You're not logged in.

User Name  Remember me?
Password 
  Register   Lost your password? 
 
> 1 <

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2124
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#56 2007-04-24 18:14 GMT-5 hours    
Ok everyone I need your advice. You've all seen the "Classic Warbirds" category on the home page and there's definitely some great photos there. When I created that category I was thinking of Mustangs, Spitfires, B-17s and so forth. Mostly planes of WWII and prior. Now, I have many people uploading Sabres, Mig-15s, F-104s, etc. etc. I'm not really sure if they belong there. What should be the cut-off timeline to be included in the "Classic Warbirds" category? What criteria?

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

troy


Photographers


 Online status  

 
Posts: 62
Location: Nebraska
Occupation: manufacturing
Age: 53

#58 2007-04-24 19:23 GMT-5 hours    
I really do like the WWII aircraft but also believe their is plenty of room for the other planes that have been out of service for 30 to 35 years. I have a eal hard time not considering Sabre's and Mig 15's as classics. They are very historically significant. I'm personally facing some problems, as the plane I worked on, the F-111F, is a museum peice. I don't feel that old and it seems wierd seeing the LN on F-15's.

Author Message

MHPhotoworks


Photographers
See my 16 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 14
Location: Orange County, CA USA
Occupation: Project Manager
Age: 42

#59 2007-04-24 19:47 GMT-5 hours    
Good discussion! When I think "classic", I think "piston". But like Troy said, it's hard not to call the Mig-15 a classic. Perhaps if a separation is needed (if for no other reason than to alleviate having to dig through many photos looking for "WWII" aircraft), perhaps an additional category called "WWII" would be appropriate, and photos that fit that category could also fit "Classics", while the reverse may not be true. Just a thought.

Also, speaking of categories, I'm a little lost with a plane, like say, the F-16 or A-10. Where do those belong? Because there is no category called "Fighters" or "Ground Attack", etc, I continue to post them under "None", unless it is something like the Blue Angels, which I assume it would be safe to post under "Special Schemes". Is "none" the appropriate category for most modern, non-transport / tanker jets?

Mike

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2124
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#60 2007-04-24 20:51 GMT-5 hours    
Mike, that's correct, 99% of photos will not fit into any category at all. I guess by default, that's the general "military aircraft" category.

Ok, thanks for your input. Should we add a "Nostalgic" or "Nostalgia" category for everything after WWII that is no longer in service?

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

MHPhotoworks


Photographers
See my 16 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 14
Location: Orange County, CA USA
Occupation: Project Manager
Age: 42

#61 2007-04-24 22:34 GMT-5 hours    
That's not a bad idea either. I have a feeling, however, that unless the phrase "WWII" is somehow used to define the difference between "classic" and "nostalgic", the mixing of the two (Migs, with say, Mustangs) will continue out of confusion. Of course, that's just my take on it.

Mike

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 57 Photos

 Online status  

 
Posts: 2124
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#64 2007-04-25 07:17 GMT-5 hours    
Ok, just added a new category: "Nostalgic Warbirds". This is for the early jets after WWII and up to the 60's. In turn, the category "Government Aircraft" has been merged into the "Tankers and Transports" category. That was also getting a little confusing as many of the aircraft in that category also belonged in the "Tankers and Transports" category. Please make the correct selection at time of upload.

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

> 1 <