Dazed767
Topic Author
Posts: 4968
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 12:30 pm

What's the point? The upload page says:

"Registration:
Registration number ONLY! If you don't know the registration, leave empty."


There are 92 photos of N***** ranging from Saab340s, 727s, DC10s, and 747's! God knows how many G-****, F-****, etc photos there are. It's happened to me as well. I leave it blank for a reason, because I don't know the reg#. Obviously if it's an airline from the U.S.A, it will probably have an N reg#. Why do some people feel there needs to be something for a registration if it's not even complete? I find it annoying, but that's just my opinion. Just thought I'd bring this up again.

Justin
 
LOT767-300ER
Posts: 8526
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2001 12:57 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 12:35 pm

Errrrrrr?

Obviously if you cant see the reg or didnt get it then you leaver it blank.....
 
res
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 8:53 am

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 12:48 pm

Yeah, i dont see what the big accomplishment is...it really does not change anything about the photo at all. I see a lot of entries that look like N***AA for american airlines...well, that really doesnt help much.
FLY NAVY
 
yevgeny
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 2:17 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:18 pm

This is DEAD END LINK

Yevgeny
 
Alaskaairlines
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 12:28 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:36 pm

I agree with you 100% Justin, I actually was planning to start a thread about this issue. There is just no point to it!

-Dmitry
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 5:17 pm

I believe that the corrections editor once said that was what should be done. Check out this thread, and notice particularly the text from Southflite that I've cut and pasted...

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/aviation_photography/read.main/32347/

The deal with the *** registrations is that we'd rather have a partial registration than none at all ... simple as that. Airport overview and window view photos generally wouldn't have a rego filled in, but if there's an aircraft in the photo we'd like something in the rego field, even if it's just a pattern/template of what the rego could be. You'd be surprised how many of those *** regos lead people to examine the photo closely and find some identifying mark to positively ID the aircraft.

So, if you don't like the addition of N*****, have a moan or a whinge about the corrections editor - it'll make a change from screener bashing  Acting devilish

Andy

There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 5:28 pm

Hi!
Guilty again!
I have this thread Andy mentioned in mind during screening and when i see an empty rego field i add as much as possible.
Guys its better this way then getting a badinfo rejection isnt it  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Peter
-
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 10:54 pm

Amazing isn't it? Screeners do something folks don't like and we get a topic as long as your arm and the rhetoric continues no matter what we say.

As soon as its mentioned in this topic that its the corrections editor that has decreed that unknown registrations should be entered as N***** everyone goes quiet!

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Dazed767
Topic Author
Posts: 4968
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:33 pm

God forbid if I ever got a badinfo rejection for not having a reg.... but I'll save that for another post if need be Big grin

The deal with the *** registrations is that we'd rather have a partial registration than none at all

Then the "leave blank if unknown" for the reg# on the upload page needs to be changed then, since that rule does not seem to apply anymore.
 
flpuck6
Posts: 2047
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 1999 12:32 am

RE: N***** Registrations

Fri Sep 27, 2002 11:49 pm

I think the asteriks look horrendously unprofessional. Or are we not aiming for professionalism?

If someone wants to scrutinze the photo, then they can and they'll send in the information to fill out the reggie. The N***** doesn't motivate me to open it up and look more carefully especialy when the reggie is clearly not visible in any form. It doesn't take a genius to know that an Air France reggie starts with F- or than a US-carrie starts with an N-

Justin has a point there. The "leave blank if unknown" for the reggie on the upload page needs to be modified if the corrections editor has told us a partial reggie is better than nothing.

-Chris
Bonjour Chef!
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Sat Sep 28, 2002 12:06 am

Flpuck6 said: It doesn't take a genius to know that an Air France reggie starts with F- or than a US-carrie starts with an N-

Badexamples Big grin Big grin

Actually, several Air France 747s were operated with N registrations for quite some time, and I'd bet I can find one or two US carriers with non-N regs on the database too!  Acting devilish

And thereby, I guess, is illustrated one of the points southflite was trying to make.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Guest

RE: N***** Registrations

Sat Sep 28, 2002 1:31 am

I'm totally with Justin and Chris on this...Three points:

1. Peter sez: "Guys its better this way then getting a badinfo rejection isnt it".

Yes, I would have to agree there. But why would a photo be rejected if you don't know the reg? It says if you don't know it to leave it blank.

2. IMHO it makes the photographer look unprofessional.

3. Andy sez: "Actually, several Air France 747s were operated with N registrations for quite some time"

True, and that leads me to this point...Take a look at this photo of mine that the N***** was added to:
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Brian Stevenson - SPOT THIS!



Now, speaking hypothetically, couldn't this aircraft been leased from a company w/ a F or EI or any other prefix reg? So how would you know for sure that a a/c is truly a N reg?

I honestly think that a strong majority of photographers would be in favor of doing away with this.

Just my take,
Brian
 
res
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 8:53 am

RE: N***** Registrations

Sat Sep 28, 2002 3:24 am

Good point, Brian. I've never agreed with the asterisk addition.
FLY NAVY
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Sun Sep 29, 2002 8:59 pm

Yeah, Brian and actually that you need get a longer zoom with more than of 2000mm zoom with the good shot by the 37,000 feet into the your flight, ok? This is your point it out about with the photography to do. And also, I can do see with the your photo of US Airways shuttle were good shot as for yourself, huh? You can't see it with the reg. number on the aircraft by Airbus A320.  Sad Why you could not tell us with the friends of into a.net? Well, later!

Regards,

Scott W.
 
RoastedNutz
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2001 12:18 pm

RE: N***** Registrations

Wed Oct 02, 2002 3:08 am

Yeah I think the **** suffix on the registration is a load of bull****

 Laugh out loud

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests