I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.

Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.

What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)

Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!

Bruno - B4
Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.
>
> Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.
>
> What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)
>
> Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!
>
> Bruno - B4
> Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)

Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60 knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft, adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on it could improve that a great deal I would think.

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 3:55:47 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.
>
> Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.
>
> What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)
>
> Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!
>
> Bruno - B4
> Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)

It's noticeable when flying with others. On the order of 5 ft/minute in cruise, but I didn't attempt to quantify in any serious way.

Evan Ludeman / T8

I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not to fly around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer months around 85+ knots...I said try. :)

Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online calculator and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft. Therefore, about 2.5 lbs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85 knots, you are about 39/1 at that weight and speed...I think. So you would then be 36.5/1 with one camera or a drop in performance of around 6.5%.

I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the wing. If both together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to impose upon yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If these calcs are correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the soft weather local flying days only. :(

Thanks!
Bruno - B4


>
> Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60 knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft, adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on it could improve that a great deal I would think.

Bruno, your XC videos are exceptionally fine as they are. For pretty
pictures for non-glider-pilots outside cameras are fun but for for me
what is really interesting in XC flight videos is watching from the
pilot's point of view and seeing ahead to the land, sky and
instruments.

John Galloway

At 22:15 03 January 2015, wrote:
>I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not
to
>fl=
>y around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer
months around
>8=
>5+ knots...I said try. :) =20
>
>Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online
calculator
>=
>and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft. Therefore, about
2.5
>l=
>bs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85 knots, you are about
39/1
>at=
> that weight and speed...I think. So you would then be 36.5/1
with one
>cam=
>era or a drop in performance of around 6.5%.
>
>I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the
wing. If
>b=
>oth together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to
impose upon
>=
>yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If these
calcs
>are=
> correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the soft
weather
>loca=
>l flying days only. :(
>
>Thanks!
>Bruno - B4
>
>
>>=20
>> Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs.
At 60
>k=
>nots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq
ft,
>addin=
>g 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to
45.5. That
>=
>is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably less than
1, not
>i=
>n free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on it could improve
that
>a=
> great deal I would think.
>

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 2:15:41 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not to fly around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer months around 85+ knots...I said try. :)
>
> Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online calculator and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft. Therefore, about 2.5 lbs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85 knots, you are about 39/1 at that weight and speed...I think. So you would then be 36.5/1 with one camera or a drop in performance of around 6.5%.
>
> I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the wing. If both together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to impose upon yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If these calcs are correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the soft weather local flying days only. :(
>
> Thanks!
> Bruno - B4
>
>
> >
> > Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60 knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft, adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on it could improve that a great deal I would think.

When you are doing these calcs do not correct the air density for altitude (unless you also correct your airspeed to true). The airspeed indicator shows dynamic pressure directly. So the dynamic pressure at 85 knots IAS @ 15K is the same as the dynamic pressure at 85 knots IAS @ sea level. Or if you are using true density at 15K then you must use true airspeed - you will find the result to be the same. Dynamic pressure is about 0.5 * .002378 * (airspeed in ft/sec) at sea level standard conditions. Your drag at 85 knots at 15K will be more than you estimated.

On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 14:15:39 -0800, brunovassel wrote:

> I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not to
> fly around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer months
> around 85+ knots...I said try. :)
>
> Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online
> calculator and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft.
> Therefore, about 2.5 lbs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85
> knots, you are about 39/1 at that weight and speed...I think. So you
> would then be 36.5/1 with one camera or a drop in performance of around
> 6.5%.
>
> I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the wing.
> If both together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to
> impose upon yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If
> these calcs are correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the
> soft weather local flying days only. :(
>
> Thanks!
> Bruno - B4
>
>
>
>> Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60
>> knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft,
>> adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to
>> 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably
>> less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on
>> it could improve that a great deal I would think.

Did your calculation include drag from turbulence set up by the flat back
of the camera?

What would be the result of adding a streamlining cone with an A/R of 5
to 10 to the back of the camera, and maybe extending it down onto the
wing or tailplane surface to get rid of interference drag under it?

