It’s defined in SERA 3135.
SERA.3135 Formation flights
Aircraft shall not be flown in formation except by pre-arrangement among the pilots-in-command of the aircraft taking part in the flight and, for formation flight in controlled airspace, in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the competent authority. These conditions shall include the following:
(a) one of the pilots-in-command shall be designated as the flight leader;
(b) the formation operates as a single aircraft with regard to navigation and position reporting;
(c) separation between aircraft in the flight shall be the responsibility of the flight leader and the pilots-in-command of the other aircraft in the flight and shall include periods of transition when aircraft are manoeuvring to attain their own separation within the formation and during join-up and breakaway; and
(d) for State aircraft a maximum lateral, longitudinal and vertical distance between each aircraft and the flight leader in accordance with the Chicago Convention. For other than State aircraft a distance not exceeding 1 km (0,5 nm) laterally and longitudinally and 30 m (100 ft) vertically from the flight leader shall be maintained by each aircraft.
So it is basically a pack of aircraft reporting as one (the leader), no larger than 0.5 nm laterally and 100 ft vertically.
I have experimented with on board cameras for the last weeks and tried some editing. It is true, that if you don’t need to be very precise about the cuts, editing is not that much work. The results are quite crude sometimes, but I think that doesn’t matter too much. At first I started with just a single approach, in this video a simulated engine failure in the Junior. The camera was plugged into the intercom and camera sound and music are both audible. The engine, too, because of the missing squelch in the intercom. So my mic picked up some engine noise.
Then I started rearranging some of the shots to make a video more interesting. The camera wasn’t in the intercom. There wasn’t much to listen to, anyway.
Now I just arranged some of the footage I had collected in several flights into a video following something like a “plot”.
Editing itself took about 15 to 20 Minutes per video with the Microsoft movie maker. That program is very basic, to put it mildly.
Concerning the music: The camera microphones are almost all so bad and the wind noise is quite disturbing, that I chose to use some music instead. I guess if you want good engine noise, you have to include a good microphone and a good audio recorder to the setup. Otherwise it is a pain to listen to.
My setup consists of an ActionPro X7, sometimes accompanied by some GoPro cameras of my copilots. I have a simple cable for plugging the camera into the intercom and several mounts. Surprisingly, the ActionPro doesn’t need a propeller filter that badly as some other cameras. Here is a picture of the installation in the C172
I haven’t done any film of other aircraft, (besides the forced formation during aerotow). I am just learning about how to shoot and do stuff. Very important is, I think, that you don’t start to “Fly for the camera”. Once the engine starts, the mind has to be on flying, not on filming. I think if I engage in formation flying videos, I will do this in a two person cockpit for safety issues. So I can concentrate on flying and someone else is filming. Steve from Flight Chops has the rule, that he never acts as movie maker and pilot the same time. Rather than that, he shoots all his flying and later sees, if there is something interesting to put into a video. If there is a specific topic, he will shoot with a team, rather than be film maker and aviator at the same time.
The next step in my videos is, I guess, getting another video editing software. The movie maker is quite limiting…
Sorry for a bit pedantic here Malte, but why do you call it “simulated engine failure” here and “Ziellandeübung” in the video title? Two very different maneuvers…
You are right, the (legal) correct term would be “Notlandeübung auf einem Flugplatz”, but this manoeuvre is colloquially called “Ziellandeübung” and I had no interest in the usual YT comments when this video got linked in YT playlists with real emergencies.
EDIT: I have changed it, you are right. In radio communication though, the term “Notlandeübung” is usually understood as training for an off-airport landing. Thus it does make sense to use the term that everyone can associate right. And furtermore, there isn’t a real “Ziellandeübung” – either it is a spot landing, or not. And according to the syllabus, the spot landing can very well be with the help of the engine.
