|
|
Post by malibupa46 on Jan 19, 2022 17:37:24 GMT
I have recently sent a message to the Editor of the above publication, but it would be nice to hear comments from other readers/users and Air-Britain members
I have spent the last couple of weeks (and will continue to do so) going thru my copy of the European Registers Handbook 2021, but I think it is in need of updating/amending and deleting some of the information printed, especially in relation to the comments against individual registration entries.
Are users/readers of the publication still interested in comments such as “Res.”/”permit”, (D-EANU/F-GIQQ) “permit expired” (D-EAJU), “w/o” (F-GJLK), “w.f.u.” (F-GJSU) and “badly damaged” (F-GJSL) etc. - some of which are more than 20 years old ?
Shouldn’t entries such as above be deleted after a couple of years or maybe not even mentioned? After all, if an aircraft has been declared a "write-off" (such as F-PHMN in 2006) and there is no mention of the fate of the wreckage, it is of little use to anyone these days. I also believe that if a lot of these comments are deleted, it would make the publication smaller and perhaps could be produced in one volume and would be cheaper to produce.
I look forward to hearing other people’s comments.
Thanks for reading
Tim
11630
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 24, 2022 16:07:19 GMT
This was Dave Partington's response direct to Tim, copied here for information for others.
Thank you for your message and comments about ERH 2021 content. I hope that you don’t mind if I attempt to explain the situation regarding the points that you made.
Updating and amending ERH takes several months and is based on available information. As a result the reliability of sources must be of prime importance. In some countries official data is readily and reliably available, in other cases it is apparently available but is not frequently updated. You may note for example that the CAAs in Belgium and Spain have recently been clearing out many expired registrations which can now be removed from ERH. The next group of countries consists of those with limited or no official access, such as Portugal and Italy. The worst case scenario involves countries with strict GDPR regulations such as Germany and Finland where data has been totally restricted, eased only slightly in Finland recently.
If I was an airworthiness official with equal access to 47 different countries then the situation would be straightforward. But I am not! I have to rely on a large number of contributors to supply new data or to back up what is not otherwise available and for this reason the type of data in each register listing can vary. If an aircraft is still registered I will generally include it until such time as a cancellation date can be confirmed and/or included in ABN. As an example, among those that you list, F-PHMN and F-GJSL are currently registered by the DGAC but I do not have the authority to cancel them.
The phrases used in describing the condition of aircraft seen or reported on airfields or in accident reports, such as “wfu”, “damaged” and even “W/o”, are not absolute guarantees – we know of many aircraft that have been repaired or resurrected to fly again, so these must be considered as potential cancellations, not permanent deletions. Some apparently minor accidents can turn out to be insurance write-offs. Similarly, comments on reservations, permits, etc are for guidance in that marks can be reserved but the aircraft itself can be changed before final adoption – recent LN- and SE- airliner exchanges for example. Some countries’ data first reaches us as reservations but we may never hear of later confirmation.
My hope is that we are presenting, as accurately as possible in the circumstances, a time-specific picture of the European scene on an annual basis.
I do not claim 100% accuracy, with over 120,000 entries to consider that would be impossible, but I do hope to present as much currently confirmed data as is available for what is possibly the most detailed source of European register data for the enthusiast. As for reducing the title to a single volume only, we would have to take at least 100 pages out in order to get back to earlier levels, the equivalent of 20,000 lines, and still have a large, less manageable book.
I haven’t seen any further debate on the Message Board and I hope that I am not being complacent, but I do believe that members who buy and use ERH are getting what they want. All are encouraged to send in specific updates or amendments and each year many do.
|
|
|
|
Post by supermanc2008 on Jan 25, 2022 16:21:50 GMT
Hello Dave.
Thanks for that comprehensive reply.
A few years back ERH was published in a QR format with full details on a CD.
Would that be possible to do instead.
Kind regards
John Taylor (02803)
|
|
