83 replies to this topic

[FL050]

I would respond but admins are deleting everything on this topic.. but thank you for admitting.. there are way too many people on this forum that thin they know what being a real pilot is.

[FEST-HOS-MANGE]

FL050, on Aug 3 2011, 11:42 PM, said:

I would respond but admins are deleting everything on this topic.. but thank you for admitting.. there are way too many people on this forum that thin they know what being a real pilot is.

people like you ?  

[Jonay]

it is one of these cameras in question right?

[kestrel]

Jonay, on Aug 4 2011, 08:54 AM, said:

it is one of these cameras in question right?

Yup.... there is the killer camera, mine is smaller than that  

[mhockey21]

kestrel, on Aug 4 2011, 06:14 AM, said:

Yup.... there is the killer camera, mine is smaller than that  

I think you are missing the whole point of what we were saying....

[EPS236]

Mountains out of molehills.

[kestrel]

EPS236, on Aug 4 2011, 04:32 PM, said:

Mountains out of molehills.

tell me about it!  

[THBatMan8]

MONSTER DEBATE!!!

Edited by Richard_Nixon, 04 August 2011 - 12:23 PM.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Richard_Nixon, on Aug 4 2011, 01:22 PM, said:

MONSTER DEBATE!!!

LOL.

Oh, Aharon  

[shamupilot]

Fate01_VUSAFS, on Aug 4 2011, 12:25 PM, said:

LOL.

Oh, Aharon  

Well this proves my theory right:

everything at FSW is MONSTER sized.

[THBatMan8]

shamupilot, on Aug 4 2011, 02:29 PM, said:

Well this proves my theory right:

everything at FSW is MONSTER sized.

All in good humor.

[THBatMan8]

Side note:

I'm tempted to go to Burger King and order MONSTER FRIES!!!

This thread reminds me of "how many FSW members it takes to change a light bulb"

Quote

1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb would have been changed differently

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs

1 to move it to the Lighting section

2 to argue then move it to the Electricals
section

7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs

5 to flame the spell checkers

3 to correct spelling/grammar flames

6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ... another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid

2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp"

15 know-it-alls who claim they were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct

19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb forum

11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum

36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty

7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs

4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's

3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group

13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"

5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy

4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"

13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs"

1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again.

Edited by Richard_Nixon, 04 August 2011 - 04:14 PM.

[Ceridwen]

Great video, thank you very much!  Gives a whole other perspective, and great editing!


As for everything else here:
It is more likely to die at home, or during a car crash, than to be killed by a small camera mounted to a small plane.

Safety (or rather the rules) is a variable thing, not something to just count on whatever the rules may be.

[THBatMan8]

Ceridwen, on Aug 4 2011, 03:36 PM, said:

Great video, thank you very much!  Gives a whole other perspective, and great editing!
As for everything else here:
It is more likely to die at home, or during a car crash, than to be killed by a small camera mounted to a small plane.

Safety (or rather the rules) is a variable thing, not something to just count on whatever the rules may be.

Just to add another note to this;

Check your FAA regs at the door. The OP is from the UK, so FAA regs do not apply to him.

[AmericanAirFan]

Amazing Video!

I did some of my own research. Considering I am working at a major aircraft maintenance facillity for my summer job. And I am taking classes torwards getting my A&P Certificate at college. I should really know things like this.

The Question: Is it illegal to temporarily mount a camera to the outside of the airplane?

Answer: At least in the U.S. no it is not illegal

Here is a quote from another forum about STCs and some about mounting cameras. (Read the words in bold)

Quote

You have multiple questions, and none of the answers can be both simple and completely true. In other words, welcome to the can of worms. The further you dig, the murkier it's going to get, and this is why your A&P hates paperwork, but probably is a little obsessive about it.

First off, will the change you are making require a Form 337 [Major Repair or Alteration (Airframe, Powerplant, Propeller, or Appliance)]? If it does not, it is a minor repair or alteration, and can be done with at most a logbook entry.

