28 Dayslater Forum..

Seems to be far less busier than before though, but I am glad (I think) to see it back

Thanks.
Back from the dead it is!

http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/index.php

won’t open for me…?

It seems 28DL is back running again, with no obvious explanation I can find

Steve

Interesting! But a number of possibilities arise – when the accusation of trespassing is made.

Nowadays, pretty basic digital cameras have a telescopic capacity that enables photos to be taken whilst the photographer stands at the gate on the public highway. So whilst it may appear that the photographer was trespassing, to take the photo in question, the truth of the matter may be very different.

Generally trespassing requires the feet of the trespasser to be on ‘terra firma’. Recently I took some very good aerial photos of our property thanks to a relative of a neighbour who has a microlight. With the exception of MoD property, I don’t think that the owner of civilian property (in the UK) can object to or claim intellectual property rights to images of their land and buildings taken from the sky (assuming that they are taken from a suitably high altitude).

There was always a lot on there documenting dis-used airfields, something I find interesting – and many of the surviving relics are disappearing at old airfields.

I believe the Museum at Hawkinge endeavours to prevent photogrphy: subject has been aired on the forum previously. Quite how anyone can enforce such a ban puzzles me, given the widespread availabity of small digital cameras and so called camera ‘phones. Don’t quite see their logic, the museum’s, I mean. Never been to visit the museum.

Planemike

Here’s a link to a US version:
http://www.abandonedbutnotforgotten.com/california_home_page.htm

It is a rule that you can not damage, deface or steal anyone elses property ‘take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but fingerprints’

Taking photos on private property is another minefield althogether. The owners of the property can insist on royalties or take action to prevent the photo being published.

Case in point can be some museums / National Trust properties, where the owners rely on sale of images to provide an income. Thankfully I cannot think of any aviation museums which stop photos being taken or make a charge for photography. (MOD based museums on MOD land may be the exception).

To be honest, I am sad to see the site closed, as it did show some interesting sights, and also as has been previously mentioned, it showed where the wee pikeys were.

I thought it also provided an insight into how some airframes were being neglected…

(Hangs anorak back on the coat peg…)

Regards,
Scotty

Perhaps the crux of this thread is not so much what was displayed on 28DL but how some of those involved seemed to go about it. It’s been mentioned above that some of their behavior could be having a detrimental effect on those of us who go out and indeed ask – even a bit of simple door-knocking goes a really long way! We have met some wonderfully helpful people who either own or lease disused airfields and many are very interested. Others will point you in the right direction to ask. This is what seems to have been missing from some of the 28DL reports, with examples of strange times of day getting onto sites and thinking it clever to have been “busted”. There just seems to have a been, in certain circumstances, a disregard for the rights of entry to the properties involved.

I admit, there has been some very good information to come out of 28DL and it’s a pity that the forum, as such, could not have encouraged “genuine” research and recording, tying it in with the written historical record.

I know 1 Group and REF very well, as we regularly go out together but our main is to record – legally – what is left, as it is a part of our heritage which disappearing all too quickly.

Could bang on but won’t. Suffice to say that I’m split 50/50 about it ceasing trading, as it were.

Chris

I know that trespass on a railway (in the UK) is a criminal offence, as opposed to a civil one. I would imagine that Airfields….. would be a similar case?

Certainly not a criminal offence, many a time we have found them and they have been quietly escorted of the base by the RAFP and politely told not to come back.
I even found someone sunbathing close to a Seaking doing hovering checks, I nearly shot at him, but for completely different reasons.

Contrary to most here I will miss 28days later, some sad aviations relics have come to my notice through thta site.

Even with blinkers on, I have managed to find two excellent photographic resources of disused airfields, one belongs to the originator of this thread, the other called “Control towers” run by Robert Truman hasn’t been updated for a few months, but there is a wealth of information on there also.

Regarding techniques, I usually point the camera at the subject matter, having first selected “auto” (and lifting one blinker up, for the view finder) then I press the button on the top, (works for me).

Regarding unauthorised access, I have said it before, and I’ll say it again, If there is a gate that is shut and a fence around it, the owner doesn’t want you in there, why can’t people respect that?

If there is no gate or fence,there is still the matter of crop damage, (criminal damage) which is an offence.

Many of these old derelict buildings are on a knife edge of destruction, as landowners, we are being told that we now need third party liability for people on our property (even those who shouldn’t be there), rather than pay that, many landowners will raze the buildings to the ground, removing the problem (and our heritage) in one go; why not make enquiries, and ask the owner.

Hi, I had never really seen any other sites on old airfields before finding the forum, not something I had really gone out of my way to look at. But since getting in to it, my interest has grown.

The trouble with the ‘auto’ or ‘p’ setting is you can not do long exposures, change aparature size, use aeb for hdr etc. Good for taking normal pictures but you are quite limited.

I say blinkered as it seems you think that anyone involved in Urbex is a trespassing criminal, whereas a lot of reports were on proper tours, or with permission from the owners.

It is a rule that you can not damage, deface or steal anyone elses property ‘take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but fingerprints’

There are of course two sides to every story, some bad apples may have been involved in vandalism and theft, but often its the local chavs hellbent on destroying everything that cause the damage 🙁

I enjoy it as too often there are old building ripped down to be replaced with chicken hutch style houses, look at all the airfields disappearing for example. Its nice to have some reminders of what once stood, and respect to its history.

IMO of course…. 😉

Shame its closed, I was a regular reader for a while, seems we have lost a good resource (even if you blinkered types think otherwise) it certainly introduced me to some photographic methods and how many different military airfields there used to be around the uk.

Even with blinkers on, I have managed to find two excellent photographic resources of disused airfields, one belongs to the originator of this thread, the other called “Control towers” run by Robert Truman hasn’t been updated for a few months, but there is a wealth of information on there also.

Regarding techniques, I usually point the camera at the subject matter, having first selected “auto” (and lifting one blinker up, for the view finder) then I press the button on the top, (works for me).

Regarding unauthorised access, I have said it before, and I’ll say it again, If there is a gate that is shut and a fence around it, the owner doesn’t want you in there, why can’t people respect that?

If there is no gate or fence,there is still the matter of crop damage, (criminal damage) which is an offence.

Many of these old derelict buildings are on a knife edge of destruction, as landowners, we are being told that we now need third party liability for people on our property (even those who shouldn’t be there), rather than pay that, many landowners will raze the buildings to the ground, removing the problem (and our heritage) in one go; why not make enquiries, and ask the owner.

Shame its closed, I was a regular reader for a while, seems we have lost a good resource (even if you blinkered types think otherwise) it certainly introduced me to some photographic methods and how many different military airfields there used to be around the uk.

I guess military airfields would fall under MOD property, so trespassing there is certainly not be something you’d want to do for fear of being shot accidentally on purpose.

Not sure about dockyards though, but its possible.

wcfcfan is correct. Trespassing is a civil offense, not a criminal offense. Despite what all the signs say, you cant be prosecuted for a civil offense, and you therefore cant be prosecuted for trespassing… That not to say yo cant go to court for trespassing… But it will be civil not criminal! Or at least thats how I understand the situation!

I know that trespass on a railway (in the UK) is a criminal offence, as opposed to a civil one. I would imagine that Airfields and Dockyards would be a similar case?

Trespassing is a civil offence not a criminal one.

Breaking and entering is a criminal offence.

Taking something from the site, is of course stealing and is a criminal offence

If you refuse to leave when asked to by the police or the landowner, that becomes aggravated trespass and again is a criminal offence.

All those signs that ‘trespassers will be prosecuted’ are incorrect as trespassing is not something one can be prosecuted for. I wouldn’t want to be the one that tested that though!

I’ve no idea what would happen if you started walking round someone’s house after finding the door unlocked, but I bet it would fall under something other than trespassing! 🙂

Edit – You beat me to it VX!

I fail to understand how the act of trespassing is not illegal?, why do we have fences, gates, security guards, no entry signs and of course the well used coin of phrase…..trespassers will be prosecuted.

John.

wcfcfan is correct. Trespassing is a civil offense, not a criminal offense. Despite what all the signs say, you cant be prosecuted for a civil offense, and you therefore cant be prosecuted for trespassing… That not to say yo cant go to court for trespassing… But it will be civil not criminal! Or at least thats how I understand the situation!

The act of trespassing itself is not illegal, but it is possible some of those who posted there did gain access by illegal means – ‘The bad elements’ as referred to earlier

I fail to understand how the act of trespassing is not illegal?, why do we have fences, gates, security guards, no entry signs and of course the well used coin of phrase…..trespassers will be prosecuted.

John.