Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should I Remove This Picture?  
User currently offlineDutchair From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 105 posts, RR: 21
Posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4993 times:

Hi all,

Got this e-mail this evening. I have no clue if this is a fair request or not.
Can someone advise me on this matter?  Confused Thanks, Miguel

Picture:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Miguel Snoep



E-mail:

> Mr. Snoep,
>
> In reference to the photographs taken by you of N145RD we are
> asking that these pictures be withdrawn. Our permission was not
> given and these photographs are in violation of our certificate of
> operation. The FAA contacted us and requested we remove the
> pictures. In addition to printing the pictures without our
> permission you have erroneous information as to ownership and
> operation.
> If you have questions you can contact me at.... We
> appreciate your prompt coopeation and attention to this matter.
>
> Respectfully,
>
>

[Edited 2005-11-23 21:37:28]


"People are assholes when flying"
66 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4972 times:

Hi Miguel,

Why would the FAA ask them to remove it and not contact you or airliners.net? Also, why would the FAA want it removing in the first place?

You don't need their permission to take the plane's photo, but I would be interested as to why it is in violation of their certificate of operation.

I would email the editors asking them to correect any wrong information, but I would seriously question the accuracy of what else they've told you. Just seems a bit far fetched for my imagination, but I'd definately check it out.

Regards,

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4968 times:

If you don't want to trash your own windows I would have it removed Miguel.
You want to be welcome another time somewhere don't you ?

Willem



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4967 times:

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 1):
Why would the FAA ask them to remove it and not contact you or airliners.net? Also, why would the FAA want it removing in the first place?

Exactly my thoughts. I would ask them a few questions first but like Tim says it sounds a little fishy.

Good luck,
Ivan



Contrails Aviation Photography
User currently offlineDutchAir From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 105 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4948 times:

Thanks so far guys!

It seems a little far fetched to me too. I just found out that this person is from a company called "Airway Transport" located in California City.

I'll ask him these questions and let's see what they have to say.  Smile

Regards, Miguel



"People are assholes when flying"
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4941 times:

I wouldn't pull it yet, because to me this sounds like absolute rubbish. Having a photo of your aircraft in the public domain a violation of certificate of operation? I don't think so. Why don't you try and contact the FAA on the matter as well? I'm pretty sure they would have contacted you directly in the first place, what business is it of theirs to be on Airliners.net looking for photos of aircraft and reporting it to airlines anyway? To me it's all a bit fishy. Ask questions and get answers!

Cheers

Dan


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4934 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It is up to you but provided you were not trespassing then I do not see the issue.

Quoting Dutchair (Thread starter):
you have erroneous information as to ownership and
> operation.

..and so does the FAA then- Their database matches your info.

I wonder if any of the other photogs with this A/c in the db have been contacted. Perhaps a personal email to one or two of them may clarify things.

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4933 times:

Did the other 6 photographers of this a/c have permission to shoot it and put it on A.net?
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4887 times:

Quoting EGGD (Reply 5):
I wouldn't pull it yet, because to me this sounds like absolute rubbish.

Rubbish or not is probably not the point.
The one speaking "rubbish" is probably the same you need to get access another time, I can guess his answer already.
Especially when published on a bulletin board, we are not the only ones reading this.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineDevil505x From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 232 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4883 times:

Oh boy isn't that one of those CIA planes they have been using to ferry terrorists all over the world. Nice knowing you!  laughing 

User currently offlineVisityyj From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 519 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4818 times:

The FAA register is probably not up-to-date, as this DC3TP has been in and around California City for a year or so. It does appear that Airway Transport may own or at least lease it, which may have caused the sender of the email to have a hissy-fit.

As for the FAA request, it's total nonsense, he's just making it up to try to intimidate you. Since the photo was taken at Mojave not California City, he also has no say in giving or denying access there.

Tell him to take a hike.


User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4793 times:

Sounds like there's a bit more to this than meets the eye. As was said its not illegal to take pictures of aircraft but it sounds dodgy that it has been asked to remove the picture. Maybe there is something in the comments that was mentioned that shouldn't have been...

User currently offlineDacman From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 444 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4784 times:

I got the same request today. I shoot on the ramp at MHV a number of times every year, in fact I was told I could take photos of the aircraft.

