On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:27:21 +1300, "Podge" wrote:


"tony cooper" wrote in message
.. .

I think there are some considerations you haven't thought about.

I don't know what the air hostess to passenger ratio was, but we
can't expect the air hostesses to have the time to check out each
passenger's device to see if it's something that is, or is not, within
the rules. In that brief time that you were stopped from using your
device, she had to monitor several passengers and conduct her other
duties. It makes their job easier to just say "no devices".

Also, there's the security consideration of allowing images to be
taken of ground facilities. Perhaps we're more conscious of this in
the US, but the idea of people being able to photograph airport ground
facilities is not acceptable here.

It may be that the possible interference in the aircraft's systems is
not the reason for the ban at all. It's a plausible excuse that
passengers are more likely to accept because they don't know anything
about the aircraft's system.

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Good points, but I think if someone really wanted to take movies from a
departing aircraft, they could easily conceal a tiny video camera. We see a
few TV clips these days where people were filmed by miniature hidden
cameras. In addition, you can often see amazing detail from images on Google
earth, so I think it might be quite difficult to stop people getting images
of airport ground facilities?

The question is not "Can you sneak some photographs on take-offs and
landings?", but "Why does the air hostess ask you to turn devices
off?"

Sure, you can risk it. But, if caught, you'll be removed from the
flight and quite possibly banned from that carrier.

Yes, Google earth gets images of ground facilities. From straight up.
From the cabin window you can get lateral views not possible with
Google images.

The commercial carrier ban isn't going to make it impossible to get
images of every aspect of the ground facilities, but it's going to
make it more difficult. That's what most security measures do.

Interestingly, I had to pick up a relative at a local airport on
Saturday. I arrived early and went to the commercial park next to the
airport (not on airport grounds) and killed some time looking for
shots.

The airport is a former Naval Air Station
http://www.orlandosanfordairport.com/history.htm
and what is now the commercial park was part of the Navy base in WWII.
There are still some old buildings there that go back to the Navy base
days. I was photographing a large storage tank hoping that the
shadows of the winding stairway up the white tank would make a good
picture (it didn't) and a security guard approached me. Turns out
it's something to do with the government (I didn't catch that part of
the guard's warning) and the guard firmly requested that I not take
any more pictures. He didn't ask me to erase the one picture that I
had taken, but he was firm about me leaving that immediate area.

Here's the pic. I didn't bother cropping or doing anything to it
because I don't see any potential.
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f2...213/sat001.jpg



--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida