Aerial Photographs/Aerial Patrols

[[email protected]]

As is common in the industry, our electric utility performs regularly
scheduled air patrols. Our aerial contractors are looking for so
called "danger trees" that could come in contact with the lines,
right of way encroachments, and facility maintenance items.

We're using both fixed wing and rotary aircraft.

It is a challenge to train contractors and it's labor intensive to
investigate each problem. We think a better way of performing this
task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
(accuracy is not an issue since anything within 500' is acceptable).

I would appreciate any insight, experiences, or comments relative to
this topic.

Thanks,

Mark

[John T]

wrote:
>
> It is a challenge to train contractors and it's labor intensive to
> investigate each problem. We think a better way of performing this
> task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
> item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
> (accuracy is not an issue since anything within 500' is acceptable).

I'm not a professional photographer (but I pretend to be an amateur!) so
take this with the relevant spice...

I'd recommend finding a few "threat" scenarios and photographing them from
the air using different techniques (series of stills, video, camera angles,
flight paths/altitudes (finding the optimum oblique angle), perhaps
stereoscopic photography). That would likely give you a more reasonable
expectation of the types of scenarios you would need to investigate from the
ground.

I'm concerned that a single digital still may not be the evidence you need
in many cases (although a series would be more helpful). The pilot/spotter
on the scene is able to get at least a reasonable estimate of the distance
between the threat and the line due to stereoscopic vision. Without that
depth perception (lost by a still photo), it can be difficult to gauge the
distance between the objects. A video camera can help, but it's still not a
replacement for depth perception. This isn't to "poo poo" the idea of using
digital photography to improve your efficiency, but I wouldn't want
expectations to get too far ahead of reasonable results. :)

Of course, if you have a spotter trained in the "art" of discerning threats,
he may be able to provide a digital still to back up his claim without much
training (since he already knows what's really a threat). Perhaps somebody
with more powerline observation experience can step in here...

Good luck!

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[zatatime]

On 14 Dec 2004 05:18:18 -0800, wrote:

>As is common in the industry, our electric utility performs regularly
>scheduled air patrols. Our aerial contractors are looking for so
>called "danger trees" that could come in contact with the lines,
>right of way encroachments, and facility maintenance items.
>
>We're using both fixed wing and rotary aircraft.
>
>It is a challenge to train contractors and it's labor intensive to
>investigate each problem. We think a better way of performing this
>task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
>item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
>(accuracy is not an issue since anything within 500' is acceptable).
>
>I would appreciate any insight, experiences, or comments relative to
>this topic.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mark


Sounds like a plausible idea. I'd give it a shot with one of the
pilot's / flight staff you are more closely with as a trial. Have
them take pictures of the same place in both an airplane and
helicopter (maybe even have them focus on exactly the same tree
group). Then send someone out on the ground to take additional
pictures and make a ground assessment. Review and compare the results
with your team and analyze the findings. If it seems like a reliable
means slowly implement it, making ground checks periodically to ensure
accuracy, and work toward saving your company money.

You will incur a little greater expense in the initial stages of this
plan since you'd be sending both types of aircraft and a ground person
to exactly the same sight, but this approach will allow you to make a
good comparison between all three.

Hope this helps.
z

[Jose]

> We think a better way of performing this
> task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
> item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate

Just curious as to why you specify digital. I've been using flexible
chemical imaging ribbon for a very long time, and it has many
advantages over digital. The key thing is the photograph, not the
medium, unless I'm missing something that can be done only if the
image is originated digitally.

Jose
--
Freedom. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Ben Jackson]

In article . com>,
> wrote:
>We think a better way of performing this
>task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
>item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
>(accuracy is not an issue since anything within 500' is acceptable).

Almost all digital cameras will timestamp their images. Almost all
handheld GPSs can produce timestamped tracklogs of where they go.
As long as the camera's time is set to the GPS time at the beginning
of the day, and suitable track log settings are chosen, you can just
use them independently and work out later where you were at the moment
a photo was taken.

I would recomment a relatively high resolution camera without a long
lens. That way the picture will contain a lot of context information
to pinpoint the location, but enough information at the center to zoom
in and see the problem.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[[email protected]]

Thanks to all for the good advice.

I'm somewhat surprised that there is so little information on the web
relative to aircraft camera mounts and remote camera controls. It
seems as if the industry is set up strictly for higher altitude
acquisition.

Incidentally, our fixed wing contractor does employ a trained spotter
(his wife).

We know this camera idea will be beneficial but finding the hardware is
going to be the biggest challenge. If anyone has any experience,
knowledge, or insight on equipping the aircraft, please share it.
Mark

[Jay Beckman]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks to all for the good advice.
>
> I'm somewhat surprised that there is so little information on the web
> relative to aircraft camera mounts and remote camera controls. It
> seems as if the industry is set up strictly for higher altitude
> acquisition.
>
> Incidentally, our fixed wing contractor does employ a trained spotter
> (his wife).
>
> We know this camera idea will be beneficial but finding the hardware is
> going to be the biggest challenge. If anyone has any experience,
> knowledge, or insight on equipping the aircraft, please share it.
> Mark
>

Mark,

http://www.tylermount.com/frameshome.html

May be overkill for your needs.

You might only need to consider some gyro stabilization for either the
camera or that will go on the lens like:

http://www.ken-lab.com/html/rafferty_1.html

Hope some of this is helpful.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[C J Campbell]

"Ben Jackson" > wrote in message
news:laIvd.655125$mD.454233@attbi_s02...
> In article . com>,
> > wrote:
> >We think a better way of performing this
> >task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
> >item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
> >(accuracy is not an issue since anything within 500' is acceptable).
>
> Almost all digital cameras will timestamp their images. Almost all
> handheld GPSs can produce timestamped tracklogs of where they go.

Some of the better digital SLRs will accept GPS stamping.

[Peter Duniho]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> Some of the better digital SLRs will accept GPS stamping.

Do you know any specific brand/models? That would be very useful
information, both here and generally. I wasn't aware of any with that
functionality built in, but would love to know which ones do.

[Damian]

Do you know any specific brand/models? That would be very useful
>information, both here and generally. I wasn't aware of any with that
>functionality built in, but would love to know which ones do.
>
a google of 'digital camera gps stamp' gives further information on
methods already described here, and the 'Ricoh 3.24-megapixel Caplio
Pro G3' is mentioned in the first hit.
I haven't researched further, as I'd lead myself astray. One point to
note is that the GPS stamp is that of the camera, not the object, so
there would still need to be a means of referencing the two.

Damian

[10Squared]

Jose wrote:

>> We think a better way of performing this
>> task is to have the contractor provide a digital still image of each
>> item in his report along with the associated geographic coordinate
>
> Just curious as to why you specify digital. I've been using flexible
> chemical imaging ribbon for a very long time, and it has many
> advantages over digital. The key thing is the photograph, not the
> medium, unless I'm missing something that can be done only if the
> image is originated digitally.
>
> Jose

The digital image may be stored in a database for later retrieval. Also,
analog photography is on its way out. Major labs across the country (USA,
for you international readers) are shutting down their film processing
operations and going totally digital.

Cheers,

Jim