You could make one pretty easily (cheaply too) by carving and sanding
white or blue insulation foam to shape, and then filling the surface with
spackle to make it smooth before finish sanding, painting and polishing
it.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 4:03:06 PM UTC-8, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 14:15:39 -0800, brunovassel wrote:
>
> > I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not to
> > fly around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer months
> > around 85+ knots...I said try. :)
> >
> > Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online
> > calculator and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft.
> > Therefore, about 2.5 lbs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85
> > knots, you are about 39/1 at that weight and speed...I think. So you
> > would then be 36.5/1 with one camera or a drop in performance of around
> > 6.5%.
> >
> > I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the wing.
> > If both together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to
> > impose upon yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If
> > these calcs are correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the
> > soft weather local flying days only. :(
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Bruno - B4
> >
> >
> >
> >> Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60
> >> knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft,
> >> adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to
> >> 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably
> >> less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on
> >> it could improve that a great deal I would think.
>
> Did your calculation include drag from turbulence set up by the flat back
> of the camera?
>
> What would be the result of adding a streamlining cone with an A/R of 5
> to 10 to the back of the camera, and maybe extending it down onto the
> wing or tailplane surface to get rid of interference drag under it?
>
> You could make one pretty easily (cheaply too) by carving and sanding
> white or blue insulation foam to shape, and then filling the surface with
> spackle to make it smooth before finish sanding, painting and polishing
> it.
>
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |

I think you get L/D bonus points after you land ;)

Sean Franke

Bruno,

I used a Drift HD170 on the tail and wings. It is a very slim camera with VERY little frontal area( I mean almost nothing). When I had it on the wing, it was not noticeable at all.
Email Paul C and get in touch with me that way, and I can send you pics and videos.
Drift has improved the camera tremendously as well. The remotes have RED/GREEN lights so you know camera is on. You can use one remote for two cameras so if you ever wanted a split screen, the image time lapse would be perfectly synchronized. Front lens rotates 180deg, so you can place the camera virtually anywhere and adjust the lens to be level with horizon. Each camera has a nice LCD screen to set up the shot, then you can turn of the screen to save battery.
Check out DRIFT website.
I am not affiliated nor an investor in the company 8-)
Hope to see you in Nephi, with a glider this time....
Justin

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 4:03:06 PM UTC-8, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 14:15:39 -0800, brunovassel wrote:
>
> > I knew I could catch a smart fish with that bait. Thanks! I try not to
> > fly around too much at 60 knots but cruise more in the summer months
> > around 85+ knots...I said try. :)
> >
> > Please check my math and reasoning on this: I went to an online
> > calculator and it said 85 knots at 15k alt is ~24.4 lbs/sq ft.
> > Therefore, about 2.5 lbs of drag. Looking at the polar of a 27 at 85
> > knots, you are about 39/1 at that weight and speed...I think. So you
> > would then be 36.5/1 with one camera or a drop in performance of around
> > 6.5%.
> >
> > I was seriously considering a camera on the tail and one on the wing.
> > If both together add up to at 13% penalty, that is pretty harsh to
> > impose upon yourself when attempting longer 750km - 1000km flights. If
> > these calcs are correct, looks like the external cameras will be for the
> > soft weather local flying days only. :(
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Bruno - B4
> >
> >
> >
> >> Very roughly: at 48:1 flying at 1000 lbs, total drag is 20.8 lbs. At 60
> >> knots, dynamic pressure is 12.2 lbs/sq ft. Camera is roughly .1 sq ft,
> >> adding 1.2 lbs drag, increasing your total to 22 and reducing L/D to
> >> 45.5. That is probably pretty worst case (drag coefficient probably
> >> less than 1, not in free stream, etc.). A tiny bit of streamlining on
> >> it could improve that a great deal I would think.
>
> Did your calculation include drag from turbulence set up by the flat back
> of the camera?
>
> What would be the result of adding a streamlining cone with an A/R of 5
> to 10 to the back of the camera, and maybe extending it down onto the
> wing or tailplane surface to get rid of interference drag under it?
>
> You could make one pretty easily (cheaply too) by carving and sanding
> white or blue insulation foam to shape, and then filling the surface with
> spackle to make it smooth before finish sanding, painting and polishing
> it.
>
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |

A roughly cubical shape is going to have a drag coefficient of around 1. A "boat tail" might cut it in half or so, if the front had to be left open. For one at the wing tip pointed in, you could have both a leading edge and trailing edge since you are looking out the side. Even a thickness ratio of 3:1 will gain a very large reduction in drag.

There are smaller cameras available, cheap. About the size of a key fob and smaller. Double stick tape to the glider.
May not have remote control capability. Google to look for them.

One of our club members used them. Look on YouTube for videos by "Unclefuzzy" the outside camera shots are from the "key fob" cameras.

