billbedford Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 I think the drones are just what is needed to get that all important roof/tender/tank top detail right. Pity they weren't around in 1950, or even 1910....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted October 2, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2014 While I loved the idea and films I've seen I am worried about the cheapo ones becoming a plague. I was at Lulworth Cove the other day and all I could hear were two flippin drones buzzing around the cliff tops. I can see the high pitched buzz spoiling a few videos too on railways as it is easily picked up by the microphone. So yes as a cheap alternative to a helicopter for videos they're great but I think they are going to become a pain as everyone wants one especially at nice quiet scenic spots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 I think the drones are just what is needed to get that all important roof/tender/tank top detail right. Pity they weren't around in 1950, or even 1910....... Yes, with regard to Tim Warris’ video (linked to on page 1) some people have noticed for the first time that the row of fans on top on American locos do not all rotate in the same direction.... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 4630 Posted October 2, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2014 There's an informative article in the current issue of Advanced Photographer (Issue 49) covering the use and legal consideration of flying UAVs. You just knew that there would be yet another TLA, didn't you. UAV = Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, apparently Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 Having run foul of the law whilst taking photos of trains in Australia the other day I wonder how long it will be before someone makes the photographing infrastructure / terrorist threat connection? Why would a terrorist need to photograph any infrastructure that way, don't they have access to Google and Bing like everybody else? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyDuty Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 I was seriously considering a multirotor for rail photography, but the legislative climate for them is changing quickly. At this point I'm more likely to get a portable jib crane and mount a GoPro (or similar) to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortliner Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 ....and they are getting smaller - there are lots of quad 'copter videos - but then there is this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 I wonder where MIT is at with this technology? I suspect they already have something at work in the “field”. Thanks, Jack. Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 I was seriously considering a multirotor for rail photography, but the legislative climate for them is changing quickly. At this point I'm more likely to get a portable jib crane and mount a GoPro (or similar) to it. Another answer is the SONY DSC-QX 10/B. Check it out, a camera that can be mounted on a telescopic stick, with it’s own WiFi, controllable remotely by a smartphone or it can be mounted to any steel/iron object with a small magnetic tripod. I think it is 139 quid in the UK at street. Big Jim has one. Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 This video shows other uses (Niagara Falls) by the same drone mentioned in the OP - note size of it. Watch in 1080 HD if you can.... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 And here is the vertigo inducing Award winning short (less than 3 minutes) of the Cumbres and Toltec RR: Again adjust settings to the highest level for your PC (or whatever). Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PaulRhB Posted October 2, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 2, 2014 There's no doubting the superb videos like those but it's the people who show you their holiday videos with wobbly shots, resembling a major earthquake, of the person in fronts head and the ground that worry me when they get one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 A couple of times during the summer I was tempted and very close to getting a DJI Phantom as I can see massive possibilities for some superb footage. I understand the UK regulations and the need for them (even though the Phantom could safely perform outside those parameters) which would limit activities (rendering most of the videos linked to above outside the law if they were in the UK) and then if I were to ever show anything it could be viewed as professional usage necessitating (and probably rightly) liability insurances. I can see proliferation restricting legal use further, it won't be long until they get a bad rep in wider circles and then I'm left with something expensive and useless (I can't foresee different rules for different systems of different standards or even UAV licences on the horizon as it'll be easier and more popular to legislate against them in due course). Hence I've talked myself out of something very entertaining. How many criteria does this one break and that's before the FA/League come up with something? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPcUWnUFjws Link to CAA legislation on Uk usage - http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1995&pageid=16012 Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft Article 167 The person in charge of a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not fly the aircraft in any of the circumstances described in paragraph (2) except in accordance with a permission issued by the CAA. The circumstances referred to in paragraph (1) are: a) over or within 150 metres of any congested area; b.) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons; c) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft; or d) subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), within 50 metres of any person. Subject to paragraph (4), during take-off or landing, a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not be flown within 30 metres of any person. Paragraphs (2)(d) and (3) do not apply to the person in charge of the small unmanned surveillance aircraft or a person under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft. In this article ‘a small unmanned surveillance aircraft’ means a small unmanned aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data acquisition. Summary In essence therefore, provided the aircraft has a mass of 20 kg or less, the current regulations state: The operation must not endanger anyone or anything. The aircraft must be kept within the visual line of sight (normally taken to be within 500 m horizontally and 400 ft vertically) of its remote pilot (i.e. the ‘person in charge’ of it). Operations beyond these distances must be approved by the CAA (the basic premise being for the operator to prove that he/she can do this safely). Small unmanned aircraft (irrespective of their mass) that are being used for surveillance purposes are subject to tighter restrictions with regard to the minimum distances that you can fly near people or properties that are not under your control. If you wish to fly within these minima, permission is required from the CAA before operations are commenced. CAA permission is also required for all flights that are being conducted for aerial work (i.e. in very simple terms, you are getting paid for doing it). The 'remote pilot' has the responsibility for satisfying him/herself that the flight can be conducted safely. Permission to carry out 'aerial work' with a drone of less than 20kg beyond the above permissions involves a fee of £226 for each location where it would take place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Reichert Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 According to my somewhat annoyed, but scientific assessment of overreaching, over taxing, government, in the late 70's , every traffic light in the UK is in violation of the then UK communications act. I.e. They send varying electromagnetic frequencies to communicate information, without first obtaining a license. About the same time my brilliant boss at ICL, was able to construct a working model R/C flapping wing aircraft that was around the size of a real hawk. Once drones become sufficiently bird-like, and able to escape detection and/or downing, there will be no practical way of restricting them Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 It is almost overwhelming, now. Should you check out the link in the OP - click on the “Dealers”, I was quite surprised. Btw my maternal side of the family changed their name from Adler to Hadler in 1910.........sorry to hear of the Interment Camp. Downright scandal considering the Saxe-Coburgs... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornbyandbf3fan Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 I'm surprised no ones mentioned the Steam magazine article regarding drones. I can see their uses, but I think the noise will become a pain, especially for those (including me) who pref re to take videos rather than stills. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 And here is the vertigo inducing Award winning short (less than 3 minutes) of the Cumbres and Toltec RR: Funny -- This one make real-lifelook just like CGI...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 3, 2014 Author Share Posted October 3, 2014 I'm surprised no ones mentioned the Steam magazine article regarding drones. I can see their uses, but I think the noise will become a pain, especially for those (including me) who pref re to take videos rather than stills. I think that there is plenty of room for everyone - we covered the “noise” factor earlier - it is the cheap and nasty that are the noisiest - I can’t imagine they would survive for very long... Er, I mean the drones not the operators. Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 3, 2014 Author Share Posted October 3, 2014 A couple of times during the summer I was tempted and very close to getting a DJI Phantom as I can see massive possibilities for some superb footage. I understand the UK regulations and the need for them (even though the Phantom could safely perform outside those parameters) which would limit activities (rendering most of the videos linked to above outside the law if they were in the UK) and then if I were to ever show anything it could be viewed as professional usage necessitating (and probably rightly) liability insurances. I can see proliferation restricting legal use further, it won't be long until they get a bad rep in wider circles and then I'm left with something expensive and useless (I can't foresee different rules for different systems of different standards or even UAV licences on the horizon as it'll be easier and more popular to legislate against them in due course). Hence I've talked myself out of something very entertaining. How many criteria does this one break and that's before the FA/League come up with something? Link to CAA legislation on Uk usage - Permission to carry out 'aerial work' with a drone of less than 20kg beyond the above permissions involves a fee of £226 for each location where it would take place. Yes, if you can’t ban them then ensure they are taxed to the hilt! That’s the UK way. Pity they have not viewed the truly lovely film of the Bluebell Line that Tom linked to above. Me? I think that they will get smaller and quieter until no one notices them... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 3, 2014 Author Share Posted October 3, 2014 By the way if anyone needs an orchestral soundtrack to their own epic contact me by PM - I may even do it free if the movie is very good! Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 4, 2014 Author Share Posted October 4, 2014 Here’s a nice little film of my local shortline the “Black River and Western” of western NJ. Note some nice overhead shots of their Yard and maintenance facilities at the town of Ringoes. Don’t like the dodgy banjo soundtrack though. I can see it’s point but these need something more majestic.... Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Focalplane Posted October 8, 2014 Share Posted October 8, 2014 Now what I would like would be a drone that can go back through time and hover over Birmingham New Street in the early 1950s. That facility would be very useful to us modelers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted October 8, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 8, 2014 Having run foul of the law whilst taking photos of trains in Australia the other day I wonder how long it will be before someone makes the photographing infrastructure / terrorist threat connection? Surely a good tool for anyone planning nasties in this day and age to get info about areas that they would not otherwise have access to? That goes way back. I was nearly arrested in 1974 on Carlisle station for taking too much interest in the running gear of a sleeping carriage (a 12-wheeler). Police were on alert for IRA attacks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted October 8, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 8, 2014 When I was last in Maplin's (a couple of months ago) they had R/C helicopters with digital wifi cameras for toyshop prices (£30 IIRC). Only snag with them seemed to be very short flying time due to battery capacity (or lack thereof). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted October 8, 2014 Author Share Posted October 8, 2014 When I was last in Maplin's (a couple of months ago) they had R/C helicopters with digital wifi cameras for toyshop prices (£30 IIRC). Only snag with them seemed to be very short flying time due to battery capacity (or lack thereof). They also don’t represent a stable platform without GPS in them. As we said before if you’re going to commit to them you would really appreciate that. GPS also means they can backtrack themselves to where they detect the radio signal or you can program in their route. The cheaper iterations tend to be very noisy too. Would the 40 quid one have it’s own WiFi? That’s how you control the gimbal and the onboard camera with a SmartPhone. The Phantom model has all those features including the camera for less than $1200.00US. Expensive, maybe? Cheap compared to some others. http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.