Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:55 am

I have on many different occasions now had photos rejected for incorrect information and been advised that they want the shots and to resubmit with the correct information. After checking the information and uploading again I then have then rejected for photographic reasons. I have sent comments to the screeners advising them that I am reloading them on their request.

What a wind up, especially when the critisism on the second rejection is completely different to the first
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:59 am

Isn't that message just a generic keep-your-hopes-up confidence booster in the rejection email?
What the FUTT?
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9175
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:00 am

You are comparing apples to oranges. Once a screener sees "badinfo" I am sure they are done screening that photo, and they kick it back to the photog with a badinfo reject.

It would be unrealistic to list all of the reasons a photo might not make it, when all it takes is one...talk about mega long que waits, could you imagine?
 
Jkw777
Posts: 4427
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:15 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:02 am

Hi there Brian,

I suspect the main reason behind this is different screeners screening your pics. It sucks, I know.

I don't think this is inconsistency, different screeners have different eyes!

I personally have edited images, left them for one day before uploading then looking back and deleting about 5-10 even though they looked spot on the previous day.

Get the info right in the first place and you will cut out the chance of having them rejected.

Better luck next time matey.

Cheers,

Justin Wood  Smile
[email protected] or +447751242989
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:04 am

Thought you were talking to me for a second, Justin! haha

Brian. With an I. You ROCK!  Smokin cool
What the FUTT?
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:05 am

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!  Sleepy

Discussed many times before... If we see badinfo alongside the thumbnail, its not worth investing the time opening the large version of the image for close scuitiny. There is a VERY clear solution to this problem though and its in your hands - get the info right FIRST time!

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:22 am

On the flip side, I've gotten "badinfo" rejects where the aircraft type is correct, reg and serial are correct, the date is correct, the categories selected are correct, and the only problem was that I misspelled the name of a town the a/c was in by 1 letter. A town with something like 500 residents... and no personal comment from the screener. Took several of my friends to figure that one out and a trip to the town sign to be sure (couldn't find jack on the internet about it).

I'm no big fan of the rejection reasons list. It's not very correction-friendly.

-Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:32 am

I couldn't care now, this site is so far up it's own backside, I couldn't give a sh"t. I understand the importance of good information and excellent shots. But lets be real about this whole subject, airlines.net seems to think that they own aviation photography, They don't. I think that complete amateurs are screening nowdays. I know this as I have been informed that the delay in screening has been caused by training new screeners.

Lets stop being bullied and start publishing creative shots, the usual crap formula that airliners.net uses is getting a bit long in the tooth now.

Come on guys lets start shooting

 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4947
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:33 am

hey guys, someone else had this idea in another thread and I think its a good idea. If the only reason a photo would be rejected (it meets all other standards) is badinfo then it should be accepted pending photographer correcting said error, and placed into a special quick queue. "info" rejections should be treated different than photo or processing rejections.

bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
707CMF
Posts: 4698
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 5:39 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:37 am

Well, Bruce, IIRC, you gave the idea, I suggested some improvements to it. But Andy is right as well here. If he rejects directly the picture for badinfo without checking the picture itself (and he is entitled to do it that way, mind you), then the idea would not be implementable

Cheers,

707
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4947
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:54 am

Well then Screeners should check all photos even if they have bad info. Hey, it ain't easy - screening these days is like a full time job seeing the huge numbers of pics waiting and the standards to uphold.

And when the 20D hits shelves, up goes the queue  Sad

bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:14 am

"And when the 20D hits shelves, up goes the queue "

I doubt it. All the people that wanted an inexpensive DSLR purchased the 300d or d70. The 20d will be a replacement or backup for a lot of people, or upgrades to d30, d60, 10d crowd.
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:16 am

Why are people talking about cameras and not me.

Only joking
flightuk
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:54 am

Bad info is a pet peeve of mine!
(This is especially true of USAF registrations!!!! - want to get on my bad side, don't invest enough time in looking up USAF registrations).

If there is bad info, I will look at your shot....

