's "Hate Mail" or "Sleazerag Sun"

[Hotel Tango]

If you only knew it, you have far more "freedom" to engage in this highly intrusive and invasive hobby in the UK than almost anywhere else on the planet...........indeed, there are places quite close to home where photography at an airport could see you shot dead!

Firstly I was not aware that I was being uncivil to you. That was certainly not my intention. I was talking about public areas not airport (railway, etc.) property.

There are the odd exceptions but your statement (above) paints a much darker and untrue picture of the reality.I am a keen amateur aviation photographer who resides outside the UK. Using common sense I have never encountered problems, let alone be shot at, in the many European and non-European countries I regularly visit. In fact, quite a number provide far superior facilities than the UK do - and that's a fact. I do not go near military or obviously restricted areas. Very few airports in the UK now provide official spectator areas and this in turn encourages enthusiasts (and I include non-spotters) to look for alternative spots around the perimeter. Many of these spots are close to but outside airport property (adjacent roads or fields) yet it is not uncommon to be challenged by airport security or personnel. I will gladly present I/D but I draw the line if they attempt to move me on.

[hotmetal]

For your information, Airports, Railway Stations, Bus Stations and land owned by the Crown Estates or various Civil Service Ministries is not designated public land.

The lawful right to take photos in the UK is not limited to 'public land'. What is public land anyway? Almost every square inch apart from a few areas of ancient common land are owned by somebody. I hope you are not involved in law enforcement. This sort of misunderstanding is why the government and police have had to issue guidelines to clarify the issue. I would suggest a public place is a place to which the public have access.

The Metropolitan Police Service’s approach towards photography in public places is a subject of regular debate.

We encourage officers and the public to be vigilant against terrorism but recognise the importance not only of protecting the public from terrorism but also promoting the freedom of the public and the media to take and publish photographs.

Guidance around the issue has been made clear to officers and PCSOs through briefings and internal communications. The following advice is available to all officers and provides a summary of the Metropolitan Police Service’s guidance around photography in public places.

Freedom to photograph/film
Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel

[hellsbrink]

Certainly, at Heathrow Airport we have a duty to ensure that our celebrity guests can enjoy a bit of privacy without their every movement appearing in the next day's "Hate Mail" or "Sleazerag Sun"

Which is why only "approved" photographers are allowed access to areas where they can take photos of the so-called "celebrity" guests so these pics appear in the Hatemail, Scum, Express, Mirror, Star, Sport, etc?

[mingocr83]

Well.. is very unfortunate to find that hostile environment there. Last flight I made in CM, the crew was veeeery accesible with me regarding taking pics on board. I visited both galleys with crew getting the meals ready and stuff. The Senior CC gave me a tour on how the galley worked, how they stored the food there and stuff. He also made sure if I was capable on operating the emergency exit (my seat was on that row).

After a while I noticed there was a free Business class seat, I politely requested if I could take the seat... they said it was Ok and moved me there, they even took my camera bag from the bin and put it on the bin on top of my new seat.

I do agree with one of the comments made by one ppruner regarding letting them know if its possible to take pics on board. I made the request to the captain that was standing on the door when we were boarding.... he said it was ok with him and told the CC he agreed on that. The captain invited me to take some pics and videos about the cockpit preparations/preflight checks. The F/O was Costarrican so the environment was very favorable to me. The only thing they told me was "please do not take the radio scanner out"...

[Chuchinchow]

The only thing they told me was "please do not take the radio scanner out"

Was that some sort of South American euphemism, then?

[rennaps]

Proof positive

[NZScion]

Cross posting here, but is also relevant to this thread. I came across this Flightglobal article which highlights some of the issues Honeywell and Boeing are currently having with Wi-Fi interference and one particular version of their Display Units (for the SLF here, these are the screens which display important information to the pilots).