Warbird Information Exchange

The thread about The Bee brings up again a frustration I have had since day one with this website, which, by the way, I dearly love and visit daily, usually the first place I go every morning getting online.

Though I am sure the moderators have even less time than we all do, and maybe see no way to keep little details in the registry current and accurate, maybe there is a workable solution.

How about a thread that could be permanently pinned somewhere near the top called Registry Revisions.

WIXERS could go in and post their recommended corrections in a list. Some documentaion would have to be given with sources listed. Verification documentation would be required from at least two other WIXERS with credentials of at least one of the following: a long history of factual imput to the WIX forum, first hand involvement with the airplane, or other established reputation as an author or expert on the type.

After a revision has been verified it could be assigned a revision number pending the actual correction being made. A log could maybe be made listing these revisions as one of the links in the registry. A date could be posted once that log entry has actually been changed.

I know it sounds like more work than the actual changes needed require, but this would provide an organized system and a way for a moderator with an extra half hour of time now and then to go to thiis log, see that a recommended change is warranted, and verified, and just go in and do it as time allows.

Having never run a website maybe I am way out in left field with this but it just seems something could be done. I recommended some changes years ago such as, and including the Paul's P-51C and have never seen them made.

Who has the solution?

We could together make the already wonderful Registry a very reliable and much better place to visit.

With this we could also see a new way for photographs to be contributed documenting many dozens of aircraft in the Registry which currentlt say No Photo Available.

By the way, on the subject of the Registry, I would volunteer to put together a page documenting the known civil registered Timm N2T-1 and Fairchild AT-21 types which I have made a personal study of.


Lowell Thompson
Kellogg, Idaho

Great idea, Lowell. I agree, the registry is in sore need of an update. There are many errors in it. Perhaps Scott can delegate some of the authority to change the registry to some of the more "trusted and senior" members here who have well-established credibility. I'm sure that the last thing Scott wants to do with his limited time, is to correct small errors in the registry. He has enough problems just dealing with day-to-day running of the forum and banning "problem-children".

Maybe volunteers could take on parts (P-51, B-25, etc) of the registry. place an e-mail address on the header of that section of the list which corrections could be sent. The volunteer making corrections would be able to over-see the section they are responsible for and try to keep it updated.


Just a thought

Steve

Awhile back i tried to send in info on my project to www.warbirdregistry.org but it was totally ignored.

_________________
F-84F Simulator Project
www.f-84f.org

The old saying garbage in garbage out applies here. A database is only as good as its data. Having a database full of mistakes is almost worse than having none at all. Then bad information gets propagated to yet more databases and so on. Add to that the fact that many of these aircraft have mixed parts and swapped serial numbers at some point it gets kinda silly to even keep track of the minutae, at least for certain types anyway. Having said that it would really annoy me if I had a restored P-51B/C and people kept saying I chopped up an A-36 to make it.

Good thing to raise, but some background to consider.

The Mods, AFAIK have no control over the registry. The Mod's control is in fact quite limited - For instance, if you look at the header of each sub forum, you'll see most mods only have controls on some forums as well.


Unfortunately that appears to be a hard call for some here. Assessing the relative values of data and making value judgement calls gets little credit, and lots of noise re- 'self appointed experts' and cramping people's 'freedom of speech'...

I'm afraid there are some WIX members whose skill, expertise and approach I respect and value, but that's often not utilisable here at times to to the ability of any clown to flood discussions with irrelevant personal agenda.

Also personal involvement with the aircraft is no guarantee of honesty.

I've been told some obvious whoppers by aircraft owners and crew, face to face, and in print. Sometimes so laughable as to be embarassing.

There are other factors, too, here. For instance, once an aircraft has identity 'x' allocated to it by the government authority, it takes an act of God to get it changed if incorrect - it's easier to ignore. On the other hand, amazingly, some owners have been known to 'trade-up' the identity of an aircraft from a 'didn't see war service' to 'flown by ace x'.

Yes, I know examples, no I'm not going to name names. I'm also not stupid.

