Some thoughts from someone whose
helped with some directories but been too scared to do them! (The Warbird Directory with Paul Coggan although the lion's share was done by Geoff Goodall and John Chapman.)
Interesting idea, something I'd like to see, but certainly a
huge undertaking.
The only merit of such a list is to achieve a reasonable 90% coverage in some directions - bits and pieces aren't useful.
I'd be very disappointed if it turned into a US only list, either type or coverage. There's a big wide world out there, filled with interesting aircraft.
Then again Mike Henneger shows what one determined individual can do with his Locator.
For every warbird out there, there's got to be 10 - 50 vintage types. Because they are mostly less rare, less costly* and of less interest to small boys, the coverage is a lot more sketchy than of warbird types. Likewise there are a lot of owners who aren't too keen on their aircraft getting written up, and the same problem that Les Hunt had and Paul Coggan's team certainly had, of owners not wanting dates locations etc published could be an issue.
However, current full type and owner details can be found on line for Australia on the CASA database and CAA database for the UK, whatever owners think, and I'd assume there are similar for other nations like Italy, Germany, Canada, France etc.
The Australian military type database
www.adf-serials.com is an excellent resource, and a format that, IMHO, apart from the use of frames, works better than the Warbird Registry for searching by type etc. There may be issue over the data being able to be pulled, which is why the WR is the way it is. I'd be interested to see what other people thought of the ADF site's format.
One thing they do well is to have 'authors' for each type or 'page'. That system might be worth adopting. I wonder who'd be co-opted for Wacos and Lockheeds?
A smart move, IMHO, would be to start with a few rarer specific types, rather than heading in with the DH-60s and 82 and Piper Cubs. (And I've just realised this has been suggested several times already -
Read the question stupid...) Then it would be possible to show these as evidence of achievement when trying bigger jobs.
Transport types have been well covered by the Survivors books by Roy Blewett. One of the things he's done is to list survivors against production, an interesting percentage statistic!
One other thing would be to adopt the Smithsonian system of ID, rather than the WR version. The Smithsonian (used in Bob Ogdens Museums of the world books, among others) is:
A: Active
C: Under rebuild
D: Derelict
PV: Public view - museum etc
RA: Research accessible - not public view
S: Stored
X: Carries false markings
They can be used in combination, as well. Thus you can have PVAX which tells you a lot about the aircraft in four letters.
Rather than aiming for full or even partial histories by ID, just starting whith a what's where now would be useful, IMHO.
What do people think?
*
Relatively...
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
