Warbird Information Exchange

I wonder how recent they consider "recent" to be. I also know of at least one DC-3 that when I searched it on Flightaware a while back, it showed up on there, with a brief blip of an implied flight a couple years ago, but has actually been static for many years.

I updated the DC-3 list just a couple days ago, adding two (N844TH and C-GOOU), but I had to go back in just now and remove one (N141PR, as I found that is the same airframe that is now C-GOOU).

You have to be cautious using flightaware, just for fun I put in the tail number of my Ercoupe, it showed I had made a 20 min flight in the Barstow area, thing is, I have never flown in that area, and I have never been in the area with the Ercoupe, and it was not even airworthy at the time.

_________________
Matt Gunsch, A&P, IA, Warbird maint and restorations
Jack, You have Debauched my sloth !!!!!!
We tried voting with the Ballot box, When do we start voting from the Ammo box, and am I allowed only one vote ?
Check out the Ercoupe Discussion Group on facebook

Kermit Weeks bought this one and it was reregistered, with the same marks, on July 10 last year and is current. I think it needs a bit of work before it flies again, however!

_________________
Zac in NZ
#avgeek, modelbuilder, photographer, writer. Callsign: "HANDBAG".
https://linktr.ee/zacyates

"It's his plane, he spent the money to restore it, he can do with it what he wants. I will never understand what's hard to comprehend about this." - kalamazookid, 20/08/2013
"The more time you spend around warbirds the sooner you learn nothing, is simple." - JohnB, 24/02/22

Thank you Zac!

A couple of months ago I was walking my dog and I noticed a very low 787...heading East at about 2-3000 agl. Odd to see a jetliner that low.
I'm about 20 miles east of the nearest airline field, so it wasn't inbound or outbound from that.

I returned home and looked it up, it was no surprise that it was listed as a Boeing test flight.

The odd part was looking at the FA map.
It showed the aircraft several miles SW of where I saw it, easy to judge since their map had it West of a nearby highway...whereas when it flew directly over me, I was well east of the highway. Additionally, its online track was SW-NE, whereas when I saw it, it was heading due East.

So don't believe everything you read or see.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Flightaware doesn't pretend to be anything that it isn't. As the site clearly explains, its sweet spot is tracking IFR flight planned scheduled commercial flights. In an attempt to provide what info it can about other types of flights, it has scattered receivers around the country/world to pick up anyone else who is squawking. Think what a task this is. Most flights evade its detection entirely, no doubt. Others may be picked up just for a moment, and the telemetry and even the tail number might be incorrect or incomplete. Or it might pick up an aircraft at a couple of different times and do a best-guess but incorrect interpolation as to its route.

Despite all this, it is impressive what it can pick up in some of the better covered areas.

August

Not totally true August. FlightAware still receives the majority of its data directly from ATC radars (not just in the US). It then supplements this with the various ADS-B networks to pick up aircraft not being tracked by radar.

The disconnect comes from the fact that both the FAA and some operators are able to intentionally offset and/or obscure their data on both the radar and the ADS-B. When you see a track that appears several miles offset, just remember that most likely that is the case. All radar-only/radar-primary tracks are also delayed by up to 15 minutes from real time for security reasons (that's an FAA thing, not FlightAware). Also, raw data tracks from non-ADS-B sources can be offset because for various reasons, including the ground receivers. MLAT tracks are especially notorious for this. MLAT is usually non-IFR flights with Mode-S transponders or military IFF transponders. You will see these most prominently on the ADSBExchange website. The more ground receivers that can "see" the transponder/IFF, the more accurate the track, but if they're low level (like in the case above) there may only be 2 or 3 sites picking it up at any given time, so the positioning will be much less reliable.

The Bearcat hit the extinguisher and veered into the T-6. This was actually a ground collision, not just a flyaway prop blade.

Probably worth noting that Spitfire Mk.VIII MV154 is now based in the UK at Duxford.

Thank you Fury, it will be right to change that. I've heard that a Spitfire from the States is recently now back in the UK again too, as of this summer, but waiting to make the change until it's in the public domain/flying in the UK.

Down a B-25 and T-33,

Although, I think the T-33 is much more easily repairable than the B-25. This September has been horrible for airplane crashes, especially fatal ones, so I still take these two as near wins since neither involved fatalities.

Did some float flying to Birches on Moosehead Lake today for lunch, the DC-3 is still there on floats.

Phil

_________________
A man's got to know his limitations.

Dakota ZS-CRV flew over my house today .. it is currently the only piston Dak flying in South Africa
Pic taken at an earlier flypast in 2015

Why is the Goose not on the list? How many are still going?