If it is:
a) 100% perfect, I might invest in correcting it for you.
b) Really poor, I will reject it with all rejection reasons plus bad info

If you are:
c) A seasoned uploader, you should know better - if also b) I'll reject
d) A newbie, with a b) quality image, I'll even invest the time to send you a personal email thereby giving you benefit of the doubt

If you get more than 5 USAF registrations wrong, you will get a personal email from me listing the many, many USAF registration sites available for you to get-it-right.

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
bigphilnyc
Posts: 3874
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:43 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:06 pm

Strange. When I read the very first post, this is what I read:

I have on many different occasions now had fools post the same whiny crap and they have been advised that the screeners only get demotivated from screening and we all want the posts to stop. After checking the forum rules and informing again, I then have their posts appear again for reasons of ignorance. I have sent comments to the fools in question advising them of the rules https://www.airliners.net/discussions/rules.main?confirm=no and that I am reposting responses like this to them upon their useless posts.

What a wind up, especially when the criticism is the same stuff over and over and is completely counterproductive.


-Phil
Phil Derner Jr.
 
User avatar
Kereru
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 8:19 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 12:16 pm

Good things take Time.
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4947
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:22 pm

I disagree, Jeff. the prices of used 10D (and the ones that came before it) will come down as those people upgrade, so they will be even more within reach of po' folks.

bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:28 pm

What ever.  Big grin Makes little difference either way I look at it. If your concerned about the size of the queue, then I guess it's just something additional you'll have to deal with.
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:41 pm

My bad info was a reply to a secondary reply. But we never get threads here that change from the original question.
 Smile

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
cathay112
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 3:58 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:25 pm

Flightuk, you'll go a long way here at airliners.net with comments like you've flooded us with lately.........

NOT!
 
kc7mmi
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:07 pm

Is there a known ratio of how many shots actually get accepted for a given number of submitted photos? A rough number will do ie. (1/4, 1/2, 5/10, 5/20)...
 
cicadajet
Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 1:54 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 4:15 pm

<< Is there a known ratio of how many shots actually get accepted for a given number of submitted photos? A rough number will do ie. (1/4, 1/2, 5/10, 5/20)...>>


From the upload FAQ, updated Oct 2003:
"We receive many hundreds of photos daily and reject about 50 to 70 percent of them."


 
FiveDollarFun
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 4:29 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:10 pm

I learned a long, long time ago -

When someone gives me respect - I will give it back.

If I was a "screener" on this site - I would ignore all the crap remarks in this forum, take off my pantys, put on my boxers, and screen photos !!!!

To hell with all the crybabys.

I made a remark a week or so ago about the queve moving slow.

My remark was a little bit misunderstood.

Airliners.net needs a few "terminator screeners" to erase the crap - no more power than to terminate (erase) crap - therefore letting the screeners of higher respect and ability to sort through the photos that belong here...
 
sulman
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:16 pm

Fivedollarfun,

It wouldn't work. The existing system is fine. I've had rejections that I've felt were inconsistent, I've had rejections that I've felt have been harsh. So what? All of that has been outweighed by the balance of decisions being fair, and my results improving.

This is Johan's playing field. We're all guests here, and you have to accept house rules.
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:35 pm

Fivdollarfun,

Not sure what you mean by us needing "terminator screeners" or how you decide which screeners have "higher respect" seeing as many of the screeners don't post here. However, I fundamentally believe that we do at least need to be aware of issues that are being debated here, as some of these debates do impinge on what we do - none of us are so old or wise that we are not able to learn anything more, despite what Flightuk thinks!

If you accept that we need to at least read the forums, then it comes down to individual character and personality as to whether we respond to inane comments like those made by Flightuk - sadly, some of the screeners won't have anything to do with this forum anymore, because of the garbage that gets posted here from time to time. Whilst I totally agree that respect given deserves respect back, I personally also subscribe to the philosophy of fighting fire with fire, especially when the originator is unjustified in being so harsh in the first place. In the "good" old days, we screeners were meant to be demure and ingore all the crap that was thrown at us, but I've been around here long enough (and, maybe surprisingly, care too much) that I'm not prepared to just let accusations like Flightuk made sit on the forums without some sort of response.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 9:05 pm

Isn't everyone afraid of upsetting the screeners. I got quite upset with being messed about by having shots rejected and told to reload with the correct information, only to have it rejected again for a different reason.

Can a memeber of the crew tell me if I am banned as Skymonster was looking for the ban button.

Cheers
Flightuk

P.S the concorde pictures are not mine. Skymonster why don't you show my rejections to everyone
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 10:22 pm

Flightuk said Can a memeber of the crew tell me if I am banned

Why do you care whether you're banned or not - you said " I couldn't care now, this site is so far up it's own backside, I couldn't give a sh*t"

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9175
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:33 pm

That was the "Screeners are crap" thread, looks like it got deleted Big grin
 
Cpn360
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 7:48 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 1:24 am


Brian,

Got a few questions for you:

-It's the second time in a few days that you bring up something about new screeners ... Where is that info based on??? IMO, you got problems with comprehension, as Peter U. told you last Friday that NO DECISION ON NEW SCREENERS has taken yet!
- What are you trying to achieve whit this kind of posts? I only can advise to spend more time in the preparation of photo's then waist your time with this kind of s*.

Period

Thank you

Serge
There is more in life then Airliners.net... Belgae Gallorum Fortissimi
 
kc7mmi
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:26 am

Flightuk,
If you don't like the way the system works here there are plenty of other websites around that you can upload to. I know you want to upload to the best, but posting threads like this isn't going to help you. I'm surprised the screeners and mods haven't removed you from the forum and your pics from the queue. How can you be so bitter towards this site and still upload?

-Your brother from another mother
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:31 am

That's my very point. This site is the best in the world only to be let down by a handful of poor screeners. Do you think it is acceptable that a screener should threaten to ban people, use others members work to try and criticise others, which was accepted by a screener in the first place, how ironic.

 
IL76
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:49 am

Flightuk... After all the accusations back and forth in this thread, we still haven't seen a single picture you have taken. If you've been a prof for 10 years now (you mentioned this in the deleted thread), why don't you show some of your work? Post a link? I'd love to see these wonderful pictures that the 'crap' screeners didn't appreciate...  Yeah sure
E.
 
kc7mmi
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:52 am

That photo was uploaded four years ago, a.net was much lower quality than it is now. I don't think you should consider what Andy said a threat. I say you're lucky for still being on here and not on a vacation like our good friend Scottysair.
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:56 am

I shall not be continuing with this thread any longer.
Thanks
Brian
 
bigphilnyc
Posts: 3874
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:43 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 3:57 am

Yes, I'd like to see some of these shots as well.

-Phil
Phil Derner Jr.
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4947
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:01 am

In the example that Andy posted above....how the hell did that one get accepted???? OMG that is so far off that even my elderly mother with Cataracts in her eyes could see it!

But heaven forbid you submit a shot with a control tower like Matt Coleman's that is .1 off straight.......and that gets rejected.

What is so special about that concorde? There are tons of awesome Concorde shots. I dont get it.

bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:07 am

bruce check photoid Smile

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
IL76
Posts: 2238
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:07 am

I didn't know JWenting had a brother in the UK...  Yawn
 
ebos
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:48 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:08 am

Flightuk, if you care about the quality of this site, what's your point in posting this tread? Isn't it time to post some of your rejected pictures and ask advice?...

About inconsistency: if you work with a team of 20 screeners, there will be always some kind of inconsistency, but we try hard to minimalize it. With over 50.000 pictures screened every month, there will always be opportunities to discuss about 'inconsistent' decisions, 1%?... while the other 99% of the decisions are consistent. This world is full of inconsistency, you'll have to live with that...

Sven
An-225 stalker: 1 x LUX, 1 x EIN, 1 x DXB, 2 x SHJ, 3 x CGN
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:14 am

Ok I did say that I would no longer take part in this thread. Can someone please tell me how I find out the ID's of my rejected photo's so I can post them here.
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 4:17 am

LOL Ed Smile

What a sad sad thread this is......

