At the risk of repeating myself, I would like to make further comment on these matters and to finally clarify the point I was attempting to raise.
It does seem that for whatever reasons, the FAA has become my ‘bête noire’ as far as Airport-Data is concerned. Once again let me state categorically that I have no problems with this registration database – it is what it is – period.
Doug in his later response is suggesting that I have in mind a universal database. No I have not and in any event there would as much chance of this happening as there is of the world agreeing on what to do with climate change. So please let us put on one side this red herring.
… and Doug, please, I did not criticise the FAA in my original posting , in fact I finished with ..
“I hope that this is not seen as controversy or criticism … “
Also …
“…. you apparently do not acknowledge or yet understand that in America, the "Authorities", meaning our Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DO NOT lay down ANY official description of a registered aircraft.â€
But Doug, I do (that is to say as much as anyone does!) and fail to understand how you have come to this conclusion.
The second point relates to the naming of aircraft. Despite all that Rob said in his earlier contribution, I can assure you that aircraft are not renamed in our neck of the woods. He talks of Lisunov and Showa DC3’s. These airframes were produced in commercial quantity production by these two companies and rightly retain the names of these manufacturers as with others such as F-16’s produced by General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Fokker, SABCA, etc, despite significant numbers of diehards who believe all F-16’s should be regarded as GD products. On the other hand the production of Tiger Moths and Spitfires during WW2 took place at car factories, etc, across the UK but the names and designations remained – I digress!
The renaming of aircraft does not happen across here; the very idea of a Joe Bloggs HF8C (Spitfire) would have Douglas Bader turning in his grave and riots at Duxford – it just wouldn’t happen. Yet this has nothing to do with the meritorious work of individual aircraft restorers celebrated here by magazine articles and Airshow attendances. I applaud their work just as much as any other aviation enthusiast.
Let me express my wishes more definitively!
Using one of the two examples in my original posting, anyone inputting “North American T-2B Buckeye†into the search field would not pick up on Sanders Wiley C Jr / NA T2B and this may be the very airframe they are seeking.
All I was trying to suggest was that if the database contained additional fields where the previous identity of N27WS could be entered, then regardless of the renaming of any such airframes, this search would reveal ALL Buckeyes and the existing data that each entry provides. The full and detailed past history is not necessary; I just would like to see a linkage to the airframes basic previous identity. Nothing to change about its present identity, no effect upon its FAA listing, just some help for those who may wish to delve a little into the past. A souped up Mustang flying the air show circuit is indeed a fitting tribute to the owner/pilot but there is also an interest in the occasion when another pilot may have been at the controls, perhaps fighting for his country. Why not provide a linkage?
Ultimately the conclusion/decision lies with Site Admin but my thanks to all who have contributed to the discussion.
… and finally!
This may not be the right place, so forgive me this once!
Doug, if you haven’t yet identified your Unknown Learjet, it is as you say a Learjet 45, and the missing data is reg N4DA, cn 45-283.
Blue skies all!