BillT

That uncle fuzzy search on you tube is not working. He passed away. Hopefully his account was not deleted.
BillT

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.
>

Bruno - get one of these:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1049789&gclid=CKm9qazT-8ICFQ1ufgodXbQAAg&Q=&is=REG&A=details

Head-on (tail mount) it has a frontal area of .004 sq ft and sideways (wingtip mount) it has a frontal area of .02 sq ft. If you mount it on the tail where the vertical meet the horizontal or out on the tip of the horizontal stab it will have practically zero drag. I will 3D print you a fairing for the sideways mount if you like. That's how much I like your videos.

9B

"If you have to ask, you can't afford it" Heh heh....

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 1:55:47 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.
>
> Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.
>
> What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)
>
> Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!
>
> Bruno - B4
> Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)

I have a Sony HDR-AS15 Action Video Camera that can be operated via wifi from an android phone or tablet. Less bulky that a GoPro, similar video quality and reasonably priced.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0090EC5MS/ref=dp_olp_new?ie=UTF8&condition=new

On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:09:06 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Saturday, January 3, 2015 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> > I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights..
> >
>
> Bruno - get one of these:
>
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1049789&gclid=CKm9qazT-8ICFQ1ufgodXbQAAg&Q=&is=REG&A=details
>
> Head-on (tail mount) it has a frontal area of .004 sq ft and sideways (wingtip mount) it has a frontal area of .02 sq ft. If you mount it on the tail where the vertical meet the horizontal or out on the tip of the horizontal stab it will have practically zero drag. I will 3D print you a fairing for the sideways mount if you like. That's how much I like your videos.
>
> 9B

For WiFi remote and a 3+ hour battery (claimed) you can get this for a slight incremental drag penalty:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1072691-REG/replay_xd_01_primex_cs_prime_x_video_camera.html

9B

But the outside camera will miss the sounds you hear and we all fly by. Also we wont get to see the instruments, and you cannot annotate in real life.
BTW: Thanks for all your uploaded videos.
Heinz

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots.

Come on guys, its just basic mathematics...

Glider weight.... 350kg
Glider Ratio.... 35:1
So Drag = 350/35 = 10kg
If your (air-brake) camera produces a drag of 2kg
New Drag = 12kg
Therefor New Glide ratio is 350/12 = 29.2 : 1

If you use 5 cameras you would halve the L/D.
QED.

On Monday, 5 January 2015 09:06:58 UTC+2, Heinz Gehlhaar wrote:
> But the outside camera will miss the sounds you hear and we all fly by. Also we wont get to see the instruments, and you cannot annotate in real life.
> BTW: Thanks for all your uploaded videos.
> Heinz

There are a couple of solutions to record cockpit audio with an externally mounted camera.

1. The easiest/cheapest solution is to record sound in the cockpit using a cheap smartphone or dictaphone and then sync it with the video post production.

2. Another option is to stream the audio from the cockpit to the external camera via bluetooth or Wifi.
One such solution is the Sena Bluetooth Audio Pack for GoPro http://www.sena.com/product/cameras/bluetoothaudiopackforgopro/
The Sena solution requires no post production audio syncing and it even allows you to mix the GoPro's internal microphone with external audio input.

My biggest gripe regarding action camera's and flying is their very limited battery life.
The last thing I want to be doing while flying is fiddling with nonsense when I should be looking outside the cockpit.
20,000 mAh battery pack + 128GB SD card = switch on recording on the ground and switch it off after landing. Then edit the video post flight.

Bruno,
You just posted a video of some Wave flying using two cameras in your cockpit. That was awesome. For me that was all I needed. Some great wing flex with two perspectives at the same time is perfect.

Surge, I agree about crappy battery life in the cameras. I solved this problem with a solderng iron. It voids warranty, but FYI you can hardwire your go pro/sony cam into a 12v to 5v stepdown and run it off the glider battery.. This way you get endless video. I think Paul @ Cumulus has some 5v battery options as well...anway, I'm doing this currently and have landed with 5 hrs of extremely boring, continuous flight video of flatland soaring....I need to move to the mountains!

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 9:34:02 AM UTC-5, PBA wrote:
>I'm doing this currently and have landed with 5 hrs of extremely boring, continuous flight video of flatland soaring....I need to move to the mountains!<

Serious question. Did watching the video change your enjoyment of flatland soaring? Or were you starting to get bored with it before you took the video?

Flubber,

Serious answer: I love flatland soaring and I'm not bored with it by any means. Video taping my own flatland flights has increased my passion and satisfaction with soaring immensely. I was just comparing my 5-hr local flatland soaring video to B4's edited, 1-hr, monster XC, mountain flight. Boring in comparison

Thanks for all the suggestions and ideas posted. The idea is to have possibly 4 cameras running during any given flight that I can draw footage from to tell the story of that flight. :) I'm just trying to continue to up the game since equipment is making it more possible to tell stories and show what we are experiencing up there in the skies better than ever before.