The info on the aircraft that I posted was taken from the FAA website, so I don't understand how it can be wrong either, very fishy to say the least.

It is highly unlikely the FAA to contacted the company, telling them the photos are in violation of their operating certificate, no such animal exists to my knowledge. I think it is just someone throwing their uninformed weight around.

I deleted the e-mail with no reply of course, matter over as far as I am concerned.

Mike
dacman
LGB/LAX Local



"Airliner Photography is not a crime"
User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4749 times:

Unless you took the picture while you were on the man's property, he has nothing. My guess is that he doesn't want people to know that either he or the plane were there at that time.

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 2):
If you don't want to trash your own windows I would have it removed Miguel.
You want to be welcome another time somewhere don't you ?



Quoting Aviopic (Reply 8):
Rubbish or not is probably not the point.
The one speaking "rubbish" is probably the same you need to get access another time, I can guess his answer already.
Especially when published on a bulletin board, we are not the only ones reading this.

What in the world are you talking about? How do you know that the e-mail writer is the one who let him there in the first place?

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineVisityyj From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 519 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4745 times:

Quoting Dacman (Reply 12):
It is highly unlikely the FAA to contacted the company, telling them the photos are in violation of their operating certificate,

Highly unlikely is putting it mildly. Ask him to forward you a copy of the FAA directive  butthead 


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9603 posts, RR: 69
Reply 15, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4734 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

a classic case of win the battle but lose the war.

Perhaps they have a valid reason for asking, perhaps they don't. But why risk it? Are you better off for having the photo online? Perhaps they raise a big stink to the airport, or whoevers 'property' you were on, and next time you go back you are not welcomed.

For some reason they don't want pictures of the aircraft online, so why fight it? You will only make things worse for yourself, and your fellow spotters, in the long run. There is nothing to gain by leaving it up, but there sure is a lot to lose!


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 16, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4730 times:

Leave it where it is. Do not be intimidated by unfounded threats.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineYanqui67 From Puerto Rico, joined Jan 2005, 508 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4717 times:

Oh my, a DC-3 with Turboprops, what has the world come to?

User currently offlineF9Widebody From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1604 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4715 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 15):
Perhaps they have a valid reason for asking, perhaps they don't. But why risk it? Are you better off for having the photo online? Perhaps they raise a big stink to the airport, or whoevers 'property' you were on, and next time you go back you are not welcomed.

For some reason they don't want pictures of the aircraft online, so why fight it? You will only make things worse for yourself, and your fellow spotters, in the long run. There is nothing to gain by leaving it up, but there sure is a lot to lose!

 checkmark 



YES URLS in signature!!!
User currently offlineDacman From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 444 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4708 times:

Royal,

They are e-mailing everyone that has a photo of the aircraft with the same request, it is rubbish to be sure.

I was given permission by the airport staff and the folks in the hanger where the aircraft was parked to photograph her, so in my book it stays.

I don't cave to these kind of folks with baseless requests. Next AA, UA, WN, and F9 will want all the photos of their aircraft removed from A.Net for some idiotic reason and if we did there would be no A.Net or any other airliner photo site.

Just my humble opinion.

Mike
dacman
LGB/LAX Local



"Airliner Photography is not a crime"
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4706 times:

Yep I agree. It may be a legit email but then again it may not.

Why worry about it? Just get the shot taken down. Snap something better to replace it. Then whoever it is has nothing on you.


User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 21, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4705 times:

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 13):
What in the world are you talking about? How do you know that the e-mail writer is the one who let him there in the first place?

Take it easy mate, it's just a matter of common sense.
Who cares about a DC3 without radial engines anyway ?

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 15):
a classic case of win the battle but lose the war.

 checkmark 

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 15):
Perhaps they have a valid reason for asking, perhaps they don't. But why risk it? Are you better off for having the photo online? Perhaps they raise a big stink to the airport, or whoevers 'property' you were on, and next time you go back you are not welcomed.

 checkmark 

It's just how I get access to places where others don't.
It's a well meant advice, nothing more.