If it does, is it merely documenting a major repair, is it documenting an alteration within the scope of an A&P, IA, or repair station's ability to authorize, or will it need a field approval (which is basically a one-airplane, one-time STC), or full STC process (which can take serious money and years to acquire)?

If it does not, when is a logbook entry required? When a permanent change or modification is made to an airplane. This is a judgment call, so there's not really a hard and fast rule, and we don't want the FAA trying to clarify it to be one - the more rules made, the less room for judgment calls, the worse off everybody will be.

AOPA could get away with the cams precisely because they were stuck on with gaffer's tape - anything taped or velcro'ed to a plane is not a "permanent installation" and therefore does not require a logbook entry and/or a 337, which means it does not require a Field Approval and/or a STC.

If you start permanently attaching things to the airplane, from an in-dash GPS mount to a larger step to new seat belts, you start getting into the murky area of when it's owner's discretion, when it's a simple logbook entry, and when it's a 337 required.

Any time you have to install a part that has gone through the process of getting an STC for your make and model aircraft, you must put in a 337, and God help you if you're trying to put a STC'ed part in a plane that is not in the makes and models approved for that STC. (Don't ask me about my engine upgrade; I don't want to type that rant, and you don't want to read it.)

It is up to the PIC to decide whether the aircraft is airworthy for flight or not. This means that maintenance must also be all up to date. Which a pilot relies on a mechanic to put in the necessary entries so that the aircraft is airworthy maintenance wise. If the paperwork is not right and the aircraft is unairworthy it is the PIC's problem to seek out a certified A&P to do the proper maintenance and corresponding logbook entry.

No me personally when I get my A&P based on what I've read if the camera is not permanently fixed and/or does not noticeably affect weight and balance, performance or structural integrity I will not sign something like that in the logbook. At this point the PIC is up a creek either he finds another A&P who will sign it in the logbook and do necessary weight and balance adjustments. That or the PIC secures the object and deems the aircraft airworthy. The PIC deems that if something is dropped all precaution has been taken to make sure nothing on the ground is harmed. Then I'd say go fly!!

Now if you guys are really gung ho and you're not just all talk you can send a letter requesting a letter of interpretation from the FAA about certain FAA regulations pertaining to alteration or repair of an aircraft in relation to mounting a small camera with zip ties for a flight. The FAA will send you a letter of interpretation and the letter of interpretation will be entered into the FAA's database in which you can look up all kinds of letters of interpretation.

Now Kestrel amazing video.

And Pattboy I'd fly with you anyday!

And to everyone else who has no knowledge of maintenance side of things or is not willing to do research please check your facts before posting.

Is it legal in the UK though? I don't know. I'd venture to say it probably is.

[Greeney]

FL050, on Aug 4 2011, 12:42 AM, said:

I would respond but admins are deleting everything on this topic.. but thank you for admitting.. there are way too many people on this forum that thin they know what being a real pilot is.

For a real pilot you should brush up on your FARs

[SwitchFX]

LA_PHX, on Aug 3 2011, 02:57 PM, said:

Yikes!  Fiesty in here.

They're on their monthly cycle.

[Spam]

SwitchFX, on Aug 4 2011, 07:43 PM, said:

They're on their monthly cycle.

I thought they were weekly around here...

Excellent video bud! Get some more up

Edited by Spam, 05 August 2011 - 05:10 AM.

[HighFlyin]

Great video. If you plan on taking lots of videos, I'd strongly recommend getting a GoPro. I just bought the helmet HD and a suction cup, which is good to 200MPH.

Check out some videos on YouTube. Very high quality, 1080P capability and you can mount them virtually anywhere.

[Fate01_VUSAFS]

Richard_Nixon, on Aug 4 2011, 05:03 PM, said:

Side note:

I'm tempted to go to Burger King and order MONSTER FRIES!!!

This thread reminds me of "how many FSW members it takes to change a light bulb"

Would you be interested in forming a domestic partnership with me?