My biggest problem with these lipstick cams is that the field of view is still too narrow. The one that Andy mentioned is only 140 degrees. The Hero3 is 170 degrees. I am finding that wider is better for helping the audience feel they are there.

Thanks,
Bruno - B4

Howsitgoin, Bruno!
Nice videos. (and hopefully some year I can get to Nephi for one of your camps, but work always gets in the bloody way)
For a laugh, do you think anyone asked these questions when a wing-mount camera required lead weight on the other tip?
Jim

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 8:21:17 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Thanks for all the suggestions and ideas posted. The idea is to have possibly 4 cameras running during any given flight that I can draw footage from to tell the story of that flight. :) I'm just trying to continue to up the game since equipment is making it more possible to tell stories and show what we are experiencing up there in the skies better than ever before.
>
> My biggest problem with these lipstick cams is that the field of view is still too narrow. The one that Andy mentioned is only 140 degrees. The Hero3 is 170 degrees. I am finding that wider is better for helping the audience feel they are there.
>
> Thanks,
> Bruno - B4

I've had good luck with wide angle and fisheye conversion lenses (up to 180 degree FOV). Like this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646214-REG/Raynox_HD_3035PRO_HD_3035PRO_Semi_Fisheye_Conversi on_Lens.html

An example video with a fisheye lens converter:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aDJLDQ-5QU

The GoPro produces a fair amount of barrel distortion that may be less desirable on external shots with the glider wings, etc. in the frame - depends on what you are looking for. You can fix the distortion in post with the right software tools but that's a time-consuming pain.

There are all sorts of lenses with their own FOV and degree of distortion so it's easy to change.

3 GoPros out in the breeze will make your ASW-27 into an ASW-19 more or less. Use of aerodynamic fairings can reduce the drag by a factor of 3-5.

Can't wait to see what you come up with.

9B

Bruno-

Forgive the bit of thread drift....

What mount is that you have on your glareshield in your latest video? Always enjoy watching your video!

On Tuesday, 6 January 2015 18:21:17 UTC+2, wrote:
> My biggest problem with these lipstick cams is that the field of view is still too narrow. The one that Andy mentioned is only 140 degrees. The Hero3 is 170 degrees. I am finding that wider is better for helping the audience feel they are there.
>
> Thanks,
> Bruno - B4

I personally don't like the wide angle shots as one gets too much extension distortion (objects close to the camera look too large relative to objects in the distance which appear too small). On top of that there is the horrendous barrel distortion to take care of.
It however does makes the video look more impressive as it gives the impression of higher speeds as distance objects grow in size rapidly before flashing by.

For me the idea setup would be a GoPro shooting at 2.7K and processed to remove the barrel distortion, image stabilized and then cropped to 1080p to reduce the FOV.
One product which can do all of the above for the price of an aerotow is ProDad ProDRENALIN http://www.prodad.com/home/products/actioncam/300582316,l-us.html

Maybe someone would like to make GoPro fairings for glider pilots.

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 6:19:33 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Bruno-
>
> Forgive the bit of thread drift....
>
> What mount is that you have on your glareshield in your latest video? Always enjoy watching your video!

Thanks for the kind remarks Jeffrey. I made it myself. Piece of shaped balsa wood painted black, velcro from WalMart, 1/4" screw to fit into GoPro Camera mount threaded base, pipe teflon on screw to make camera not turn on its own. :)

Andy - I have had mixed results with the lenses. At this point, I am aiming for the clearest quality as possible, it would be nice to see all instruments on panel clearly.

Also, thanks Surge for the software suggestion - I will check it out!

Bruno -B4

On Saturday, January 3, 2015 at 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights.
>
> Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.
>
> What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)
>
> Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!
>
> Bruno - B4
> Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)

Bruno, Don't change a thing, your YouTube videos are amazing. Keep up the good work. You have quite a fan base.

On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 at 9:59:38 PM UTC-8, Surge wrote:

> Maybe someone would like to make GoPro fairings for glider pilots.

