Quote:
Originally Posted by flipper35
$500, holy cow! Then again, you are in a bigger metropolis than I.
A 206 is a lot of airplane for your current camera setup. Low hours on the current rebuild on the 175?
|
Yea, the 206 is way bigger than we want now. The old aerial mapping camera required a 18 inch hole in the floor of the airplane. The weight of the mount and camera was right at 500 pounds. That was the olden days of film cameras. Of course the new "state of the art" top dog mapping camera are still about that heavy, and require huge amounts of electricity, and oh by the way they cost a million bucks and an $80,000 per year maintenance agreement for as long as you want to use it. Our camera is less than the maintenance agreement on the big boys cameras.
A 152 is enough, but awful small and it gets blown around a lot more. 172 is about the right size.