CHAMPION Tri-Traveler (N2434E)

Please correct me then Mr. Jim! Please expand. What's the problem?

Dear Mr. Jim, there is no code for this aircraft on FlightAware. There is only one Aeronca code on here. And I don't like leaving it blank. That's why I always put it in the description. That's my choice, not yours! You can vote my photos down or whatever. After I saw your remark, I looked at all your comments on other photos. All you do is correct and critique other people's photos. Putting people down! Well I could give a hoot less what you say. I think I will change it to a Vans or Piper to give you something else to "correct" or gripe about. 99.9% of my photos are correct and I don't like leaving blanks like half the people do on here. Post a photo and that's it. I will be at Oshkosh again this year and if you attend, I would love to meet you in person. And your comment, "I still don't understand why you insist"? Now you know why I INSIST!

Keep posting them ppick-everything in your collection from Bug-smashers to Buffs is great stuff.5*

Thank you Dave and I will as long as Mr. Jim doesn't object to the way I post and label my photos!

Contrary to what some people may believe, I have not yet voted one way or the other on this photo. I did see the one star vote the other day and I suspect it was our one star voter that has recently joined FA.

My original comments on this photo, and others in the past were not meant to upset anyone, including ppick. I’m not criticizing, or scolding you, I was just asking a simple question. My comments here, and elsewhere, are not criticism or complaints just plain and simple statements, nothing more. This is a very nice photo of a very nice looking 7AC Champ.

My question here was why, when ppick knows the actual designation of the plane in the photo, he continues to use the incorrect ICAO code. He says that there is only one ICAO code for all Aeroncas, that is not correct, the correct code for a 7AC Champ is CH7A, or CH7B for the later Citabria’s, and the code for an Aeronca 11AC Chief is AR11. AR15 is the code for Aeronca Sedans, a completely different plane from Champs. Others have left the ICAO box empty and just entered 7AC and that works too. I would hope that ppick is concerned that the info that goes along with his many very nice photos is accurate. Maybe I’m a bit sensitive about Aeroncas, you see I own a 7AC Champ and I value details and accurate info.

As for the other comments directed my way by ppick. His nice photo of the two seat P-51 Mustang is labeled as a T-51 Titan, which he knows is a homebuilt plane. It may be a rare TF-51D as he tried to label it, but ppick has to realize that FA’s ICAO code identification software has flaws and limitations. It will not accept T-51 for a North American Mustang, it only recognizes P-51, whether it’s a P-51A, B, C, D, H or TF.

And about his comment about my comment on the Thunderbirds F-16’s in the nice belly to belly formation photo. My comment was to correct the one person with his inaccurate comment. The perspective and a long lens distorts the distance between the two F-16’s making it look as if they’re belly to belly. My intention is to correct bad information so that it doesn’t get passed along to other people who may not be as aviation knowledgeable as others here. I suspect there are a lot of non-pilots here. It’s not meant to be criticism; it’s just correcting someone so that they can learn, nothing more.

Sometimes while I’m concentrating on typing a comment and proof reading it for readability and grammar, I forget to praise the photographer until after I’ve already entered it. That is nothing more than a forgetful mistake on my part and in no way is it implied to be anything else.
I know that I can be concise and to the point at times, that’s just me.
I hope this clears up some misinformation and any hurt feelings I may have caused, and again, I have not yet voted on this Champ photo.

Jim ... Re: the T-Bird photo ... I understood your point back when the photo first appeared. Those two pilots can indeed see each other and that is all you were pointing out. Re: the "one star" voter ... I am certain he is not someone who "recently joined." He has recently created a new account under a new name, but he has been around a long, long time. I'm positive that no one on FA thinks it is you who is handing out the single stars. There is absolutely no way you would assign such a rating to the superb photogs who post here. There is a photographer in Phoenix, several of them in Boston, one up in Chi Bears country, as well as numerous photogs from overseas, and all of them are being targeted. No one could possibly believe it is you. Trust me on that. And RE yourself ... I converse with many folks who view FA (not all of them are members). Everyone recognizes that you are focused on accuracy ... and everyone I speak with appreciates it. Earlier today, I saw a photo of an EA-18 Growler ... labeled as a Sopwith. The Navy unit it is assigned to was listed as its Navy reg number. Legitimate aviation photogs like Ppick would never think of doing pure guesswork like that; he and the other true aviation fans take pride in their photos and in providing accurate info about the aircraft in their pics. Personally, I always do quite a bit of research so that I do not present false info, and I never just "guess" as I saw on the photo this morning. I always appreciate being corrected if my info turns out to be erroneous. I think that Paul just felt there was a tone in your comments. (Let's face it; you ARE quite "direct,' Jim. Friendly grin). He and you just happened to collide, but I assure you that both of you are highly respected. Let me put it this way .... I flat out ignore pics that are posted by some because to even view them is to imply they are worth viewing. but I NEVER ignore Paul's pics or your comments. ... Gary

Jim, I know I've been very unfriendly since your post on this photo. And I do apologize! I know when I posted the photo, along with the other Champ photos that I have posted is the past, that it wasn't a Sedan. In the aircraft list FA has, they only have one Aeronca listed. I tried many time to put in a code that I thought would match up the aircraft to the code because I do know there are codes you can put in that are not listed and will show the correct aircraft but could not find the correct combination. And in your comment, you said leave it blank. I have a pet peeve about leaving a blank, and that's just my way. The photo of 150AB I posted the same day I had to leave blank and it still bugs me! Maybe my OCD? I hate posting a photo and not labeling the photo like so many do on here. But knowing I put the code FA had, I make sure to put the correct information in the description. I changed the code to one you mentioned so it would read "Sedan".

And just to let you know why I "turned" on you the way I did Jim is when you read the first comment you posted, " I still don't understand why you insist ". Like in school, you had a teacher scolding you or a Parent scolding you. Reading the way you wrote it, that's the way you made me feel. I'm not in school and my Parents have passed and the only person that can do that is my wife.

Over the years and the amount of photos I have posted, I have had at least 50 to 75 pilots contact me through FA asking if I would send them a copy of their aircraft so they could have it printed without the watermark. I have also had 6 repo folks asking if I have seen certain aircraft recently. And out of almost 7000 photos, I have had 1 person ask me to remove his aircraft and it was because his wife would be asking questions about being in Shreveport where is EX lives.

Again I apologize for the harsh words and hope you understand why? I,m sure I offended you but i mean no harm, no foul.