A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 14th 08, 04:28 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Tony Cooper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,748
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:08:46 +1300, "Podge" wrote:


"Mark B." wrote in message
...

Guess you haven't taken any flights for a while. Airline security has
changed drastically over the last several years, including turning off all
electronic deviced during takeoff & landings. Even something so harmless
as a PDA, which I usually have with me to read e-books during a flight.
Most PDAs have wireless connections built-in now, but years ago when I
started using one there was no such thing - didn't matter, it still had to
be off except while the aircraft was at cruising altitude.


Well then, how do professional photographers get their city aerial pics? Do
they have to especially hire aircraft for this purpose?

Aerial photography isn't done from commercial flights. The security
involved in commercial flights has more to do with remote detonators
and communication with other parties than anything else.

A device used to remotely detonate an explosive device can be
camouflaged as a PDA or camera.

Aerial photography is done from small planes or helicopters. Whether
they are owned by the photographer or hired is immaterial.

I no longer have a pilot's license, but when I did there was never a
question about what devices I could bring to the plane or use in the
plane or when I could use them.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
  #12  
Old January 14th 08, 04:35 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Podge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing


"Craig Welch" wrote in message
...
"Podge" said:


Well then, how do professional photographers get their city aerial pics?
Do
they have to especially hire aircraft for this purpose?


Yep.


If digital cameras really were a threat to an aircraft's navigation systems,
why aren't they especially mentioned in the instructions that are read out
by flight crew? For example, they talk about laptop computers, portable
electronic transmitting devices etc, but they don't seem to specifically
mention digital cameras? Because just about everyone owns a digital camera,
I think these should be specifically mentioned, both verbally and in writing
by airlines if they really don't want people to use these during take-offs
and landings!

Podge

  #13  
Old January 14th 08, 04:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Podge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off orLanding


"sam" wrote in message ...
Mark Robinson wrote:
Podge wrote:
I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take a
few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An air
hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was not
permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was using a
dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she still asked
me to turn it off. About 10 minutes later, when land was well out of
sight, we were able to turn on our "electronic devices". But about 10
minutes before landing, while still over the sea, all electronic devices
had to be turned off again. The only worthwhile photography from this
flight was during the first and last 5 minutes of the flight, and this
would apply to many other flights that I have been on.

Now I know that the use of camcorders has been banned during take-offs
and landings, but I didn't know that digital still cameras now suffered
this fate. My digital camera can't take movies, but I know that a lot of
digital still cameras can also take movies. From a practical point of
view, does anyone know whether digital cameras really CAN interfere with
an aircraft's navigation systems? Are airlines being a little too
cautious with regard to the use of digital cameras and camcorders?

About 5 years ago, nobody cared when I used my camcorder or digital
still camera during take-offs or landings, and there were no reports
then of interference with the aircrafts' navigation systems! So what has
changed during the last 5 years?


Any digital device can easily interfere with avionic systems.

They all contain square wave clock oscillators and logic circuits which
produce broadband radio noise which can easily land on critical
frequencies for things like precision approach, radar or communications
systems.


Mythbusted,
http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/03/e..._on_plane.html

Its because the aviation authorities don't want to do the testing.
No reason, its just policy.

Planes would be crashing a lot due to the digital watches that everyone
completely disregards otherwise.


A good web site, thanks. I can't imagine that tiny digital cameras would
pose a serious threat to an aircraft's navigational systems, so I would like
to see some serious research that proves that they do.

  #14  
Old January 14th 08, 04:51 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Podge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing


"tony cooper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:08:46 +1300, "Podge" wrote:


"Mark B." wrote in message
m...

Guess you haven't taken any flights for a while. Airline security has
changed drastically over the last several years, including turning off
all
electronic deviced during takeoff & landings. Even something so
harmless
as a PDA, which I usually have with me to read e-books during a flight.
Most PDAs have wireless connections built-in now, but years ago when I
started using one there was no such thing - didn't matter, it still had
to
be off except while the aircraft was at cruising altitude.


Well then, how do professional photographers get their city aerial pics?
Do
they have to especially hire aircraft for this purpose?

Aerial photography isn't done from commercial flights. The security
involved in commercial flights has more to do with remote detonators
and communication with other parties than anything else.

A device used to remotely detonate an explosive device can be
camouflaged as a PDA or camera.

Aerial photography is done from small planes or helicopters. Whether
they are owned by the photographer or hired is immaterial.

I no longer have a pilot's license, but when I did there was never a
question about what devices I could bring to the plane or use in the
plane or when I could use them.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida


I can see that great caution is needed in today's airline environment, but
wouldn't an explosive device and a device that is used to remotely detonate
it, be detected by the airlines' security scanning systems? After all, you
are allowed to use a digital camera and a laptop computer 10 minutes after
take off, so aren't airlines relying on these having been satisfactorily
scanned before going aboard the aircraft?

Podge

  #15  
Old January 14th 08, 04:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

"Mark B." wrote:
Guess you haven't taken any flights for a while. Airline security has
changed drastically over the last several years, including turning off all
electronic deviced during takeoff & landings.


That is not something that has changed or is new. It was
true long before, and has nothing to do with security,
but rather with safety.

Even something so harmless as
a PDA, which I usually have with me to read e-books during a flight. Most
PDAs have wireless connections built-in now, but years ago when I started
using one there was no such thing - didn't matter, it still had to be off
except while the aircraft was at cruising altitude.


Exactly. The problem is that "electronic devices"
generate radio frequency signals (and digital device
tend to generate extremely broad spectrum signals,
making them far worse).

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #16  
Old January 14th 08, 04:54 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off orLanding

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:40:03 +1300, "Podge" wrote in
:

A good web site, thanks. I can't imagine that tiny digital cameras would
pose a serious threat to an aircraft's navigational systems, so I would like
to see some serious research that proves that they do.


Whatever for? You're not going to affect the policy.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #17  
Old January 14th 08, 04:55 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Tony Cooper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,748
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

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
  #18  
Old January 14th 08, 04:58 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Podge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off orLanding


"E. Scrooge" (*sling) wrote in message
news:1200281873.491622@ftpsrv1...

"sam" wrote in message
...
Mark Robinson wrote:
Podge wrote:
I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take a
few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An
air hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was not
permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was using a
dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she still asked
me to turn it off. About 10 minutes later, when land was well out of
sight, we were able to turn on our "electronic devices". But about 10
minutes before landing, while still over the sea, all electronic
devices had to be turned off again. The only worthwhile photography
from this flight was during the first and last 5 minutes of the flight,
and this would apply to many other flights that I have been on.

Now I know that the use of camcorders has been banned during take-offs
and landings, but I didn't know that digital still cameras now suffered
this fate. My digital camera can't take movies, but I know that a lot
of digital still cameras can also take movies. From a practical point
of view, does anyone know whether digital cameras really CAN interfere
with an aircraft's navigation systems? Are airlines being a little too
cautious with regard to the use of digital cameras and camcorders?

About 5 years ago, nobody cared when I used my camcorder or digital
still camera during take-offs or landings, and there were no reports
then of interference with the aircrafts' navigation systems! So what
has changed during the last 5 years?

Any digital device can easily interfere with avionic systems.

They all contain square wave clock oscillators and logic circuits which
produce broadband radio noise which can easily land on critical
frequencies for things like precision approach, radar or communications
systems.


Mythbusted,
http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/03/e..._on_plane.html

Its because the aviation authorities don't want to do the testing.
No reason, its just policy.

Planes would be crashing a lot due to the digital watches that everyone
completely disregards otherwise.


Planes are well insulated from any interference, especially from different
electronics built into the plane itself. Otherwise the coffee maker might
bring up the landing gear and cause the engines to shut down.

E. Scrooge


However, this article suggests that interference from portable electronic
devices demonstrates 'potential for catastrophe'

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._97423671/pg_2


  #19  
Old January 14th 08, 05:00 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Floyd L. Davidson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,138
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

tony cooper wrote:

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".


The _rule_ is "no electronic devices", the airline
attendant has no discretion.

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.


That is not true.

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.


Please direct that sort of response to alt.conspiracy,
where it belongs.

The reason for the ban *is* to prevent interference with
aircraft electronics (e.g., radio and other navigation
systems). That is a *very* real potential.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
  #20  
Old January 14th 08, 05:06 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,nz.general,aus.aviation
Tony Cooper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,748
Default Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:51:40 +1300, "Podge" wrote:


"tony cooper" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:08:46 +1300, "Podge" wrote:


"Mark B." wrote in message
om...

Guess you haven't taken any flights for a while. Airline security has
changed drastically over the last several years, including turning off
all
electronic deviced during takeoff & landings. Even something so
harmless
as a PDA, which I usually have with me to read e-books during a flight.
Most PDAs have wireless connections built-in now, but years ago when I
started using one there was no such thing - didn't matter, it still had
to
be off except while the aircraft was at cruising altitude.


Well then, how do professional photographers get their city aerial pics?
Do
they have to especially hire aircraft for this purpose?

Aerial photography isn't done from commercial flights. The security
involved in commercial flights has more to do with remote detonators
and communication with other parties than anything else.

A device used to remotely detonate an explosive device can be
camouflaged as a PDA or camera.

Aerial photography is done from small planes or helicopters. Whether
they are owned by the photographer or hired is immaterial.

I no longer have a pilot's license, but when I did there was never a
question about what devices I could bring to the plane or use in the
plane or when I could use them.


I can see that great caution is needed in today's airline environment, but
wouldn't an explosive device and a device that is used to remotely detonate
it, be detected by the airlines' security scanning systems? After all, you
are allowed to use a digital camera and a laptop computer 10 minutes after
take off, so aren't airlines relying on these having been satisfactorily
scanned before going aboard the aircraft?


I gotta laugh. We have very, very stringent security precautions in
place in the US. However, it seems you can't pick up a newspaper here
and not read about some reporter sneaking something through just to
prove it can be done.


--

Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The eagle is landing but what's wrong with him? John H Digital Photography 16 January 7th 06 03:59 AM
MOON LANDING HOAX VATICAN - MAKES IT TO WIKIPEDIA [email protected] Digital Photography 1 January 2nd 06 11:50 PM
MOON LANDING HOAX VATICAN - MAKES IT TO WIKIPEDIA Crash Gordon Digital Photography 4 December 27th 05 08:15 AM
Annecy an pictures from aircraft Claude C Digital Photography 1 April 15th 05 08:13 PM
Annecy and pictures from aircraft Claude C Photographing Nature 0 April 15th 05 03:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.