Real or Fake?

[The Joker]

No not a Rolex, drone footage of an A380 taking off from Mauritius.

Lot of debate on the internet if it is real or fake. What do you think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csTkMwBE45g

[123Blueface]

I will bite that looks legit, specially from the movement as the drone turns.

[Time4aRolex]

Has to be real. There are cars moving on the roads.

[AzPaul]

Have no idea it it's real or not, but I do know that these days, just about any kind of video can be faked very convincingly.

[Etschell]

ask paul he is the drone king.

[Jace]

The only concern I have is that is an Airbus 380 which is a huge airplane which needs a lot of runway to take off. That looks like a really small airport.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[beshannon]

https://www.iflya380.com/a380-destin...tml?origin=ICT

https://www.droningon.co/2018/07/20/...-in-mauritius/

[SaibreX]

Seems legit to me. I do a lot of drone filming my self and wouldn't say it is impossible to wait for a plane to take off and have a nice footage of it :) These days people are doing anything for Instagram or Youtube :)

[CRM114]

Fake.

During the entire clip there's a complete absence of any external aircraft lighting that (by regulation and airline SOP) are switched on at certain times and are illuminated day or night to give it maximum visibility for other aircraft (even if it's drone camera) to observe, and would be seen from the drone's perspective during apparent closure track and at the closest distances.

Highly visible, anti-collision white strobe lights located on the wingtips and tail. These would be switched on from the time it had entered the runway and would be in continuous use during flight. Their use is regulatory. During the close "flyby" portion, at that distance the one in the left wingtip would absolutely be visible as it goes past and the one in the tail after it passes. No white anti-collision lights/strobes are seen at anytime.

There should also be a highly visible red, flashing beacon on top of the forward fuselage of the A380. These beacons are turned on, day or night, anytime an engine is running while stationary, during taxi, flight, until the aircraft is shut down. Also regulatory for all aircraft. Again, no flashing beacon is seen on the upper fuselage at any time even as it closes and flies by.

Landing and taxi lights. Even during the day, taxi lights in the nose wheel are turned on during taxi movement as well as during the takeoff roll, and landing lights turned-on upon entering the runway or (depending on company SOP) when takeoff clearance is received and it begins to roll. Either way, during the daytime takeoff roll the aircraft would have landing lights in the wing roots and taxi lights in the nose wheel illuminated to increase visibility for others and to signal intentions. This is done for any aircraft/vehicle down-runway that an aircraft has is lined-up/taking off, a non-verbal insurance against miscommunication or pilot/controller error. The taxi lights will disappear/turn off after the gear is raised a few seconds after lifting-off when a climb has been confirmed inside the cockpit.

In the clip, there's no trace of any nosewheel light, even briefly, when the nose is lifted and the few seconds after rotation and lift off before the gear would presumably have been raised even though at that point the "aircraft's" nose is aimed close enough to where the drone is on it's track that it should be seen.

The landing lights would stay on throughout the initial climb at lower altitudes as a visibility device for other aircraft to observe, and from the drone's apparent perspective the left wing root landing light should have been seen, yet there's no trace of a landing light at any time during the climb and fly-past.

(the aircraft also has Nav lights on the wingtips/tail (red-left, green-right, white-tail) that would be On, but Navigation lights aren't designed to be highly visible at a distance during the daytime).

So given that the drone's apparent position compared to "aircraft's" track and close passage ideally lent itself to seeing the highly-visible Anti-collision white strobe lights on left wingtip and tail, the red flashing strobe/beacon on it's upper fuselage, and taxi/landing lights during climb almost ideally, yet none of these lights designed and/or used to be seen by others in flight during the day are entirely absent, my opinion;

Fake, unless one wants to believe the crew managed to blow-off regulations, Company SOPs, and checklists regarding the use of external aircraft lights and managed/decided to start engines (Red beacon and Nav lights), taxi (add taxi lights), and takeoff (add anti-collision strobes & landing lights) completely dark.

Don't think so.

[HogwldFLTR]

Totally uncertain of Emirates corporate policy or Mauritius Island laws. The video looks pretty real. BTW, do they have a tribe there called the Waponis who like orange soda?

[GradyPhilpott]

I voted fake, because of anomalies in the video.

I know nothing of aircraft protocol, but CRM114 makes a great case from that perspective.

[Tomas Eriksson]

Originally Posted by CRM114

Fake.

During the entire clip there's a complete absence of any external aircraft lighting that (by regulation and airline SOP) are switched on at certain times and are illuminated day or night to give it maximum visibility for other aircraft (even if it's drone camera) to observe, and would be seen from the drone's perspective during apparent closure track and at the closest distances.

Highly visible, anti-collision white strobe lights located on the wingtips and tail. These would be switched on from the time it had entered the runway and would be in continuous use during flight. Their use is regulatory. During the close "flyby" portion, at that distance the one in the left wingtip would absolutely be visible as it goes past and the one in the tail after it passes. No white anti-collision lights/strobes are seen at anytime.

There should also be a highly visible red, flashing beacon on top of the forward fuselage of the A380. These beacons are turned on, day or night, anytime an engine is running while stationary, during taxi, flight, until the aircraft is shut down. Also regulatory for all aircraft. Again, no flashing beacon is seen on the upper fuselage at any time even as it closes and flies by.

Landing and taxi lights. Even during the day, taxi lights in the nose wheel are turned on during taxi movement as well as during the takeoff roll, and landing lights turned-on upon entering the runway or (depending on company SOP) when takeoff clearance is received and it begins to roll. Either way, during the daytime takeoff roll the aircraft would have landing lights in the wing roots and taxi lights in the nose wheel illuminated to increase visibility for others and to signal intentions. This is done for any aircraft/vehicle down-runway that an aircraft has is lined-up/taking off, a non-verbal insurance against miscommunication or pilot/controller error. The taxi lights will disappear/turn off after the gear is raised a few seconds after lifting-off when a climb has been confirmed inside the cockpit.

In the clip, there's no trace of any nosewheel light, even briefly, when the nose is lifted and the few seconds after rotation and lift off before the gear would presumably have been raised even though at that point the "aircraft's" nose is aimed close enough to where the drone is on it's track that it should be seen.

The landing lights would stay on throughout the initial climb at lower altitudes as a visibility device for other aircraft to observe, and from the drone's apparent perspective the left wing root landing light should have been seen, yet there's no trace of a landing light at any time during the climb and fly-past.

(the aircraft also has Nav lights on the wingtips/tail (red-left, green-right, white-tail) that would be On, but Navigation lights aren't designed to be highly visible at a distance during the daytime).

So given that the drone's apparent position compared to "aircraft's" track and close passage ideally lent itself to seeing the highly-visible Anti-collision white strobe lights on left wingtip and tail, the red flashing strobe/beacon on it's upper fuselage, and taxi/landing lights during climb almost ideally, yet none of these lights designed and/or used to be seen by others in flight during the day are entirely absent, my opinion;

Fake, unless one wants to believe the crew managed to blow-off regulations, Company SOPs, and checklists regarding the use of external aircraft lights and managed/decided to start engines (Red beacon and Nav lights), taxi (add taxi lights), and takeoff (add anti-collision strobes & landing lights) completely dark.

Don't think so.

Vert good observations and I see your point but after watching this i do believe it is genuine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8EbzRArsig

[Rolex Essex]

Originally Posted by Tomas Eriksson

Vert good observations and I see your point but after watching this i do believe it is genuine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8EbzRArsig

Thanks for the link.
I thought the plane looked a bit CGI as it flew past the drone and it’s way too close to the airport but the link has proven it looks quite genuine.

[Burlington]

If it is fake it’s certainly good enough effects to look very real indeed. Eye opening what’s possible these days when you can no longer believe what you see.

Agree good points made above to its supposed veracity regarding aviation procedures etc.

If it is fake, I’m sure these little details could be added in too even should the creator be aware.

I’m sure time will tell !

[AzPaul]

Originally Posted by CRM114

Fake.

During the entire clip there's a complete absence of any external aircraft lighting that (by regulation and airline SOP) are switched on at certain times and are illuminated day or night to give it maximum visibility for other aircraft (even if it's drone camera) to observe, and would be seen from the drone's perspective during apparent closure track and at the closest distances.

Highly visible, anti-collision white strobe lights located on the wingtips and tail. These would be switched on from the time it had entered the runway and would be in continuous use during flight. Their use is regulatory. During the close "flyby" portion, at that distance the one in the left wingtip would absolutely be visible as it goes past and the one in the tail after it passes. No white anti-collision lights/strobes are seen at anytime.

There should also be a highly visible red, flashing beacon on top of the forward fuselage of the A380. These beacons are turned on, day or night, anytime an engine is running while stationary, during taxi, flight, until the aircraft is shut down. Also regulatory for all aircraft. Again, no flashing beacon is seen on the upper fuselage at any time even as it closes and flies by.

Landing and taxi lights. Even during the day, taxi lights in the nose wheel are turned on during taxi movement as well as during the takeoff roll, and landing lights turned-on upon entering the runway or (depending on company SOP) when takeoff clearance is received and it begins to roll. Either way, during the daytime takeoff roll the aircraft would have landing lights in the wing roots and taxi lights in the nose wheel illuminated to increase visibility for others and to signal intentions. This is done for any aircraft/vehicle down-runway that an aircraft has is lined-up/taking off, a non-verbal insurance against miscommunication or pilot/controller error. The taxi lights will disappear/turn off after the gear is raised a few seconds after lifting-off when a climb has been confirmed inside the cockpit.

In the clip, there's no trace of any nosewheel light, even briefly, when the nose is lifted and the few seconds after rotation and lift off before the gear would presumably have been raised even though at that point the "aircraft's" nose is aimed close enough to where the drone is on it's track that it should be seen.

The landing lights would stay on throughout the initial climb at lower altitudes as a visibility device for other aircraft to observe, and from the drone's apparent perspective the left wing root landing light should have been seen, yet there's no trace of a landing light at any time during the climb and fly-past.

(the aircraft also has Nav lights on the wingtips/tail (red-left, green-right, white-tail) that would be On, but Navigation lights aren't designed to be highly visible at a distance during the daytime).

So given that the drone's apparent position compared to "aircraft's" track and close passage ideally lent itself to seeing the highly-visible Anti-collision white strobe lights on left wingtip and tail, the red flashing strobe/beacon on it's upper fuselage, and taxi/landing lights during climb almost ideally, yet none of these lights designed and/or used to be seen by others in flight during the day are entirely absent, my opinion;

Fake, unless one wants to believe the crew managed to blow-off regulations, Company SOPs, and checklists regarding the use of external aircraft lights and managed/decided to start engines (Red beacon and Nav lights), taxi (add taxi lights), and takeoff (add anti-collision strobes & landing lights) completely dark.

Don't think so.

Okay, but aside from that . . . . .

[Andad]

Fake, I'd pass.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by Tomas Eriksson

Vert good observations and I see your point but after watching this i do believe it is genuine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8EbzRArsig

I've seen that guy's breakdown as well.

He glosses over the absence of landing lights, blaming it on poor resolution.

He points out/enlarges the gear retracting, but ignores that the nosewheel gear assembly incorporates the taxi light, which should blazing away. In the clip, no lights are visible on the nosegear during/after rotation before it's raised.

What he calls a light on the underside of the aircraft fuselage, the dot of light he points out, is the wrong color. In the clip it's white, but in real life the flashing beacon on the underside of the fuselage is red, same as the the red flashing beacons on the upper fuselage.

He ignores the absence of the upper red, flashing beacon lights (2) that should be visible on top of the fuselage, located above where the "M" in "Emirates" is.

He ignores the absence of white, flashing anti-collision strobe lights that should be seen on the (especially) left wingtip during it's approach to the POV in the climb and as it passes.

When it comes to aircraft lighting he only spoke of the landing lights (blamed poor resolution), and ignored the absence of what else should be visible, and the only light he did point out seeing was the wrong color.

He can enlarge/zoom in to see details of cars moving along roads behind trees and individual waves on the beach (which is correct), the gear coming up, but can't see the designed-to-be visible white anti-collision strobes, red flashing beacons, or landing and taxi lights aimed almost directly at and well within a cone of visibility at the drone? In fact, the degree of detail is almost a reversed perspective. To see details like you can on the ground one ought to be able to enlarge to see details of the aircraft registration number as it flies past.

How convenient that it wasn't legible..

Nothing in this guy's videos explains the absence of the above. Being correct about runway length for an A380, wingtip vortices descending, the wings slightly rocking etc does nothing to fill in the numerous missing details that should be there. It's not that those details aren't all there. It's that none are there. Not one.

[GradyPhilpott]

The thing I noticed was that a couple of cars disappear and reappear, which isn't explained by terrain.

Also, the lack of visible engine exhaust looks suspicious to me.

Of course, I'm not an expert in CGI or aviation.

[tudorbaja27]

I was expecting to offer my thoughtful expertise on a different subject..

[function12]

Fake. I would think the wing tip vortexes would have flipped or trashed the drone.

[77T]

Originally Posted by CRM114

I've seen that guy's breakdown as well.

He glosses over the absence of landing lights, blaming it on poor resolution.

He points out/enlarges the gear retracting, but ignores that the nosewheel gear assembly incorporates the taxi light, which should blazing away. In the clip, no lights are visible on the nosegear during/after rotation before it's raised.

What he calls a light on the underside of the aircraft fuselage, the dot of light he points out, is the wrong color. In the clip it's white, but in real life the flashing beacon on the underside of the fuselage is red, same as the the red flashing beacons on the upper fuselage.

He ignores the absence of the upper red, flashing beacon lights (2) that should be visible on top of the fuselage, located above where the "M" in "Emirates" is.

He ignores the absence of white, flashing anti-collision strobe lights that should be seen on the (especially) left wingtip during it's approach to the POV in the climb and as it passes.

When it comes to aircraft lighting he only spoke of the landing lights (blamed poor resolution), and ignored the absence of what else should be visible, and the only light he did point out seeing was the wrong color.

He can enlarge/zoom in to see details of cars moving along roads behind trees and individual waves on the beach (which is correct), the gear coming up, but can't see the designed-to-be visible white anti-collision strobes, red flashing beacons, or landing and taxi lights aimed almost directly at and well within a cone of visibility at the drone? In fact, the degree of detail is almost a reversed perspective. To see details like you can on the ground one ought to be able to enlarge to see details of the aircraft registration number as it flies past.

How convenient that it wasn't legible..

Nothing in this guy's videos explains the absence of the above. Being correct about runway length for an A380, wingtip vortices descending, the wings slightly rocking etc does nothing to fill in the numerous missing details that should be there. It's not that those details aren't all there. It's that none are there. Not one.

Help us a bit more -

Why doesn’t this Emirates video have any of the lighting you mention?

https://youtu.be/8LlfES5meCU




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[AzPaul]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

The thing I noticed was that a couple of cars disappear and reappear, which isn't explained by terrain.

Easily explained by some slight rippling in the space/time continuum.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by AzPaul

Easily explained by some slight rippling in the space/time continuum.

Of course! "cheers"

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by 77T

Help us a bit more -

Why doesn’t this Emirates video have any of the lighting you mention?

https://youtu.be/8LlfES5meCU

It does have and you can see them if one pays attention to detail. 2 flashing beacon lights on top of the fuselage just aft of the satcom blister. Landing lights are on in the wing roots. White wingtip and tail anti-collision strobes are visible.

One can see them all despite that promotional video being shot in direct sunlight. On an overcast day out of direct sunlight like the clip, these various lights show up to an even greater degree.

The taxi light in the nosegear assembly isn't visible in the video, obviously, because the gear is up.

There's plenty of real life video of A380s (and other air carrier aircraft) out there in everyday in normal operations during daylight, taxiing and taking-off showing the position of these lights and their use as I've described previously.

Noting the missing details of lights where they should be on the aircraft in the clip is no different than noting missing or incorrect details on a watch when trying to determine if it's fake. The clip is a good fake. If it was a bad fake, nobody would be talking about it.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by 77T

Help us a bit more -

Why doesn’t this Emirates video have any of the lighting you mention?

https://youtu.be/8LlfES5meCU




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Is that CGI as well

Surely the lights aren't that visible in daylight?

[77T]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Is that CGI as well

Surely the lights aren't that visible in daylight?

No that’s a professional video job. My point was it’s hard to see the lights in direct sunlight.

But we did get a good explanation of reasons above by CRM114.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by CRM114

It does have and you can see them if one pays attention to detail.

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[rolexbrand]

This is absolutely fake