Lmao
Another one bites the dust...
- Thread starter tstrike
- Start date
The craft was employed by X-Factor
The pics are stolen from a thread on RCGroups.
View attachment 11078
View attachment 11079
The AV company involved:
http://www.helicam.com/our-helicam/
The pics are stolen from a thread on RCGroups.
View attachment 11078
View attachment 11079
The AV company involved:
http://www.helicam.com/our-helicam/
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
What you saw jumping out just before the crash was their spider! (according to the website)
Maybe he did not like the idea of wailing singers and jumped!
Still worrying though but as Denny says they make much less of a mess than a full size, just look what happened in London a few weeks ago.
I doubt if they would have been making enough money to convince me to do a gig like that.
I wonder if they have reported to the CAA as a incident.
Dave
Maybe he did not like the idea of wailing singers and jumped!
Still worrying though but as Denny says they make much less of a mess than a full size, just look what happened in London a few weeks ago.
I doubt if they would have been making enough money to convince me to do a gig like that.
I wonder if they have reported to the CAA as a incident.
Dave
There is two big difference between FULL SIZE aircraft and our "toys".
1) In full size your own *** is on the line. Always... If a full size aircraft goes down it is considered almost always as a major accident and catastrophe. I do not think the sympathy will be there if UAV "toy" pilot ends up slashing or injuring someone in a crowd.
2) Full size requires pilot licensing thus making it a closed/protected profession. Our "toy" generated profession is open to anybody.
Hope you all have your liability insurances
1) In full size your own *** is on the line. Always... If a full size aircraft goes down it is considered almost always as a major accident and catastrophe. I do not think the sympathy will be there if UAV "toy" pilot ends up slashing or injuring someone in a crowd.
2) Full size requires pilot licensing thus making it a closed/protected profession. Our "toy" generated profession is open to anybody.
Hope you all have your liability insurances
ZAxis
Member
Nobody has picked up exactly where the incident occurred, it was here ...
View attachment 11101
I sort of suspect the CAA were already involved beforehand.
As a location it must have taken a lot of serious preparation and not undertaken lightly. So to react as the pilot did and dump the aircraft in the water was exactly the correct thing to do and well executed. Anyone taking on a job like this can only do it in professional manner ... no option.
Definite wakeup call.
andy
Attachments
The rigs we fly for cinema work have proven to be very reliable with thousands of flights and only a couple of forced landings over a period of many years. It has taken many years to learn and improve on the many weak areas found along the way. Many of these weaknesses were caught just in the nick of time. Having said that, as I said before, I would have declined this gig. The rig flown here did not benefit from extensive flight testing and the ops paid the price. They will most likely lose their insurance and now are branded with questionable reliability. If someone would have been hurt, it would have made the front page.
In the professional world, a root cause analysis would follow such an incident. The primary recommendation from this event would be to not fly near large crowds. The secondary would be improve equipment reliability. Take this as a close call due to poor judgement and a good lesson learned.
Our team has a saying "hope is not a plan".
In the professional world, a root cause analysis would follow such an incident. The primary recommendation from this event would be to not fly near large crowds. The secondary would be improve equipment reliability. Take this as a close call due to poor judgement and a good lesson learned.
Our team has a saying "hope is not a plan".
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you know this as a fact? (not trying to be my snarky self, just asking how you know this)
My TDR helis weigh just over 5 kilos which is not much more than a standard 3D machine, but with the new Zoom function, I could and would have done that job with complete safety and not flown anywhere near the crowd. Stop building heavy lift crap and learn how to use Targa files if you really do need to uprez. from full HD.
It is the use of ultra wide angle lenses which dictate how close you have to fly. It also highlights the poor quality of the current crop of stabilisation systems used on Cinematic size cameras.
They would not stabilise anything over a super wide angle. Given that scenario the obvious way to go is to use a much smaller image sensor and then use a lossless uprez. from a source that is rock steady and super sharp in the first place. It has been proven many times that only with an inner axis system can you reach that level. That can now come from within the lens and the image sensor itself.
Any imagery from a red for example requires extensive work in post before it's usable so what is the difference.:tennis:
Would you believe that a hand held shot taken with a 30 sec. shutter speed at the 35mm equivalent of 480 mm would be possible. IT IS. and shot with HDR showing hair detail on a squirrel in a tree.
It is the use of ultra wide angle lenses which dictate how close you have to fly. It also highlights the poor quality of the current crop of stabilisation systems used on Cinematic size cameras.
They would not stabilise anything over a super wide angle. Given that scenario the obvious way to go is to use a much smaller image sensor and then use a lossless uprez. from a source that is rock steady and super sharp in the first place. It has been proven many times that only with an inner axis system can you reach that level. That can now come from within the lens and the image sensor itself.
