Has anyone else noticed the strange wording in this link
http://www.brusselsairport.be/en/spottersvisitors/
My wife pointed this out to me and she has yet to show any inclination towards an interest in tin tubes.
The myth that scanners affect aircraft instrumentation is just that. It may be illegal to own/use a scanner in Belgium but that is probably more to do with the emergency services not wanting people to listen in to their conversations ( even the Yanks don't have a problem with that - we can even listen on the web!)
The other one that astounds me is the requirement to ask the aircraft owners permission to publish your photograhs. (Skystef - you'll have fun with those airways shots) I do hope that all the pictures on Luchtzak have been granted permission. Is this a Belgian Law or International in its scope. I'll bet there will a right panic at Airliners.net et al now. It will be interesting to see how this would be policed! Better hide those Canons and Nikon sfolks before the photograph police confiscate them!
C
ps In UK they have reduced basic rate Income tax to 20% but are considering a breathing tax - how could the air be free - ridculous?
Spotting at Brussels Airport
Moderator: Plane spotting team
Forum rules
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12716
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12716
not such a stupid rule. In most country's everyone has the right on his own image. This isn't that important, unless a photo gets published. The only thing Brussels Airport is doing here, is covering themselves. If a photo gets published unwanted, and an airline takes this to court (very hypothetical), the airport can't be held liable. They warned you that you asked permission, and they warned you that they assume you have the permission when you publish a photo. It's saying: publishing is at your own risk.
Just shows how the American way of life (fear to get sued) is coming towards us
Just shows how the American way of life (fear to get sued) is coming towards us
-
jan_olieslagers
- Posts: 3082
- Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 08:34
- Location: Vl.Brabant
- Contact:
The phrase "The use of equipment that can monitor aircraft frequencies ( ... ) can interfere with the flight instruments." is absolutely ridiculous. There are likely some people around here who can explain better, but to me it seems obvious:
1) that an aviation band receiver, scanning or no, works much like any other VHF radio, including those for the FM broadcast. So all car drivers near airports should disengage their broadcast radio receiver?
2) even if any VHF receiver does radiate some little bit of HF-power, this is far far less than the radiation from GSM's, BlueTooth and whatever. Must these than also be forbidden near aerodromes?
Apart from these technical issues, one sees scanners being used near Dutch airports all the time - and I never heard of avionics disturbance there... It's just a load of bullshit.
1) that an aviation band receiver, scanning or no, works much like any other VHF radio, including those for the FM broadcast. So all car drivers near airports should disengage their broadcast radio receiver?
2) even if any VHF receiver does radiate some little bit of HF-power, this is far far less than the radiation from GSM's, BlueTooth and whatever. Must these than also be forbidden near aerodromes?
Apart from these technical issues, one sees scanners being used near Dutch airports all the time - and I never heard of avionics disturbance there... It's just a load of bullshit.