I recently flew a Cessna that was upgraded with a camera on the bottom of the plane. It portrayed all three wheels facing forward. The man had the feed connected to an additional screen on the aircraft. The feed seemed really helpful to check on when I was flaring for landing. But imagine how helpful this would be in case of a gear failure. Why don't they have this in commercial aircraft?

 

Because it would weigh something and cost money.

 

I can't imagine that this would help with landing, in fact quite the opposite for a large transport-category jet. The feedback from that close-up view would be too fast...you'd end up over-controlling. The technique we use is to look farther down the runway, not right in front of you...this dampens and stabilizes your pitch response.

You don't need a camera for the gear because we have redundant indications, and even if gear appeared down on camera it might not actually be locked. Better to use the sensors design for that.

Some large jets do have cameras on the tail for a rear view and for a broad forward view. These are used for ground operations and are very helpful...wish I had one.

 

From a YouTube search of A-380 Tail Camera.



Number of other videos out there as well.

 

777 and 787 have cameras too. Only a matter of time before this is wired into the FDR in a more formal manner and required for new large aircraft IMO. I think it would dramatically cut down on incident/accident investigation length when coupled with the other data.

 

After test-driving several cars equipped with backup cameras, I became hooked on the idea, enough that I have decided to shell out $1000 to have one put in my new car.

I wish I'd had a tail camera when I gently taxied my PA-12 wingtip into a parked aircraft (never mind that the other A/C was jutting into the runway). The real cause was that from my vantage point (being tall) I could not see the wingtips! I know, this sounds absurd, but after analyzing the geometry, yes, about the last four feet of wing on each side are not visible to a tall pilot.

Costs have come down so very much in recent years,; it seems silly to deprive ourselves of alternative views that could benefit safety.

 

Single pilot aircraft with a TV screen to watch what's going on outside is a bad idea. When operating on any airport surface, please keep you all of your attention outside the aircraft. If you taxied your aircraft into a stationary object, learning the geometry of your aircraft is the answer.

 

Landing probably isn't the time to be watching TV.

If you need a TV camera outside the aircraft to land a Cessna, then something is very lacking. What's next, a radio altimeter for the 152??

When you get your 50 hour cropdusting job with your uncle, don't try to wire it for video or sound. There are more important things to be seeing outside the window.

 

Go right ahead. Be a pig-headed arrogant know-it-all "This would never happen to me" person, if you wish. Have you ever actually taxiied a PA-12? I didn't think so. When on grass, which is not like the concrete you are used to, the grass is not always perfectly level, hence, the aircraft can list to one side, and no matter how much geometry you know, you simply can't see what's on the other side of the wing, from the cockpit, unless you can see right through your wings. Mine were covered with opaque painted doped fabric, not Saran wrap.

Please show me where you read that I suggested "operating by watching the tv screen"?

A tail-mounted camera would be a tool that I would use very infrequently, like when I need to see around the wings in close quarters, but on those rare occasions when I would use it, it might save me some grief. It wouldn't help you though, because your mind is closed.

 

Suppose your Cessna is a C208 Caravan, and your PT-6 just blew apart, and your window is suddenly covered with oil? Please don't lecture me about how that only happens once every 6 Million hours. A tail mounted camera might have saved my friend's life. He landed just fine, but on rollout he could not see the trees whose branches ultimately smashed his windshield and penetrated his face.