Willem



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineDutchAir From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 105 posts, RR: 21
Reply 22, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4688 times:

Okay, I've sent him a stupid message that I didn't understand him and here's the reply:

>Mr. Snoep: The pictures were shown on airliners.com and had your name as
>photographer. Our plane is a DC3-TP. If you keep the picture on line
>please just remove any information other basic such as register owner, tail,
>etc. Thank you......

So no FAA, CIA or any other government agency involved  relieved  Big grin
Just an owner who probably didn't like it to see his plane linked to the South African Air Force (or something like that).

Maybe I'll send in a correction... maybe not!
Thanks all for the replies; case closed  Smile

Miguel



"People are assholes when flying"
User currently offlineLurch From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4679 times:

This is from the FAA N Number site

FAA Registry
N-Number Inquiry Results


N145RD is Assigned


Assigned/Registered Aircraft

Aircraft Description

Serial Number 20175 Type Registration Corporation
Manufacturer Name DOUGLAS Certificate Issue Date 11/05/2002
Model DC3 Status Valid
Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Multi-Engine Type Engine Turbo-Prop
Pending Number Change None Dealer No
Date Change Authorized None Mode S Code 50133276
MFR Year 1942 Fractional Owner NO


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registered Owner

Name BAJA AIR INC
Street 2260 S XANADU WAY STE 340
City AURORA State COLORADO Zip Code 80014-6516
County ARAPAHOE
Country UNITED STATES

Airworthiness



Engine Manufacturer P&W Classification Standard
Engine Model PT6A SERIES Category Transport

A/W Date 05/19/1999

I hope its usfull to you!


User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4662 times:

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 13):
My guess is that he doesn't want people to know that either he or the plane were there at that time.



Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 15):
Perhaps they have a valid reason for asking, perhaps they don't. But why risk it? Are you better off for having the photo online? Perhaps they raise a big stink to the airport, or whoevers 'property' you were on, and next time you go back you are not welcomed.

It turns out it was a load of bull after all, as I suspected. My response to both points raised would be that wouldn't it have been better (and perhaps a more successful outcome for the owners) to just have emailed Miguel and said basically "look, you have a photo of our plane on a.net, but we don't wish to be publicized in such a way, can you remove it?" It would have saved all the hassle.

