Don't take pictures on US

phllax

Veteran
Aug 20, 2002
683
10
Los Angeles
Visit site
Photos taken in airplane leads to interrogation
http://travel.latimes.com/articles/la-tr-spot14-2008sep14

By Catharine Hamm, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
06:07 PM PDT, September 09, 2008

Question: Last fall, three friends and I flew from Lisbon to Los Angeles by way of Philadelphia. On the flight from Philadelphia to Los Angeles, I was showing them my new camera and took a few pictures of our surroundings. A flight attendant came to me and told me to show her the pictures, which I did. On our arrival, armed officers escorted us off the plane, separated us and made us wait for the authorities. They asked ridiculous questions ("What's your eye color?"), and in the end they let us go with no apologies. Why would this happen? Did we do anything wrong?

-- Jose Silva, Lisbon

Discuss

Weigh in on the treatment Joe Silva received. Warranted or unnecessary?

Answer: In taking photos, Silva and his friends didn't violate any Federal Aviation Administration or Transportation Security Administration rules, their spokesmen told me.

If the use of electronic devices was permitted at that point in the flight, they were in the clear.

In fact, if you look at the photos you'll see that the only thing they apparently did wrong was to use a camera without studying the manual. Ansel Adams he's not.

In a later conversation, Silva said his group complied with flight attendants and wasn't causing a ruckus.

Because the airline would not go back and research the details, we don't have its side of the story.

But assuming that Silva is correct, what could prompt such a reaction?

He said the authorities later told him that these are "sensitive times."

Indeed. But those pictures are hardly a threat to national security and are no different from the images you can find all over the Internet.

Just to see the spectrum, Google "767 interior" and click "Images," and you'll find about six dozen photos.

Silva said the authorities also told him to be careful. One has to wonder how careful he would have needed to be if he didn't, in his words, look Moroccan or Egyptian.

Richard Derk, the photo editor for the Los Angeles Times Travel section, has shot many photos on airplanes, some of which have ended up in these pages.

I asked him whether he had experienced any problems on commercial flights.

"No, never," he said. "I shoot quickly and try not to get in anyone's way, but no one has ever stopped me."

Derk, we should note, does not look Middle Eastern.

Mickey H. Osterreicher, general counsel for the National Press Photographers Assn., also expressed surprise.

"It's hard to believe that somebody didn't call a timeout in the process and say, 'What exactly did this man do?' " Osterreicher said.

"At a certain point, somebody has to use some common sense."

Picture that.

Have a travel dilemma?

Write to [email protected].
 
I don't really know why exactly THAT happened, but I know that one time I was working at the cash register in the airport restaurant and some guy got completely irate and out of control because the weather prevented him from getting to his destination and all flights were full for the next few days. The entire flight of people to LGA was upset, but this guy was really getting ridiculous. He finally grabbed his camera after one of the agents refused to give him her employee number and took a picture of her badge.
The shift manager and police made him delete it immediately because we aren't required to give the pax our last names or employee numbers and also, it is a possible security threat to have a picture of a badge (could possibly get a color copy and use it to gain access somewhere?)
I know that is really reaching, but the police agreed with the shift manager that the pictures of the badge were not appropriate.

:ph34r:

Oh, and I made the whole thing up I dont work at the airport. For an airline. Or anything.
 
FWIW, I got out my trusty AA F/A manual and my decoder ring, and this is what it says about picture taking in flight.

"Use of Cameras Digital, still and/or video cameras are permitted during flight for recording personal events. Photography/recording of airline personnel, equipment or procedures is strictly prohibited."

Now, if this were a TSA or FAA regulation there would be a box to the side giving me the exact Reg. No.; ie., FAA Regulation 121.66.123b. There isn't; so, I'm assuming that the prohibition of photographing employees and equipment is a company rule.

I'm guessing that LCC has similar rules. Unless they were taking pictures of f/as entering door codes or something, it seems a little excessive to call the police.

And, as a f/a let me say that we don't have time to police the picture-taking. They could just as easily put their cellphone in airplane mode and still take pictures with it (or most of them today). When we have o/h bins covered with duct tape or F/C seats blocked off with duct tape, I rather hope that passengers take pictures and send them to the company. At least at AA, Customer Relations still listens to the customers as near as I can tell, but no one listens to the flight attendants who spend the most time with the customers.
 
When we have o/h bins covered with duct tape or F/C seats blocked off with duct tape, I rather hope that passengers take pictures and send them to the company.

Wow Jim, according all the US haters, American and the other airlines NEVER have these situations happen. Have you been drinking or squashed their delusions?
 
Wow Jim, according all the US haters, American and the other airlines NEVER have these situations happen. Have you been drinking or squashed their delusions?
You rather seem to have missed his tongue firmly planted in his cheek and the stomping on the floor indicating sarcasm.
 
This article depresses me. Why? Because it's the first article about airlines and flying that I've seen in a LONG time that didn't contain anger. That should be a good thing, but it's lacking the other side, and more detail. Even if the other side (US Airways side) was there and in full agreement with what's said, it's still missing a lot of important facts. The biggest one is that never is it said WHY the guy was interogated. Granted one can draw the conclusion that the phototaking led to the "special attention", but did it? It's only infered. And WHO questioned him on landing? The "authorities". Which ones? And of what? FBI, TSA, ICE, LA Airport PD, LA County Sheriff, ATF, Postal Service? And then there's the "why" of questioning. Why WERE they questioned. From what the guy asked, he might have been questioned about taking the photos, or because his visa appeared fake, or because he's known to law enforcement as the worlds greatest cheese thief. Hell, maybe the guy looked like Gallager, and the interrogators were feeling nostalgic of the 70's and wanted an excuse for an autograph.

