Talk:IMPDb: Frequently Seen Aircraft

Addition

Nice idea this page!

For the moment I've pointed 4 cases in the pictures I've provided, but in two of them the aircraft appears twice only , so not ready to be list yet.
F-BCBC Morane Saulnier MS.317 seen in Adieu Philippine and L'ennemi dans l'ombre
F-OGES De Havilland DHC-6 Twin Otter in Agathe et Martha , Dortoir des Grandes and Les naufragés de l'ile de la tortue
F-BHRL Sud Aviation SE 210 Caravelle III "Dauphiné" in Le tigre aime la chair fraiche and Jeunes filles en extase
SNCAN Nord 1002 Pingouin II in 633 Squadron and Mosquito Squadron
Maybe some other cases are to be found out? Sixcyl 12:08, 10 March 2011 (MST)

Kooshmeister

The page was set up after a request/suggestion by Kooshmeister. He has on his page a list of helicopters that are also frequented. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 13:04, 10 March 2011 (MST)

I too think this is a great idea and feel it could really add to the site and make it fun. If there are other ideas, let's here them. The forum is a great place for that stuff. I think the IMPDb: Aircraft Crashes page could be real fun too. I need to get on that on of these days. - Tobin Lee 19:14, 10 March 2011 (MST)

Looking good so far! :) - Kooshmeister

Wow looking good Koosh! Keep up the great work! - Tobin Lee 03:50, 11 March 2011 (MST)

Direct link

A direct link to this page would be appreciated, wouldn't be? Sixcyl 02:23, 12 March 2011 (MST)

That, if you don't know their registration numbers, I'd advise against listing them. Also a mention of their their livery and decoration would be nice. - Kooshmeister

It might be your point of view, but not mine, the page is about "frequently Seen Aircraft" whatever its registration is known or not. Otherwise I agree with you about livery/decoration mentions. Sixcyl 04:47, 12 March 2011 (MST)

Direct link will be set up in due course when the page has 'matured' a bit more and all the issues are resolved. To make sure the site is as accurate as possible I think only positively identified aircraft should be included on this list, part of the reason for introducing serial numbers. If you believe a specific example, without an identification, should be included then it can be discussed here first. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 11:31, 12 March 2011 (MST)

Dispensed with description of aircraft's role(s)

Keeping it as just registration, serial, movie and what livery or insignia if any they've got. - Kooshmeister

If i'm right in what you're saying - I agree with no specific section for aircraft's role. This information can be found by going to the page of the production it was in. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 11:31, 12 March 2011 (MST)

Deletion?!!!

What's this boorish behavoiur M.Kooshmeister? ... You could pay attention on the other admins work here! what permitt you to delete it.... Sixcyl 05:11, 12 March 2011 (MST)

I gave my reason; you listed it by type and not registration number which was neithe rprovided nor could be gleaned from the screenshots. I admit I acted hastily but still, I stand by my reasoning. - Kooshmeister

I don't want to be rude, as I understand, you might dislake the mix between registration and aircraft types. In such a way, I've add a new column "Aircradt type" , that gives (up to me) a clearest presentation. Have add too, comments on deliveries. Sixcyl 07:17, 12 March 2011 (MST)

Significant deletion of another user's contribution should only be done after a constructive discussion over the issues. Other edits should be justified in the comments box at the bottom of the edit. I like the addition of the 'Aircraft type' column - this is the sort of thing we are looking for on the site to help make it better. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 11:31, 12 March 2011 (MST)

True but unless we have the registration number I don't think it should be listed, which is why I deleted the SNCAN as we don't know its registration number. - Kooshmeister

Also, I wanna point out the only contribution I deleted was my own. Although Sixcyl suggested it, I am the one who added it. Therefore I undid my own work, essentially, in removing SNCAN as a candidate. - Kooshmeister

Discussion? What discussion for?

Seems there's no discussion possible! and some people, here, says WHAT THE RULES ARE without any arguments for justifications and without taking account of each others opinions neither!... Is there any arguments for limiting a starting list at 3 ? ... I'm not very glad to see my work deleted twice, without any explanations... Could Tobin gives his opinion too? Sixcyl 09:13, 12 March 2011 (MST)

Discussion's can be started by anyone. Admins have more flexibility and freedom in their contributions because of their history on the site and proven record. The reason this page isn't publicly advertised as such is because all these sorts of decisions need to discussed. 3 was a starting point, MY reasons being that 2 isn't 'frequently seen' and in many cases consists of archive or secondary footage. Where there are 2, a comment can be made on the page pointing this out. One of the thoughts behind this page are to identify those aircraft that are commonly used in the film industry and to consider the different ways in which they are used.

Your contributions haven't been deleted completely, just hidden from browser view, and the explanation was given in the edit comment. They were hidden precisely for the reason that the number 3 has not been definitively decided yet, and the information can be easily restored. Tobin, I know, has difficulty being as active on the site nowadays, but I'm sure he'll give his opinion when he does find time. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 11:31, 12 March 2011 (MST)

I think two appearances is enough, really, if the aircraft plays a major role both times, but this is just my personal opinion. - Kooshmeister

Thanks for these replies both of you Kooshmeister and BThebest. I don't see the point in distinguishing aircrafts that are registered and those that aren't? as long as the presentation allows a clear and attractive page. The aim of the page is "Aircrafts frequently seen" in movies, and I personnally find interesting to have such a page for all kinds of aircrafts whatever its role in the film. Archive pictures are of as much interest for me as any other pictures.Sixcyl 07:07, 13 March 2011 (MDT)

The problem with the registration issue is that you can't 100% positively identify the aircraft, and therefore can't, necessarily, say that it was the exact same aircraft in both movies. This is what the categories are for. I think the rule should be if there is no registration then it must be agreed, here, first that they are the same. My point with the archive footage was a bit blurry and probably not relevant - there is nothing wrong with it. If the general consensus is that 2 appearances is enough then, as it is a community project, that is fine. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 09:28, 13 March 2011 (MDT)

Wow what a great and active topic. Tim and I talk often and understands my vision for this website. The change from 3 to 2 looks to have been taken care of and I approve. I think we should have the registrations however. - Tobin Lee 00:45, 14 March 2011 (MDT)

Unregistered aircraft

From the screenshots provided in the production's pages, I agree that the Re-fuelling and Pingouin aircraft are indeed the same. The Hawker Hunter however, I am not convinced so have left it out for the moment until we reach an agreement. Bthebest - IMPDb Administrator 09:34, 13 March 2011 (MDT)

Would this also apply to, say, modified aircraft like Blue Thunder, whose registration we don't know? - Kooshmeister

Order of listing?

I edited the page so the registration numbers are listed in order numerically/alphabetically, just 'cause I'm a stickler for organization. It occurred to me after this however that prior to my edit they'd been listed by number of appearances apparently. Which is better? - Kooshmeister