Stumped by a Gazelle?

[Jez]

Thanks for the clarification Alex.

I've yet to be convinced about the importance of the cn for military aircraft. I find it a bit meaningless. Do people really search the DB by cn?

[AJ]

I didn't realise that omission of the cn was now a reason for rejection in it's own right. It certainly never used to be, as I've got plenty of shots on here without cns.

Part of the reason we have a whole section of the forums devoted to info Jez.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Jeremy,
If the cn is easy to find you may get the rejection. We want our database to be as accurate as possible so if we, screeners, can find the cn quickly it means you could have done it too. If it isn't easy to find we'll accept the pic.

cheers
Alex

PS: Very often a quick Google search 'll give you all the infos.

[Jez]

The cn was missing here.

I didn't realise that omission of the cn was now a reason for rejection in it's own right. It certainly never used to be, as I've got plenty of shots on here without cns.

[z740]

CN: 1435
Owner: Royal Air Force
if you back the A/C up some you should be fine cropping wise. good luck mate!

-Chris

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Please use www.scramble.nl to get all the correct info id you can't find the plane in our DB already. or try to ask for any info at http://forums.jetphotos.net/forumdisplay.php?f=28

The cn was missing here. I did a quick check on scramble and got 1435 for the CN.

Best regards
Alex

[akerosid]

I keep having this problem with UK military aircraft ... I check previous photos, as I did on this occasion, but the photo was still rejected for "bad info".

Can anyone tell me what I should be putting for aircraft info/reg? (Why doesn't this info appear in other photos of this acft type?)

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1583801

(I'll deal with the cropping thing myself ... somehow!)