Re: [Leica] Aerial R3?

["Robert E. Welsh" <rwelsh@craftech.com>]

My Cardinal RG was also a retractable. A mechanic during an annual inspection
found a clear spot just behind the right front seat. He cut a 5 inch dianeter
hole through the belly skin - and then took a standard 6 inch insrection plate
to cover the whole. He said it was not a 'streesed skin' in that area. He wrote
up a 337 form in the log and said it was legal. I would remove that seat, and
an opposing floor inspection plate. I built a sping loaded mount for the ELM -
even modified a hand held palmtop computor to act as an intervelometer to fire
the camera at preset intervals. The greatest problem was maintaining perfect
straight and level flight for verticles. Even with autopilot slight deviations
I would hardle notice would show problems in putting together strip sequences.
Good luck

Gary Todoroff wrote:

> > Just curious ! I have done a lot of aerial photography from a Cardinal RG
> (usually with a Hassey EL) Why would you be shooting from the tail of a 210
> ??
> > Bob
>
> With the retracts on the Cessna 210, there is no place in the cabin to make
> a hole in the floor without cutting through hydraulics, cables, etc. The
> images need to be made looking straight down.
>
> The 210 has a hatch underneath at the back, which accesses the tail surface
> cables. We can replace the hatch with a camera mount without cutting into
> any of the fuselage. The Hasselblad ELM is the primary camera and will be
> mostly inside the fuselage Just a part of the body and all of the lens will
> be outside. The mount will include a wind deflector in at the front. I will
> run a flash cord along with the electronic shutter release up to the cabin.
> The flash will confirm that the camera is  actually shooting and cycling.
>
>  <<<<Doug Herr wrote re 35mm wide angle:
> My inclination would be to make damn sure the camera is reliable regardless
>  of the cost 'cuz flight time can get real expensive real fast and ya don't
> want to re-do 'cuz of camera failure.  Of course, if you're not paying for
> the flight time and you enjoy the ride a re-do can be a real benefit <g>.
> >>>>
>
> Thanks for the comments, Doug.
> At $205 per hour for the 210 (including pilot and fuel), we will definitely
> be paying! That's why I have an extra ELM, lens and magazine on board.
> However, the 35mm wide-angle photos are not essential, just very handy for
> identifying the Hasselblad photos. If the 35mm failed in the air, then no
> great loss (unless it fell off!)
>
> We did have to redo a helicopter flight when the first in-flight use of the
> 70mm back caused a film jam (I should not have taped the bulk film to the
> feed spool). Those flights were merely all of our tax dollars at work, so I
> certainly enjoyed the re-do a few days later!  While preparing the Cessna
> to fly in about two weeks, it looks like we'll be doing one or two more
> missions in  the Dolphins. Thanks again for all of your generous support of
> me and the Coast Guard!
>
> Seriously, you would all be proud of the caliber of people I have met
> through this project, military personnel who ultimately work for and
> represent all of us in the USA. It has been an incredible privilege and
> adventure to work with the "Coasties".
>
> Regards,
> Gary Todoroff
> Tree LUGger
>