Regards,

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
25 Post contains images Skywatch : Yep, they are really concerned about their privacy! They haven't even blocked it from flight tracking sites! Information as of 11/21/2005 6:14:43 AM G
26 Post contains links USAFHummer : http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N145RD Greg
27 Maiznblu_757 : Here is a list of the 1000 most recent IFR flights for this aircraft/FlightID: Ident Type Dept Dest Departure Time (GMT) N145RD DC3 SDM LVK 10/24/200
28 Eadster : Come on guys, Why is it so hard? The guy has asked a simple question. It can be done, why take things this far? They've stated that its fine to keep t
29 Post contains images Skywatch : Yep. It's a good picture, and if a little info has to go, then so be it. It still seems like a stupid request, but hey, they own the plane! Of course
30 Invader : In general, I recommend to never remove pictures by order of owners of aircraft as long as you haven't been trespassing. There have been other cases w
31 Devil505x : Are you kidding?
32 Visityyj : I think you've hit the nail on the head. If he's happy about the basics, including ownership, being reported then it must be the plane's history that
33 Post contains images JetAv8r : Maybe one of the pilot's took the plane on a joy ride that the boss didn't know about
34 Clickhappy : This thread highlights the two groups that dominate out hobby; Those who think taking pictures of airplanes is a privelege, and those that think it is
35 DC10Tim : Would you have removed the photo Royal, had you received that email? Seriously, if so then why? Tim.
36 Post contains images Eadster : Why not? So you'd rather have people think of A.Net users as a bunch of uncooprative holes? In my eyes, change the info as requested, pic stays, owne
37 Clickhappy : Yes, I would have removed it. In fact I have been in this EXACT position before, and I typed up a really nasty email, but never sent it. I did send an
38 Newark777 : And those who know the owner of the aircraft has no right to have the photo removed. Period. Harry
39 Clickhappy : Harry, I see that you are "16-20" years old. When you grow up you will learn that life is a lot more complicated than being "right." Like I said, win
40 JeffM : Hardly Harry, you have a lot to learn if you think that scenario is cut and dried. There are plenty of situations where the owner is well within thei
41 Post contains images ChrisH : I think you should e-mail him back with a friendly tone, ask what's up basically. Perhaps if you're lucky you'll get a ride like Clickhappy did. You'r
42 JeffM : Absolutely. You got a problem with that?
43 Post contains images DC10Tim : That's fair enough, and as I say, it was a serious question, not a leading one. I haven't been in exactly the same position, but have been asked by a
44 JumboJim747 : I think remove it . For the simple reason to not put this sort of chance in the future in jeopardy. If i was asked to delete one of my pics i would do
45 AeroWeanie : Clickhappy, I am 48 years old and agree with Harry. The owners of the airplane are totally out of bounds claiming that the photographers need their p
46 Fsgay : Just saw this thread, and went back and checked my email, and, sure enough, I got the same request. Interestingly, if the information on the aircraft'
47 DutchAir : Frederick, I didn't reply to his last message. I've sent in a correction yesterday and for me this case is closed now. I don't see any reason why thi
48 Key : Obviously true. But standing up for a right, even at cost to yourself, is a high value in life and found more with youth than others. While your over
49 JeffM : What kind of BS is that? You are stretching things a bit here, I did not say or imply Harry did not have common sense. I'm not sure why you say this,
50 Key : Jeff, the part you left out in quoting me is the part that relayed to you. Why I say this is I think Royal and you are too harsh on Harry. That's all.
51 Devil505x : Give em an inch they'll take a mile! Stand up for your rights! No one is being an @$$hole here. If you say no its no if they take it further they are
52 JeffM : Big crock of BS...
53 ChrisH : Depends on the situation.
54 Devil505x : Yeah really
55 Airway2 : To all of you who responded to our request for the removal of the pictures of our DC-3 TP N145RD. What was a simple request based on a request from th
56 Post contains images Aviopic : That's a clear answer Airway2 I hope it will open they eyes of the "it's my right", "period" and "case closed" people around here and they will answe
57 Post contains images Visityyj : Original 'request': Modified (or mollified) request: Had the second request been sent in the first instance, I doubt there would have been any discuss
58 StealthZ : Not sure either, So it appears that others are getting a rather bizarre PM from "Airways2" Mine read.. "A basic request was sent to anyone posting pi
59 Newark777 : I received that IM as well. Harry
60 Clickhappy : So why not take the picture(s) down? Seems like a ton of time being spent on a silly subject, just remove them and be done with it.
61 StealthZ : Royal, I thought this matter was dead & buried but this Airways2 woman has a bee in her butt and needed to involve folks in her bunfight with the FAA.
62 F4wso : Maybe this thread will last until Dec 17, 2005. Then we can celebrate the 70th anniversary of the DC-3 series. Gary Cottage Grove, MN, USA
63 Post contains links and images ShyFlyer : Exactly. The info attached to that photo is freely available from the FAA. All you need to do is use the N number and Google and you've got it. In fa
64 Visityyj : Beacuse of the manner of the request. Had the operator simply said "please remove your photo of N145RD as we do not wish our airplane to be shown on
65 Flybhx : Sounds like the FAA chap needs training in the definition of plying for hire. A large storm in a very small teacup over this. The rights and wrongs of
66 TACAA320 : Leave it where it belongs... Airliners.net Simply delete such email.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Should I Upload This Picture? posted Tue Jan 31 2006 04:06:11 by Garri767
Should I Upload This Picture Of JFK? posted Sat Jun 18 2005 21:32:26 by Birdwatching
Should I Pull This Picture From The Queue? posted Mon Sep 20 2004 03:15:16 by Eksath
Should I Upload This DFW Interior Picture? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 04:23:09 by VasanthD
Hi And 'Does This Picture Can Be Improved?' posted Mon Nov 6 2006 15:59:30 by FYODOR
How Should I Upload This Shot? posted Tue Oct 31 2006 19:37:31 by DLX737200
How Should I Edit This Photo? posted Sun Oct 29 2006 02:00:36 by NicolasRubio
You Vote, Should I Appeal This Night Shot? posted Sat Oct 28 2006 18:49:20 by Atomother
What To Do With This Picture? posted Sat Oct 14 2006 09:59:01 by WILCO737
Should I Upload This, Or Not? posted Fri Oct 6 2006 15:29:02 by Raptors