Plane Spotters at Sydney - Join In!

[Ray P.]

Originally Posted by NeilP

Hi Guys,
New Member!

I was in Adelaide recently, perched at the fence of the old carpark. I had the AFP drive up next to me, lights ablaze, and questions galore. Real sour *****s too. Now, I certainly understand what they were concerned about, and if I were able to produce some sort of "Spotter's I.D", we all would have felt much better about it. As it was I was able to carry on, but...
....

Welcome Neil, unfortunately carrying a card won't guarantee that they won't be "Real sour *****s". Some of these guys are like that no matter what.

From my perspective, if I saw something dodgy, I would call the authorities as I am sure most here would, and I wouldn't need a card to do so. I am a little confused as to what the card will achieve. I mean, if you are out spotting and the AFP pull up, will they check your card, call it in to check if it's legit and then let you continue on. I mean, what if I flashed my RAAF ID, would that make me more trustworthy in their eyes (and no, I have never done that)?

I certainly think the idea has some merit, but this is a two way street and I would expect to see some tangible benefit to be gained by paying for and holding such a card. Scott has hinted on Airside Tours which is certainly a tangible benefit, and better spotting areas which sounds great, but then I am not sure if that means that card carriers only will get access, and if so, how will that be policed?

Scott, I am sure that you are all over these issues as have been the other Airport Spotting groups; I'm just interested to see how this happens.

[NeilP]

Maybe I'm missing something here, and maybe I should have been a bit clearer... The AFP in Adelaide took my license, "called it in", asked lots of questions (do I belong to any groups, why am I in Adelaide, why do aircraft interest me??? and such), asked to search my bag, checked my camera, generally made me feel very uncomfortable.
In Sydney, at the mound, a week later, two AFP's were talking to me about this very thing, and while filling out a questionaire, they told me that they weren't necessarily asking Plane spotters to be their eyes and ears, but basically hoping to try and identify genuine plane spotters, from potential trouble makers, as these two groups are mostly the only ones likely to be doing anything that could possibly be perceived as suspicious (ie, standing on fence lines, using ladders, etc).

Sure, they would appreciate us identifying and reporting something untoward, but wouldn't that be expected of any citizen?

As for paying a fee, I'd be happy to pay to enjoy my hobby in peace, and that would be benefit enough...

Cheers,
Neil.

[Robbie W]

Originally Posted by Ray P.

Scott has hinted on Airside Tours which is certainly a tangible benefit, and better spotting areas which sounds great, but then I am not sure if that means that card carriers only will get access, and if so, how will that be policed?

I got the impression airside tours (and/or up-close access aircraft, etc) were potential prizes for assisting AFP and airport security people in the event of a security breach. I don't know if it was a bonus being offered to all paid-up, card-carrying spotters.

If I averted a terrorist incident, I'd want a $10k reward and nomination as Australian of the Year, not an airside tour, etc - none of which has been guaranteed as a bonus to those who assist, anyway.

Not since locals in Mascot and adjacent areas hijacked the media to endlessly complain that YSSY was "too noisy" have we seen overboard politicking and manipulation of a supposedly major airport issue.

Only today I saw an AFP car jotting down the licence plate details of professional photographers reporting on the departure by private jet of a major US celebrity. Completely ridiculous, completely unnecessary and a total waste of AFP resources. Airport noise was the political football at one time, now it seems to be security.

[Lee G]

Scott's original post was back in late September but I don't think I have seen an update from him since. It'd be nice to hear back to find out where this proposal is up to.

[thierry stephan]

Hello,

We do the same in France for CDG and ORY airports.
It is a very good idea.

Thx

[Mark T]

As Lee said, it would be great to hear if anything further has been done with this.

I am stuck at MEL due to the delays here tonight - Virgin Blue check in system down and a QF flight delayed "due to bird on the flight deck".

So, I thought I would take a couple of photos from QF Club lounge, only to be told by an officious QF staff member that other pax had complained and photos were not allowed at airports any longer - whatever!!

[Robbie W]

Will the Airport Watch membership program disadvantage infrequent or one-time spotters?

Aviation enthusiasts specialize in photography of aircraft, but photography enthusiasts photograph everything.

Is it practical or reasonable for someone to apply for membership before even heading to the airport for some spotting or photography, such as random passers-by who stop to view or photograph events such as the A380 when it first flew in, or a 787 when it commences?

Frequent spotters are known anyway, and are easily identified. The one-off 'randoms' are the ones who are not known and are the ones least likely to have Airport Watch ID.

[Jacques Brunelle]

No, there are no disadvantaged spotters, part-time or otherwise. The rare visitor is still welcomed as usual. Not much in the way of changes here after Airport Watch except that the airport has eyes and ears outside the fence and there are advantages to being in the AW programme. Whatever your airport's status quo is, it will remain after AW has begun. Why would it change unless you're in a country that forbides such photography long before Airport Watch comes on the scene? If your airport encourages such photography then you are doing well.

In my experiences with Airport Watch (AW) in North America (I am in Ottawa and about 10 major airports here are in the programme) over the past 10 years, this is a win-win-win situation. For more info go to my blog on item #58 I think it is. There are websites indicated there that shows how this works. Airport Watch in Britain (LHR) and in France (CDG) are different still.

There has also been some consternation about fees. From what I have seen, if there are any fees, it has been for the spotter's part of AW for local admin expenses to organise the spotters amongst themselves. I have never seen a fee charged to be an AW spotter by an authority. That would be against the principles of the program thus far. But hey, every country is different and there may be reasons for everything. AW is meant to help the authorities while bringing a new found respect to the hobby at least in the eyes of the authorities. Everyone wins and don't worry about fees, costs and budgets. The important thing here is to voice your desire for such a programme and to inform your airports about it. AW has already been proven to work. By the way, it was -27 C here today plus the wind chill and it is not even winter yet, so go out and enjoy the view and the warm weather! Pleae feel free to ask questions.

Best regards for Christmas and for a promising New Year.


Jacques

[Gerard M]

Scott's original post was back in late September but I don't think I have seen an update from him since. It'd be nice to hear back to find out where this proposal is up to.

I'll echo the previous posts, any more info on this? I'm thinking this has the makings of one of the state governments north-west rail promises etc etc? Gets everyone excited and then nothing happens?

[Philip Argy]

Hang in there guys - I've got every confidence in Scott being able to progress the proposal with AFP management.