Like this?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw1ChKkWEYLNX21XQV9lVHpGejQ/view?usp=sharing

9B

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 1:58:55 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 6, 2015 at 9:59:38 PM UTC-8, Surge wrote:
>
> > Maybe someone would like to make GoPro fairings for glider pilots.
>
> Like this?
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw1ChKkWEYLNX21XQV9lVHpGejQ/view?usp=sharing
>
> 9B

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw1ChKkWEYLNSTd6OElFN3UwTnM/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bw1ChKkWEYLNWkdzTEFvQUVRQVU/view?usp=sharing

9B

Andy, thanks for playing around with the farings idea. How much drag do you really think this would save? I think it would be a fun project.

Bruno - B4

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 8:48:15 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Andy, thanks for playing around with the farings idea. How much drag do you really think this would save? I think it would be a fun project.
>
> Bruno - B4

I you look up drag of different shapes, a flat plate (Go Pro) has a drag coefficient of 1 or more. A contoured airfoil-type shape has a drag coefficient of 0.1 to 0.2 so it would seem to make a fair amount of difference.

My 3D printer is on the fritz, but once I get it working again I should be able to crank one of these out in a day or so.

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 10:54:40 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Saturday, January 3, 2015 at 12:55:47 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> > I am thinking about trying to do some soaring videos. Inside the cockpit footage only is boring and I want to be more like Balleka with amazing outside camera shots. :) The reason why I haven't done much is concern over the performance penalty of outside cams while trying to do longer XC flights..
> >
> > Anyone smarter than me (I know most of you are, other than TT) able to figure out the drag penalty of a GoPro either mounted on the wing or on the tail of a 27? It would be attached with the adhesive mount and not the larger suction cup mount in hope of reducing the drag. The GoPro in its larger case to accommodate an extra battery is 41mm H x 59mm W x 40mm D.
> >
> > What I am hoping to figure out is if it is a 1-2 point L/D penalty or something more like a 4-5 point drop. Those of you who have flown with me know I need every L/D point I can get. :)
> >
> > Here's to hopefully a lot of fun 2015 soaring videos shared from a bunch of us!
> >
> > Bruno - B4
> > Oh yeah - and Nephi is amazing! ;)
>
> Bruno, Don't change a thing, your YouTube videos are amazing. Keep up the good work. You have quite a fan base.

CAN'T be any worse than "downgrading" to an ASW-20 from your 27.

Bruno,
These camera's are already in that shape.

http://store.driftinnovation.com/drift-ghost-s?gclid=CjwKEAiA_s2lBRCe1YPXxtSe-DcSJACCIh3Ll16GxtjbONomuJSgzjhan3eNOSKnnejIPZWZgpt HNxoCT2Hw_wcB

But I agree, those fairings look cool, and it would be a fun project.

Put enough cameras on, Bruno, and the plane may glide backwards because of all the drag! Want serious glide degradation, you needed to talk with Oscar Boesch about carrying an early I-Max camera on his AS-W15. Pictures in a back issue of SOARING. Oscar left us in 2012.

Maybe camera used by Sebastian Kawa in Nad Annapurna video would be better than multiple cameras. See 9:20 in http://youtu.be/4UdfTZ3bf9E.

On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 at 2:39:21 PM UTC-8, Ivan Volny wrote:
> Maybe camera used by Sebastian Kawa in Nad Annapurna video would be better than multiple cameras. See 9:20 in http://youtu.be/4UdfTZ3bf9E.

Bruno,

Here are a couple of links to external camera rigs I've tried in the past. Both were shot at Parowan FWIW. The first dates from 2005 when the best available solution required a remote bullet camera hard-wired to a digital video tape-based camcorder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXbfs0tzqbQ

The second one is from 2012. A GoPro mounted to a piece of aluminum channel stock mounted to the wingtip. Issues with framing and vibration, but promising.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv-GTknLkQE

Hope that helps as you think about possible camera locations. I have a few more ideas to pursue - including a cheap version of a panning camera you can mount externally.

Looking forward to Nephi this summer.

Andy - 9B

I can say from personal experience that a Super Cub wingtip
inserted (in flight) into the wing of a Nimbus 3 reduces its
performance to about Ka8 level, not all due to the full rudder
required to fly straight.

Total drag of a sailplane equals AUW divided by L/D, typically
around 25 lbs force (or 120 or so if you insist on SI units). Go-Pro
Cameras aren't very aerodynamic. OK when flying for fun, but not
seriously.

At 22:46 12 January 2015, Steve Leonard wrote:
>Put enough cameras on, Bruno, and the plane may glide
backwards because of
>=
>all the drag! Want serious glide degradation, you needed to talk
with
>Osca=
>r Boesch about carrying an early I-Max camera on his AS-W15.
Pictures in
>a=
> back issue of SOARING. Oscar left us in 2012.
>