PUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54 Posted (9 years 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 22824 times:
From time to time the urban legend that c/n are mandatory when uploading is coming up. This is not true!!!
The mandatory thing is the use of the autofill function on the upload page!
If there is one ore more c/n showing up then the usage of the field is mandatory! If you dont get a c/n by autofill the usage of the field is NOT mandatory.
The help text says basically the same:
=== Filling-in of this field is optional, but it is really appreciated when you do an effort to find the cn and list it, as the cn is a great tool for cross-referencing and for historical research. When you don't know the cn, leave the field blank.
Code (For civil aircraft)
This field is NOT intended to host things like:
Airline codes (Neither the 2 letter code nor the three letter code)
Names of aicraft like "City of Melbourne"
If a aircraft carries the last two letters of the registration somewhere above the cockpit windows or on the front gear door (like for example British airways, Aeromexico amongst many others) those letters are NOT to be listed in the Code field. This is a very common error happening!!!
Read the help text which is also very clear about what should be put into the field for civil aircraft
=== Other codes that shall be listed in this field are fleetnumbers for civil aircraft when they carry them, show codes for e.g. the Paris and Hannover Air Shows, race- or rallynumbers, or any other identity not being a registration, construction number, or name on the outside of the aircraft (so, no SELCAL codes). Individual names painted on aircraft like e.g. "City of Melbourne" shall be listed in the Remarks field if you want to include them.
Thanks for reading and following this posting and of coure the help text.
Jaspike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 1 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 22785 times:
Re. CNs, every registration for the A318, A319, A321 & A340 now has a CN. So in theory, there should be no uploads of these aircraft without CNs because using auto complete is compulsory.
Also, I recently went through all Boeing CNs (and some Douglas) changing them all from the incomplete 5 digit ones, to how they should be displayed (CN/LN). So the drop down lists aren't showing the 5 digit ones, so again (in theory) there shouldn't be too many uploads of the 5 digit CNs. There are still a few in the database for various reasons.
Tameteora From Netherlands, joined Oct 2004, 230 posts, RR: 41
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 22764 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting Jaspike (Reply 2): every registration for the A318, A319, A321 & A340 now has a CN. So in theory, there should be no uploads of these aircraft without CNs because using auto complete is compulsory.
One exception of course being any aircraft (new or rare) that isn't in the database yet. Although it isn't mandatory for these aircraft, we'd really appreciate it if you make every effort to find the cn (and other information) for those aircraft as well.
Malandan From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 22717 times:
Because of my particular aircraft interests, I would prefer that c/n's were made mandatory but these are often difficult if not impossible to locate, particularly with older military machines.
But may I raise through this thread, hoping it has not been previously discussed, the question of making some of the upload fields truly mandatory.
For example, why could it not be that the autofill field must be accessed before it is even possible to make entries in any of the other download page fields.
To take this even further, changes were made to the 'Country/location' fields such that you can now only fill them in by accessing the view menu. Could this not be extended to the 'Aircraft Type' and 'Airline' fields. Clearly not all required information is currently present in the database and a 'fill it in yourself' choice would be required, but at least it would point persons, particularly newcomers, in the right direction and toward a good practice data flow.
Such changes may indeed contribute to a reduction in the presently high numbers of photographs awaiting screening by more 'right first time' supporting information.
My interest lies in the future as I am going to spend the rest of my life there!