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
 
kc7mmi
Posts: 834
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:02 am

 
sulman
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:11 am

All rhetoric, badinfo, badlevel, and badattitude aside, there's some potential in a couple of those.

A slightly cooler head and kinder words could see some good contributions from you Brian.
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
qantas744
Posts: 1658
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 6:25 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:21 am

The EMB shot has at least one dust spot and is soft particularly around the registration area.



Matt
you can't buy time but you can sell your soul and the closest thing to heaven is to rock'n'roll
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:26 am

OK...

Flightuk said: I do care because I am a first class member and pay

You pay for use of the forums, not to upload photos which is free.

Flightuk said: Do you think it is acceptable that a screener should threaten to ban people

Whether acceptable or not, photographers have been banned from uploading photographs when they break the site's photographic rules on a regular basis. However, the precedent has been set as a few photographers have been banned from uploading photographs for various periods of time as a result of their abusive behavior.

Flightuk said: I can't believe a screener has got so involved with this thread, it only reinforces my original point about screeners

I can't believe you expected that we wouldn't get involved. It seems reasonable as far as I'm concerned that we respond in kind when people throw their toys out of the pram in our direction - we do this for free and for fun, not so that we can get abuse thrown at us.

Flightuk said: This site is the best in the world only to be let down by a handful of poor screeners.

Sigh... Here we go again!!!

Its a shame really, because if you stepped back from this and had actually done something about correcting the photographs you've had rejected, you might actually have gotten some of them onto the database by now.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:44 am

And now, an HONEST appraisal of your pics from one individual screener's point of view - a screener who would still screen your pictures entirely fairly and against the same standards as he would judge all others:

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=318farn.jpg

Badinfo (you need an operator name, which you can get if you use the autocomplete function on the upload page). Maybe slightly off-center horizontally, and I'd also like to see a little more unsharp mask but neither may be killers as far as the shot is concerned.

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=F15farnborough.jpg

Badinfo (operator name - again you could get it if you used autocomplete, or read the instructions on how to enter the operator name correctly, or select the operator name from the drop down list). Badangle (needs a rotation clockwise to correct it and make it level)

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=F16falconfarn.jpg

Badinfo (operator name, registration - same comments as previous). Badangle (rotate clockwise to correct)

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=globemaster.jpg

Badinfo (operator name - as above). Otherwise, probable accept.

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Gripenfarn.jpg

Badinfo (operator name, type - as above again). Badsoft (needs somewhat more unsharp mask, but probably correctable)

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=JetProvfarn.jpg

Badinfo (needs an operator name and registration - again, can be had for free from the autocomplete function). Badsoft (in this case, looks too soft to be rescued by unsharp mask, so probably not going to be accepted anyway)

Both Red Arrows shots are Badinfo (operator name) but otherwise look to be OK, although the second is rather off centered and could be rejected for that reason.

https://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=MM7063

Badinfo (operator again - see above). Badangle (needs clockwise rotation to correct and make it level). Badsoft (needs a little more unsharp mask).

Andy

There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:53 am

Andy you're a very good person Smile

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
flightuk
Topic Author
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 11:08 pm

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 6:32 am

Skymonster (Andy) many thanks for even being bothered to look at the shots after all the remarks I have made and thanks for your honesty. Deep down I know I over stepped the mark and apologise for this. I will channel my frustrations more constructively in future.

Thanks again
Brian
 
LHRSIMON
Posts: 1315
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:59 am

RE: Inconsistent Screening Results

Wed Aug 25, 2004 7:11 am

Glad thats all sorted.... Just as a side issue that seems inline with this thread. I was on the mound at PMI a few day ago and it seems that the poor screeners come in for alot of stick... Heres the story

I spoke to some German chap who when i told him i download to A.Net and have 150+ photo ended up giving me 5 minites of how sh#t all the screeners were. And how they don't know a good picture from a bad one. Also that he will never download or look on A.Net anymore as they don't have a clue !!!!

Needless to say he had been given a load of rejections and took offence.....

Why don't they do what i did and just try a bit harder , learn the camera and listen to people on this FORUM...... All you need to remember is don't take offence but TAKE NOTICE !!!!!!

Simon
Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos