Views of posted photos

Hi John,

I just took a look. Nice quality shots. I am partial to military and antique/classic shots, but I appreciate good photography nevertheless on any plane!

I try to take a look at galleries off and on, but sometimes I don't have the time to. I'm guessing most people are like that. Subscribing to the feed lets us see things as they are posted and I know many do that (I did for a while but got toooooo far behind too often!).

Keep posting!

Glenn

Some of us are too busy padding our own numbers here to look at others... ok j/k

When I come on the site and they show a random shot of a plane on the site and it looks interesting I will open it up and see what else that photographer takes.

Every once in a while I go through some of the at least top 15 photographers to see what they added lately. For example I been checking Doug Robertson and Mark Pasqualino's stuff lately since they are posting pictures from Oshkosh - I sooo wanted to go to Oshkosh this year.

I know what you are saying - like airliners.net/myaviation.net has the counter that shows how many times your picture been viewed.

For Daniel,

I have a lot more photos from Oshkosh out of the 2,000 or so shot in nine days there but feel I should not post them. Reasons? Various. Some just don't validly compute to the FAA registry: examples-some were granted as temporary registration for 30 days and the time had expired by date of photograph. Checking back periodically showed no change-i.e., the registration was not extended nor was still valid on date of photograph. Another example, a manufacturer was giving demo rides in a new model, yet that painted registration was for an earlier customer aircraft of same make, apparently still in registration-as if the manufacturer "borrowed" a number to use. Some warbird registrations did not compute correctly, either, and the painted numbers were clear and not misinterpreted by me. As they say, "Photos don't lie". In such cases I do not care to put a photo on the web that "proves" a registration "problem" or "error". I just don't want an owner coming after me. And, it is a question of ethics and reputation. So, some great shots remain off this site. Incidentally, I found the same thing during my Alaska trip in August 2007. I could not upload some photos for similar reasons.

There were, however, some aircraft at Oshkosh that were on the FAA registry validly and not in the A-D database. For these I did some research in my various Janes references and entered all data possible which then created a new page. I only did this after cross-checking the FAA registry. So, there were quite a few shots that did get posted in this manner. Subsequently, I found others' shots of these same aircraft so they were enabled in getting their photos uploaded as a result.

Thankyou Daniel and Glenn for your replies and kind comments, I see from another post that a 'views' count is now available if you click on each individual photo at the bottom of the info' section.

Is this a new feature or have I just not noticed it before? The feature is appreciated and shows that some people are having a look at my shots so that is all the encouragement I need to upload more.

It's a new feature just added to the site.

Welcome to Airport-Data.com.

Ken

Doug,

I came up with those same problems at Sun N Fun, which is a somewhat scaled down OSH in Florida where I have gotten a lot of pictures of aircraft that the registration didn't exist or that the plane didn't match at all - ie a Citation showing up when it was a Piper 32. I figured either FAA didn't catch up yet or that airport-data hadn't caught up yet and they were new regs.

Glenn was mentioning to me about fake regs too on aircraft in sort of an illegal action, but I don't know why anyone would fly an illegal plane to somewhere like Sun N Fun or OSH where there are likely several cameras pointed at these planes or a bunch of British guys writing down numbers in books

You brought up a good point though with the 30 day regs. I often ended up posting data on the site for what I could get from these planes

I was getting a little bit of that at the NBAA static displays too, maybe some of these regs were temp regs as these corporate jets would probably soon be bought by someone else as many were for sale.

Another thing that was interesting is the Dornier CD-2 Seastar used a fake registration while it was parked on display at NBAA. It's real German Reg is D-ICKS, however while it was parked on display it was displayed as D-IOKS - maybe for obvious reasons.

You can see it in these two pictures - there was only one CD-2 at NBAA

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/244541.html

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/236101.html

Hi John

I'm in the UK and enjoy seeing photos from around the world but mostly from the UK particularly from places I hav'nt been to, most of the photos on this site are probable taken on digital cameras but those taken with film are just as interesting. I was lucky about a year ago when my Sisters partner gave me his old digital camera when he got a new one but i will still be uploading some of my old photos from the past, so it does'nt matter what camera you use just share your photos like the rest of us on this site.

P.S. thanks to all of you for the shareing.

Neil

Hi John

Thanks for the comment about my photos, i'm just getting back into aircraft and photography a bit more i find it relaxing. i used to go to a fair few airshows when i was younger but there's to much hustle and bustle for me, Its nice to go to a GA airfield with a cafe and have a cup of tea and take a few photos and chill out so most of my photos will be light aircraft etc. Ther are 16 airfields/airports and a few private strips within 50 miles of me including Heathrow and Gatwick so at some time i may revisit them and shoot some airliners but i definately prefer the smaller airfields Blackbushe and Popham are my favourites.

Neil