Aerial photo mishap
01-27-2012, 05:24 AM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Aerial photo mishap
Pilot in fatal Denver crash was shooting photos, may have hit winds - The Denver Post
This article is about a mishap that occurred back in June 2011, but it highlights some of the dangers of aerial photgraphy I think - the environment. I'd like the discussion to focus on the trials and tribulations that aerial photo pilots finding themselves dealing with when on a job.
USMCFLYR
This article is about a mishap that occurred back in June 2011, but it highlights some of the dangers of aerial photgraphy I think - the environment. I'd like the discussion to focus on the trials and tribulations that aerial photo pilots finding themselves dealing with when on a job.
USMCFLYR
01-27-2012, 05:39 AM
#2
Moderator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
This guy apparently got into a downburst. Very dangerous and not much you can do about it. Small airplanes can only do about 800 fpm and the low altitude does not give a lot of slack.
I am not doing aerial surveys any more, but our operation stayed in busy airspace and we were always seeing/ avoiding airplanes. With one crew member head down the other guy had to keep a lookout. It was close sometimes. We did have a TAS system on board but they are not infallible.
I am not doing aerial surveys any more, but our operation stayed in busy airspace and we were always seeing/ avoiding airplanes. With one crew member head down the other guy had to keep a lookout. It was close sometimes. We did have a TAS system on board but they are not infallible.
01-27-2012, 07:37 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: Seat: Vegan friendly faux leather
Posts: 981
Originally Posted by Cubdriver
This guy apparently got into a downburst. Very dangerous and not much you can do about it. Small airplanes can only do about 800 fpm and the low altitude does not give a lot of slack.
I am not doing aerial surveys any more, but our operation stayed in busy airspace and we were always seeing/ avoiding airplanes. With one crew member head down the other guy had to keep a lookout. It was close sometimes. We did have a TAS system on board but they are not infallible.
I am not doing aerial surveys any more, but our operation stayed in busy airspace and we were always seeing/ avoiding airplanes. With one crew member head down the other guy had to keep a lookout. It was close sometimes. We did have a TAS system on board but they are not infallible.
I'm the biggest wimp when it comes to bad weather, and concentrating on a job is a very easy way to get out of your element.
01-27-2012, 06:12 PM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,253
I remember a CRJ700 took off ahead of us and reported WS with altitude LOSS on climb out. The 700 is overpowered for an RJ, it would take a lot to actually lose altitude after you firewall it.
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
01-27-2012, 07:51 PM
#6
Bracing for Fallacies
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: In favor of good things, not in favor of bad things
Posts: 3,543
Originally Posted by rickair7777
I remember a CRJ700 took off ahead of us and reported WS with altitude LOSS on climb out. The 700 is overpowered for an RJ, it would take a lot to actually lose altitude after you firewall it.
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
02-11-2012, 04:38 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: EVIL PRIVATE JET
Posts: 529
Originally Posted by rickair7777
I remember a CRJ700 took off ahead of us and reported WS with altitude LOSS on climb out. The 700 is overpowered for an RJ, it would take a lot to actually lose altitude after you firewall it.
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
Then some clown in a 310 took off immediately after, disregarding the tower's suggestion that he wait...and the fact that he had to taxi around another RJ (me after I decided not to go).
Guys like that really tick me off! Just the other day I told our passengers we were going to delay because it was freezing rain. Then we are standing in the building and another company based on the field taxis out in their Navajo and takes off!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
