Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3770 posts, RR: 20 Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2080 times:
It seems it's difficult to get a rejection for wrong paint right now
Mark's comparison with the Bahraini Hawks is a good one. But on the other hand, I'm seeing an aircraft with British military markings and a British military serial, which is what normally counts.
Then again it's really not a 'UK - Air Force' aircraft.
Maybe one of the database editors can step in.
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1605 posts, RR: 64 Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1981 times:
I am not 100% certain of the answer but I take this view...
It is carrying an RAF serial and roundel, one that I do not believe will be re-issued so UK Airforce would do. A comment in the comments field would be most appropriate, essential in fact about where it is going to go.
I would not dream of rejecting for that and a comment to the screener of what you have done and why would help us.
You could try for further advice from Editors@airliners.net
As to the potential double, that is a more thorny problem and I would not make a decision one way or the other without the opinions of others. It is a new aircraft, and a subtly different motive and just, only just, the other side of the aircraft. As you realise yourself, this is a fine balance as it is undoubtedly part of a sequence though due to rarity I would tilt towards acceptance.....but please don't hold me to it !!!!
Hope this helps
Dlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 506 posts, RR: 6 Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1911 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
It carries the insignia of the RAF and an RAF serial number, so for now, its UK - Air Force. All of the Danish EH101s have gone through this too. One of us will have to go in and fix the Bahraini Hawks.
You might thinks so. I don't upload many pics. On my last trip I uploaded 6 in total and 4 were rejected. My upload limit is down on what it used to be. I just don't want to suffer a rejection because of incorrect info due to strict upload rules. I appreciate those that have offered advice. I'd rather upload here to be honest but there's no denying that other sites are more user friendly in certain aspects.
747438 From UK - England, joined Jan 2007, 820 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1889 times:
Quoting 9V (Reply 9): You might thinks so. I don't upload many pics.
It doesn't matter how many pics you upload !
You seem to have thrown your toys out of the pram simply because out of 149 views, no one has come forward with the info you asked for. So you "bumped" the thread (which I believe is against forum rules) to gain attention.
You then post a reply to me, which seems to court symapthy. You totally ignore the fact that Dendrobatid and Dlednicer have posted the info you asked for and don't bother to thank them !
Dlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 506 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1852 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Hey guys grow up. This is a hobby.
First, pictures are rarely rejected for info, especially nitpicking about what the airline is for aircraft that haven't been delivered yet. The screeners don't delve into the info too deeply - I recently fixed a Dassault Mirage identified as a P-51!
Second, while rejections are a blow to one's pride and ego, one shouldn't overgeneralize. I once had 8 rejections in one weekend and felt like crap. I decided to learn from this and worked to improve my quality. My acceptance rate peaked at 90%, but has recently slumped to 70%.
Third, us editors are busy fixing the db. We try to get to questions in a timely manner, but sometimes we have distractions. If you want quicker answers, e-mail us directly.