DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16831 posts, RR: 57 Reply 3, posted (8 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4234 times:
Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 2):
Yes i know its real but this guy added the camera himself with cable ties seems weird to me
Apparently, he cleared it with his company. There is an alternate landing gear extension/retraction on the 747 that allows the NLG to be left down when the MLG is retracted.
What surprises me is that it didn't damage the camera. The camera would get quite a cold soak at altitude. If it is not waterproof, on descent, the camera (and its circuitry) will remain extremely cold, which could very well lead to condensation forming on the interior circuitry where it is sheltered from the airflow, especially if they pass through a cloud.
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8754 posts, RR: 52 Reply 4, posted (8 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4194 times:
You have to get a modification approved by the engineering organization from that airline to ensure it does not impact the certification of the airplane. Adding equipment like a camera does not necessarily need a supplemental type certificate, but it would need some engineering to make it legal to be installed. Using a hand held camera and a zip tie is a bit crude, however if the camera is not using electrical power from the airplane, is not near the fuel system, and if it is outside the pressure vessel there aren't that many regulations.
Airlines do install sensors on airplanes for various reasons. It's not abnormal to have engineering install strain gauges or some other type of measuring equipment on the airplane to measure something. Boeing, Airbus and various suppliers work regularly with airlines to instrument airplanes as a part of their aging aircraft design work, although typically airplanes aren't flying regular revenue service in this configuration. I've seen a 737 with all sorts of strain gauges hooked up to the nose landing gear to measure various parameters to help improve reliability of components.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Tod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1682 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (8 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4138 times:
As mentioned above, it just takes some engineering paper for most airlines to do that with the aircraft during a test flight as its in 'experimental' status. Revenue flights are a whole different story. I've been required to go the STC path just to put temp sensors in air ducts and connect them to a little 9 volt data logger if pax are on onboard inflight.
AF1624 From France, joined Jul 2006, 572 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (8 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2987 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 3): What surprises me is that it didn't damage the camera. The camera would get quite a cold soak at altitude. If it is not waterproof, on descent, the camera (and its circuitry) will remain extremely cold, which could very well lead to condensation forming on the interior circuitry where it is sheltered from the airflow, especially if they pass through a cloud.
It was probably a GoPro.
A nuclear blast wouldn't damage a GoPro. These cameras can resist anything. Seriously. I've dropped mine from a 10 floor building and the casing was barely scratched. Some guys attached these cameras to rockets or atmospheric balloons and flew them thousands of feet in the air, they came back to the ground with no parachute, and the thing was still intact.
One guy lost his camera on a beach, the thing stayed in the water for 6 months before being found by some random guy. Camera intact after a good wash.
"bumped my head on the door frame on exit unclasping the latch on the box. The camera popped out on exit at 12.500 and fell straight down onto the landing area at the DZ and was recovered by a fellow skydiver. It even caught our landings. Not one scratch on the body or lens. Still can't believe that I got it back and that it is totally fine. A buddy the same day who is one of our camera flyers had the same thing happen but with his SLR....not the same result. I'm definitely a gopro fan for life these little guys are bomb proof"
I'm telling you that thing, even without its protective casing which was the case in that video, will survive anything. Seriously, they should build bomb shelters out of GoPros.
I have a Contour+ as well as I do motovlogs (vlogs on a motorbike) and having tested the two I can say two things :
The Contour is not as sturdy as the GoPro, not by a long shot, but it still is VERY sturdy.
The Contour's image quality is ridiculous compared to the GoPro's. But it is still okay.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 1293 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 16831 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1682 posts, 
From France, joined Jul 2006, 572 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1381 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