So why WAS the guy questioned?
 
If I would happen to have a Camera on-boad, I would have the harness wrapped around me so that the FA's can not do anything, as it is secure. Snap. Picture taken. A camera is not a transmitting device, so does not need to be shut off, just secured. Bush uses the US Constitution, so why can't the passengers!
 
Wow Jim, according all the US haters, American and the other airlines NEVER have these situations happen. Have you been drinking or squashed their delusions?
Well, it doesn't happen often, but it does happen. There are AA stations where getting the flight out on time is a lot more important that getting the flight out with all the parts working--like seats. And, I am the first to say that when I get on an a/c and two F/C seats are covered in duct tape with a handwritten sign that says "Do Not Use" (as if anyone could), I am deeply embarrassed. I hope I never get to the point where I would tell a customer that if they don't like it they should just sit down and shut up.

And, it doesn't matter how many airlines are doing it or how often, it should never be an acceptable practice to any of us.
 
I can safely tell you that not ONE Midwest plane was ever less than spotless, same for CO. AA planes were old but clean, same for NWA. UA is a mixed bag in my observation. Five M/L flights on DL don't count as that's not enough to make a judgement.

In just under 1,000 flights with nearly 800 on US I can say with confidence that US is by far the worst when it comes to dirt and broken stuff on a flight and this has only been since the Sand Fleas took over.
These would be my observations as well...except that I'd also add I've never seen a WN airplane that was less than EXCELLENT in terms of the interior.

I think it's also interesting, when you fly on CO and they do the safety announcement, there is Larry Kellner's mug sitting and introducing himself, (a little stiffly I might add LOL) and he goes on to say at CO, they are dedicated to "clean, safe, reliable transportation."

In December, their year end puff piece at the front of their magazine was touting that "clean" thing. I do think it's a core principle of theirs.

Honestly, it's not about "hating" US Airways....the flying public and this country need, for competition's sake, all the good, well run airlines we can get. And as I've said many, many times, "in no way do I EVER believe safety has been compromised."

I just want the management of the airline to treat the pax as they would want themselves treated...and I would dearly LOVE to know how management would feel if the cleaners at the Sand Caslte forgot to clean their offices for a couple weeks? Of when a coffee mug broke, they just taped it up...how would they take that?

Probably not well....we pax make their pay chaecks a reality....why do we have to accept it? Adn the answer is, we really don't....and I think that's the issue...

Mr. Parker, Mr. Kirby & Mr. Isom.....how would you like your office or your home looking like and being in the condition we see in so many of these aircraft? I suspect you would not accept it....why should we have to accept it? As a business traveler, the airfcraft I'm in is my office, often times.
 
My signature below has my flights for this year, and the most, 48, have been on DL and DL Connection. I honestly have not seen a nasty DL/DL Connection plane this year. I am not sure my 16 NW/NW Airlink flights qualify me to make a comment, but while their planes are older, they are clean. US/US Express is hit or miss. That is probably what bothers me the most, the inconsistency.
 
why should we have to accept it? As a business traveler, the airfcraft I'm in is my office, often times.
Because you want the lowest fare or convenient schedule and nothing else matters. CO and WN are setting themselves up for failure. All that good service, and catering to business customers, is costing them lots of money that will bite them in the butts sooner than later. US will be the last one standing. Tempe's plan is brilliant, simply brilliant and will be taught in every respected MBA program for many, many years in the future. So stop complaining because no one is listening.
 
Imagine a person....who operates a dedicated web site FULL of pictures inside US Airways planes and intimate information contained about the operation of US Airways...Then they post videos of safety demonstrations that are taken when the "Please Turn off Electronic Devices" light is clearly visible...and this doofus operates a camcorder and records the safety video. Ridiculous? Yes. Obsessive? You bet! Downright weird? Oh yeah.

I'm thinking a full machine gun escort off the plane would really set these terrorists straight, don't you? We've got the evidence on youtube, for sure, of these crimes. Either that or a good spanking from mommy that's long overdue.

We finally have the ammo we need to cleanse ourselves of the madness: The OFF/ON Switch!
 
I don't really know why exactly THAT happened, but I know that one time I was working at the cash register in the airport restaurant and some guy got completely irate and out of control because the weather prevented him from getting to his destination and all flights were full for the next few days. The entire flight of people to LGA was upset, but this guy was really getting ridiculous. He finally grabbed his camera after one of the agents refused to give him her employee number and took a picture of her badge.
The shift manager and police made him delete it immediately because we aren't required to give the pax our last names or employee numbers and also, it is a possible security threat to have a picture of a badge (could possibly get a color copy and use it to gain access somewhere?)
I know that is really reaching, but the police agreed with the shift manager that the pictures of the badge were not appropriate.

:ph34r:

Oh, and I made the whole thing up I dont work at the airport. For an airline. Or anything.

:rolleyes:

Agents can say they don't have to give you their name or badge number (unless they're subpoenaed as a witness in court), but since they work in the public and you have every right to be there as a fare-paying passenger, you certainly have the right to look at the badge.

If you have the right to look at their badge, you also have the right to photograph it, because it is in "plain view" (same reason why cops can bust you for drugs if they see it through the windows of your car and you can't throw it out on 4th Amendment grounds). You can't rummage through the drawers at the gate or sneak in the cockpit, but if an employee is standing in front of you, he is in plain view.

The shift manager can't make a passenger do anything. That's just silly.

If the police try to make you delete the photos, the proper response is "This is evidence in an upcoming lawsuit. I am not going to delete the photos because that would be destruction of evidence and is a crime. You cannot order me to delete the photos because you aren't a judge. If you confiscate my camera and delete the photos yourself, you will be charged with the crime of destruction of evidence".

Don't let people push you around!