Louisiana Flooding

[etodd]

Are all of our vertical photo capabilities still on hold, keeping CAP from helping in Louisiana like last Fall in the Carolina flooding?

Any word on when the new Virb mounts will be delivered? I really don't understand the hold on this. (Yes, I know, everyone keeps reminding me that 'this' is how the gov't operates.) If its a money issue, someone please tell me where to order and I'll buy one myself for our squadron's plane and get us back in business for FEMA.

I have several mounts I have used very successfully for years for GoPros (not glue) that I could suggest if CAP folks are still in the head scratching stage.  This isn't rocket science and we are in a hindered mode.

[Spaceman3750]

CAP can still help in all of the situations we have previously helped in. Virb didn't add any significant mission capability, nor did it take it away. It just created a new way to take the same photos we've been taking for years.

[etodd]

Virb didn't add any significant mission capability ....

I'll differ on your opinion. I do understand what you are saying, but I think the response we got from FEMA and others with the new verticals that give them so much more capabilities in being able to merge the images for continuous views and much more are a big future for CAP. No, it doesn't replace oblique views at all, but is a new product we offer that will see increasing demand from our customers.

But all that sidetracking aside, my question still stands. Maybe we can get approval for some home-brew mounting solutions if the folks up the chain are having so many problems that is taking them several months to figure out?

[Eclipse]

CAP photobombed Sandy using "real" cameras quite effectively.

The new systems may or may not wind up being a capability enhancer, but in the interim there's no degradation.

I was discussing the Virb systems with the wing DO the other day, and got a resounding "meh, whatever" regarding them,
which seems to be the general CAP stance right now.

Maybe we can get approval for some home-brew mounting solutions if the folks up the chain are having so many problems that is taking them several months to figure out?

It's the same chain, and the same approvals, regardless

[Spaceman3750]

To be more specific about my point... Lack of Virb is not preventing CAP from helping in Louisiana, or anywhere else. Yes, they are cool. They do add a certain capability. I want them too. But nobody is saying "sorry, you can't do vertical, so we don't want you."

I appreciate your "tear down walls" attitude. We need more of it in CAP (applied correctly). But in this case, if the solution was go online and buy a different mount, it would be done already.

[etodd]

Hmmm. Makes me wonder then. I wasn't at all happy with the photo quality of the Virb. But it was much cheaper than a GoPro so I assumed that is why we got stuck with them. Maybe its not the mount they are researching, but studying whether a whole new system is the way to go(?)

The folks here using the gear are always the last to know. LOL

[Eclipse]

From an image quality perspective, GoPros and Virbs are essentially hardened cell phone cameras.

There's been discussion for several years regarding some sort of gimble or similar mount on the aircraft to allow APs
to use higher quality cameras, but they usually get bogged down in the "favorite" of whomever is bringing it
(back) to the table.

Once decided, then there's the funding and the approvals, and by the time it's close, something new comes out.

[etodd]

From an image quality perspective, GoPros and Virbs are essentially hardened cell phone cameras.

There's been discussion for several years regarding some sort of gimble or similar mount on the aircraft to allow APs
to use higher quality cameras, but they usually get bogged down in the "favorite" of whomever is bringing it
(back) to the table.

Once decided, then there's the funding and the approvals, and by the time it's close, something new comes out.

All so true. My problem is that I'm an entrepreneur, business owner and much of my business is aerial photography.

I see a need today. Tomorrow I'm buying the gear and by the third day I'm making money with it.

I would happily fly missions with my own gear ... but get told not to because its not approved even though the 'approved gear' is years older technology than my gear.

I'm a jump in and solve a problem and get down to work sort of guy. All this gov't bureaucracy stuff is just very frustrating to watch. Knocks the enthusiasm right out.

.

[JeffDG]

Are all of our vertical photo capabilities still on hold, keeping CAP from helping in Louisiana like last Fall in the Carolina flooding?

Per John D at the conference, CAP has received FAA approval for an "inspection plate" mount for the Virbs, and is now working on acquiring and distributing them.

[JeffDG]

Hmmm. Makes me wonder then. I wasn't at all happy with the photo quality of the Virb. But it was much cheaper than a GoPro so I assumed that is why we got stuck with them.

The main distinguising feature between the Virb and GoPro is the fact that the Virb has the integrated GPS and stamps the pictures with that information.

[stillamarine]

Hmmm. Makes me wonder then. I wasn't at all happy with the photo quality of the Virb. But it was much cheaper than a GoPro so I assumed that is why we got stuck with them.

The main distinguising feature between the Virb and GoPro is the fact that the Virb has the integrated GPS and stamps the pictures with that information.

I saw a video a student pilot put on facebook last night that had the speed, compass heading, and track. It was pretty cool.

[NIN]

A CAP member I know flew for two organizations that did aerial photography: one was a subcontractor to Microsoft for the "Bird's Eye View" in Bing, and the other was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Google for the low-altitude photography incorporated into Google Maps.

Both outfits used Cessna light singles (aka "the same aircraft CAP has in its fleet") equipped with fixed camera mounts.   In the case of the Bing maps, there were FIVE cameras on the aircraft: two side-facing oblique mounts and three downward-facing mounts.  One of the cameras shot thru a modified baggage door, for example.  I can't remember all the track spacing specifics, but I seem to recall that the tracks were flown at half-mile intervals from somewhere between 2500 and 3500 ft.  Obviously, they're trying to create an overlaying "mesh" of photography in a different way than CAP would need to.

But imagine flying a route-track (river, coastline, whatever) at, say, 1500 ft AGL with 5 cameras running, all geo-referenced and not requiring intervention except "Is the camera system running?"  Thats a metric ton of imagery.  Even if it was just three cameras: left, right and straight down. That would still be pretty spectacular from a coverage standpoint. And none of these cameras were external: all were mounted in the baggage area.

With good data link software, you could stream that data back to a mission base and have "extra eyeballs" watching the ground, with the ability to "back up" and look at something of interest...