You'll note a recent hoo-ha involving a recently banned member and his favourite aircraft. From the data provided, it was easy to draw a conclusion as to the identity of that aircraft. However, that wasn't the poster's desired 'correct' answer, so we were treated to a lot of flailing around. Some of us just walked away. This is a common problem, and when the owner gets shown that what they want to believe is 'x' is actually 'y' they don't tend to be too thankful. WIX doesn't need that grief.

I do, it's on my computer, and it's called the Warbirds Directory.

http://www.warbirdsdirectory.goodall.com.au/

Put together as a primary research effort by Geoff Goodall, it's a required item for any professional in the warbird "who has got what" biz, like myself.

Given the existence of the Directory, there's a problem for the Registry's updating and utilisation - the Registry's a useful quick reference, but I USE the Directory (as do most pros in this field, therefore that eliminates the top-end user base). I don't have my own data to add to the Registry, as I use the Directory. Lifting data from the Directory for the Registry's use would be poor form. Any data I get would go into maintenance of the Directory. Sure I can pass that data on for the Registry's use, but obviously you can see why the existence of a quality paid for database causes issues for the Registry (also based heavily, btw, on earlier editions of the Directory).

As the thread started by Albert Stix on the 'HAF F4U-5NL project 1978' shows, it is possible for a WIX group to work out good data on a couple of aircraft through collaboration, and that's great. However it's the exception rather than the rule. You might also tie this story back to one of my earlier remarks...

I'm not saying that the Registry shouldn't have effort put into it, but just pointing out some of the factors not considered so far, which affect the user and owner bases of it.

Regards,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Some good points, JDK, but is it really that hard to correct some "basic" information in the warbird registry? Confusing an A-36 and a P-51 B/C is a HUGE error. "Data-plate" restorations are an entirely different can of worms.

On the Mustangsmustangs.com website, they have the history of every surviving Mustang in the world. If they can do it, why can't the WIX? Granted, the Registry here doesn't have to be the "complete end-all, be-all, authoritative" source, but we can strive to at least make it accurate as far as basic information.

Obviously things like dataplate serial numbers and Bureau numbers are going to be very divisive, and hotly contested, but why don't we just use whatever the aircraft is registered with for the FAA, CAA, etc.? Or if it's a static museum piece, then it's provenance should be that much easier, since a lot of times the aircraft is not a composite rebuild. I agree that it would be nearly impossible to tell the complete history of an aircraft restored with parts from many different airframes, but I think the Registry can be a little bit more accurate than it is now.

Hi Warbird1, I'm not suggesting it can't or shouldn't be done, but just some other factors. For instance, if I didn't have the Directory, I'd be keen to help and use the Registry. But I don't even keep my own notes, now, just use the Directory, which for reasons of copyright, means I won't pass large lumps of data on from there. That goes for a lot of the more experienced people in the field.

But, as you say, it can be done.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

I think a 'Wiki' - type system would work best....

Paul, I was going to suggest a moderated wiki as well.

Any database compiled by a small to medium sized group of individuals will contain many errors. You can be sure that the Warbird Directory, though more accurate than the Registry (which is essentially a haphazardly expanded and updated copy of a prior edition of the Directory), is still error-riddled. It also, of course, was inevitably out of date even before its release.

A database maintained by a small to medium sized group of individuals also cannot be kept up to date. Many of us know what happens when we submit photos, updates or corrections to the Registry. Unless it is an area that Scott is currently working on or has solicited contributions, it is a black hole. This reflects the fact that Scott is human and has a finite amount of time and energy. These limitations would not apply to the warbird community at large.

The tradeoff with wikis is always that any clown can screw up entries, but wikis have developed ways to deal with that, including diligent moderation. Although time consuming, diligent moderation (i.e. mod/owner pre-approval of each update) is at least more feasible than having the site owner personally make the updates. A wiki probably will never be as "authoritative" as a directory compiled by a few "experts" (the point of my quote marks being that all experts in this field are self-styled), but traded off against that is the much greater participation, including by people familiar with specific airframes; the opportunity for community review and policing of accuracy; constant and instant updating, so that every first flight, accident, and sale would likely appear within hours; and likely many more photos, again available instantly upon contribution.

Whether the wiki would end up being more useful to even the top-end users than the Directory would be an interesting experiment. Although I am frequently accused of elitism, my money would be on the populist approach in this case.

August