Air to air camera ships

Not ‘deathly dull side-on static shots’ at all.

Albert,

Tongue firmly in cheek there.

It was a sly reference to another prolific poster’s remarks on an adjacent thread who could barely disdain himself from taking such shots. 🙂

Time and affordable equipment moves on.

Mark

Woody,

Hendon and Canada respectively as stated.

Here are a couple of ‘deathly dull side on static shots’.

Mark

Not ‘deathly dull side-on static shots’ at all. Many photographers would give their hind teeth to take such shots of the RAF Museum’s today in such conditions. I was there at Abingdon in June 1968 and shot absolutely every aircraft like this in colour and in perfect blue skies. When I explore the gloom at Hendon, I am so glad I have those shots!

Image attached.

Mark

Thanks Mark and Eddie – the four blades should have been a giveaway for a Tempset rather than a Typhoon.

Woody

Abingdon Review Tempest.

Looks more like a Tempest V to me. If so, it must be the one that was recently re-restored as a TT.5. I don’t think any of them were flyers at that date.

Image attached.

Mark

My birds

Hi All,

Well like alot of you I’ve shot out of the B-25 using both tail position and removing the escape hatch.

I’ve also used a swivle mount SNJ great movement no glass and a full 360 movement. The worst I ever shot out of was David T. B-17 waist position the damn engine were throwing oil and this was the time when it seem verytime we went up a chunk of paint would come off.

My last Air To Air was done in a SuperCub at Geneseo shooting the WWI stuff now that was fun side window open calm morning air with no other traffic but us and the DVII, Tri, SE5 and the Port.

Have shot out of my old Tiger that was rather interesting, almost lost my camera in that one.

Cheers Crazymainer

Looks more like a Tempest V to me. If so, it must be the one that was recently re-restored as a TT.5. I don’t think any of them were flyers at that date.

The Defiant is the one at Hendon, but the Beaufighter went to Canada in exchange for the Bolingbroke/Blenheim now at Hendon.

Woody,

Hendon and Canada respectively as stated.

Here are a couple of ‘deathly dull side on static shots’.

Mark

Albert and Mark – many thanks for your responses. Mark – I assume that’s a Typhoon behind the Beaufighter in your latest not so deathly dull shot? If so, presumably it is also now at Hendon?

What a line-up. Were any of them flyers in 1968?

Woody

Mark – Great pictures (as ever). Are the Defiant and Beaufighter the ones now at Hendon? If not, any idea where they are now?

Woody

Woody,

Hendon and Canada respectively as stated.

Here are a couple of ‘deathly dull side on static shots’.

Mark

Here’s a different angle on things…..no engines!! DuoDiscus and ASH25 over Switzerland…the ASH being the camera ship.

Mark – Great pictures (as ever). Are the Defiant and Beaufighter the ones now at Hendon? If not, any idea where they are now?

Woody

The Defiant is the one at Hendon, but the Beaufighter went to Canada in exchange for the Bolingbroke/Blenheim now at Hendon.

Mark – Great pictures (as ever). Are the Defiant and Beaufighter the ones now at Hendon? If not, any idea where they are now?

Woody

My favourite is the AA5 with canopy back. I’ve also taken a few from a JP with the canopy back, but as you can appreciate, this was rather windy and also much hassle with straps etc. I don’t enjoy the Herc since you can only take photo’s from directly behind otherwise the vapour trails ruin the shot. Also taken some beautiful pic’s from a Seneca with the door removed. Probably my worst was the Cub, although this was from the rear seat. Not enough room to move about!

2: Well Air to Ground actually…

…but I guess that counts.

The RAF laid on a S55 Whirlwind helicopter for the Press Day at the Abingdon Review on 10 June 1968.

A bit of a bone-shaker and restraining belts were provided.

This was some time before I kept a passenger log. Who would perhaps know the serial of the Whirlwind?

Mark

As Mark 12 says, there is a problem shooting through perspex, particuarly old perspex that is often scratched and cloudy. I have taken mediocre shots through perspex of a B-17, B-25 and Ilyushin IL-14, which I would have liked to have been much better. Wherever possible,I only shoot from types that can have a window or door open, or preferably off. If at all possible use a ‘high wing’ type, which gives you more opportunities, especally when the formating pilot passes you underneath! I have shot successfully through perspex, as long as it’s clear and flat, but it’s more a matter of luck! As long as your camera mount has a compatible speed with your subject, it makes life a lot easier. I once knew a ‘well-known’ (infamous?) aviation photographer try shooting Duxford’s B-29 from a Cessna 172!! I think he caught two shots as it went past! As JDK said, we once shared a C-130 ramp to shoot Comet XS235 and DH 88 Comet G-ACSS. Whilst some good shots were had, I would have preferred using the side para doors and having the subjects alongside. That’s what happens when the pilots brief without including the photographers! Very important to have a thorough briefing beforehand with both pilots and the photographer, so you know exactly eachothers capabilities and what you want to get out of it.Use hand-signals for changes in position and most impostant of all, instil confidence in both pilots and don’t expect them to make any sudden changes in formation. If both keep staight and level with the sun on the subject, you should get some great shots.
Whilst in the RAF, I have taken some superb shots of various types from the open para doors of a RAF Hercules – Buccaneers, Hunters, Harriers, Tornados, Victors, VC-10s,to name a few. I even got one to formate with a Convair 580!! Working at RAF Lyneham, I had the Herc pilots eating out of my hand and those were wonderful times!

I only ever had two opportunities to shoot air-to-air and can hardly be called a pro, but I figured I might as well add my two cents worth.

First opportunity was when the Dutch Spitfire flew alongside the B-25 I was in from Leeuwarden to Rotterdam. I took the shot below through the perspex side window (its also a lousy scan, I know!). The Mitchell also has an escape hatch on the starboard side which can easily be removed in flight and gives an ideal almost draft-free position for side shots. Someone else was using that though.

I’ve also been in the back of a Herc for a photo opportunity with the same Spitfire, the Dutch B-25 and the DDA Dakota behind us. The photos I took aren’t much to look at though as I was behind the professionals with only a 50mm lens which was not the ideal setup for those circumstances! Still it was fun just being there. After the flight some people started wondering who had been flying the Herc as almost the entire crew (there was just one lonely guy on the flightdeck) was with us in the back. :rolleyes: The B-25 crew later said that the back of the Herc looked like a crowded pub to them! 😀

Wow Mike! I saw that B17 image and went right to the books. It’s so close it’s not even funny. If only they’d added the side window on the nose, and had the correct nose glass with guns installed.

Hope you don’t mind I played with it a bit to show how close you got it 🙂

Dan

4: Shooting through perspex

When photographing high performance ‘Warbird’ aircraft, there are probably more A-A photographs taken through perspex than not if you did the count.

Unless pre-planned and polished, the perspex is the perspex and it can cast a bloom or haze and bring a great shot down to just average.

With the wonders of PSP/photoshop it is interesting to revisit some of the shots of the past and apply the haze removal software.

I can’t be sure but I suspect MikeJ’s fine P-47 shot was taken through perspex. Here is was happens when you hit the button.

Mark

ps. 4:….the ‘selecticon’ for photo technique. 😉

Air to air

Hi

I use a birddog based here in Christchurch as muach as possible as you can shoot from both side’s with no restriction.

For the faster aircraft, I prefer a Nanchang over a Yak52 as there is more room in the back seat and you don’t get the slipsteam problems you do in a Yak.

The fisrt photo is me in the birddog shooting a Cub, while my 12 year old daughter shoots me with a Canon G3.

The next two are from my favorite camera ship, a F2b with the rear seat facing backwards.

Alex……
www.warbirdsovernewzealand.com

I hear you…on a recent photo shoot with a Mustang, it got a little too close for comfort vis a vis the Mustang’s prop and OUR wingtip…and out over the mountains of Colorado with the afternoon T-storms building! Still, got some great stuff out of it, shooting through windows and through small window openings without glass in the way…and truth be told, you really can’t tell the difference!

Mark

As Damien says, the Yak 52 is pretty good, and numerous enough to be widely available. It is quick enough to at least hang in there with heavier metal, if they agree to take it easy. With the canopy back , the angles are great, but the noise and wind is disorientating, and will easily whip off a headset. Also, beware of any baggage on the shelf behind you, eg a canopy cover, which will start to jump about, and could easily go over the side/ wrap round tailplane.

In shooting air/air , shoulder straps will need to be loosened or maybe even undone, as most formating targets will often be slightly behind. Being semi-strapped in , it is important that you persuade the pilot not to apply any negative ‘G’ .

Tigers are good for atmospheric wing/wires shot, but are very windy, and difficult to twist round in, if the target is astern. Quite slow, but OK for other light a/c. The Lysander was shot from a Tiger, but that has the ablility to go unusually slow. Keeping it on the outside of an orbit allowed it a few more knots.

Cubs are quite good, but even slower. With the door down/window up, the view is fantastic, and if the photographer is in the front seat, he can lean round and shoot past the struts, for rear 3/4 shots. Quite a gentle, relaxed photo mount.

Shooting through perspex, you just take your chance on optical imperfections, but it can be Ok. The Rapides were taken from a C-172 through perspex,and the original print was reasonably sharp. Ultimately, though, it is the skill of the pilots which dictate the results; too far away- you get nothing. Too close- photography ceases to be your main concern!