Any imagery from a red for example requires extensive work in post before it's usable so what is the difference.:tennis:
Would you believe that a hand held shot taken with a 30 sec. shutter speed at the 35mm equivalent of 480 mm would be possible. IT IS. and shot with HDR showing hair detail on a squirrel in a tree.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jake Bullit
Fly,crash,glue,repeat!
Her`s the newspaper article taken from FPVHUB:
View attachment 11119
Not my finger BTW:highly_amused:
View attachment 11119
Not my finger BTW:highly_amused:
Attachments
Here's a link to the UAS Vision Daily News story on the crash.
What interests me is that it says " the helicopter floated to the top and they managed to fish that out" - How?
Every time I lift my Skyjib I'm amazed it flies let alone float!!!!!
Sounds as fishy as the net they used to catch it :shame:
http://www.uasvision.com/2013/04/15...il&utm_campaign=6bbf5d3c82-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN
What interests me is that it says " the helicopter floated to the top and they managed to fish that out" - How?
Every time I lift my Skyjib I'm amazed it flies let alone float!!!!!
Sounds as fishy as the net they used to catch it :shame:
http://www.uasvision.com/2013/04/15...il&utm_campaign=6bbf5d3c82-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN
gadgetkeith
likes gadgets
I agree with most of the comments this kind of media exposure is going to kill it for the flying camera operators everywhere
flying camera jibs have a place and as said in many many threads over or near crowds of people is a no go because of the saftey aspects involved
in this type of situation its just a QUICK LAZY FIX on behalf of the production team to get the footage with minimal effort bad move
a zipline camera rig would have taken more effort to setup and could have got the same results ie a wide travel scan across the crowd etc
as far as pricing for the shot saftey shouldnt be compromised if its in the budget then do it right or leave it out
also as far as a cheap shot maybe not from what some are saying they can charge for doing this type of filming
flying camera jibs have a place and as said in many many threads over or near crowds of people is a no go because of the saftey aspects involved
in this type of situation its just a QUICK LAZY FIX on behalf of the production team to get the footage with minimal effort bad move
a zipline camera rig would have taken more effort to setup and could have got the same results ie a wide travel scan across the crowd etc
as far as pricing for the shot saftey shouldnt be compromised if its in the budget then do it right or leave it out
also as far as a cheap shot maybe not from what some are saying they can charge for doing this type of filming
ChrisViperM
Active Member
Just wondering if he keeps his contract and carries on flying......
Nevermind how careful you are, how intens your pre-flight checks are and how much experience you have....these bastards drop from the sky at their own liking.....preferably at the most unwanted moment
Chris
Nevermind how careful you are, how intens your pre-flight checks are and how much experience you have....these bastards drop from the sky at their own liking.....preferably at the most unwanted moment
Chris
Last edited by a moderator:
Quantumlight
Member
It is great when you can fly and change the camera angle so easily with a rig like this but safety wise have a parachute at least on it. i should decrease the speed to a level of non leathal.
But at a event like this use a zip line rig. much more safe.
But at a event like this use a zip line rig. much more safe.
They really are like lightbulbs, when they work they shine very bright, but they seem to go out at the most inopportune times.
It was dumped into the river. Anyone would do the same thing to avoid injury of bystanders. Flying something that big near a crowd takes some ballz and trust in your equipment. I would rather take a job filming a building or a nature shot where only a deer would hear the motor rotor crash, but knowing my luck the lipo would burst after crashing and start a forest fire.
Does anyone know what flight system he was using?
My business partner was chatting to the CAA about permissions for an upcoming job we're setting up and this came up in general conversation. They had special permissions for the shoot so were not contravening the ANO and part of their risk assessment involved the plan for ditching in the Thames in the event of a forced/crash landing so they are happy everything was done right.
Dependabletv
Always learning
Coming at this from the TV perspective, if you know how to do a lossless uprez, please tell us as it will revolutionise the TV and film industry. Scaling up an image has to add pixel information. If it wasn't captured in the first place, it can only be interpolated (otherwise known digital guess work) A lossless conversion assumes the same resolution if that's what you refer to?. The post work done with Red Raw files is all about colour space not resolution - and perhaps drying the files out in this case. Ideally, you need to shoot beyond your required resolution so that the stabilisation software, if required, can stabilise without zooming. I could be wrong and I hope I am as I can then sell some very expensive cameras and go on holiday! :tennis:
3DJIM
Low Down Hucker
Like everyone has said it could have been lots worse, they had a plan if things went wrong and when they had to put that plan into action it played out as expected, if anything it should help strengthen the safety fight for multi's in the uk. Things will and do go wrong with everything in life, every day, risk mitigation is key and planning paid off here.
The 6p's rule applies,
'piss poor planning prevents perfect performance'
Learn and move on
Jim.
The 6p's rule applies,
'piss poor planning prevents perfect performance'
Learn and move on
Jim.
Last edited by a moderator: