Thought about HOW to make the topic here.

[flying dog]

Hey, I won't be the first and probably not the last, but double posts on the same topic are a bit silly.

 

I am sorry I goofed with the Menagle one just yesterday.

 

When posting abut an incident, I was wondering if we should try to adopt a way of doing the SUBJECT so double ups are not as easy?

 

(OPEN DISCUSSION)

 

Location Incident Type-of-plane Severity

 

That way you know: Where, What, Type and how bad.

 

If something is not known, put something like:

 

Menangle landing ---- no deaths

 

I know it is dangerous for me, but it is just a thought.

 

:)

 

 

[Robbo]

Need some sort of template that automatically turns it into a forum post.

 

So there will be a form asking for all the details, hit submit and bingo its a thread.

 

Calling Ian, are you there?

 

 

[flying dog]

Yeah, but I was just thinking if *we* can put a LITTLE effort into the subject line it could help so many people.

 

Ah, what do I know. ;)

 

 

[Robbo]

Yeah, but I was just thinking if *we* can put a LITTLE effort into the subject line it could help so many people.Ah, what do I know. ;)

Problem is, the topic subject has a character limit so wouldent have room for much.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

I try to do location and date. Often times the type of aircraft, number of Pax and injuries are not known at the first report. The date and location are usually accurate. Date makes it easier to look up later when the ATSB report is released and avoids confusion with people resurrecting ancient threads.

 

 

 

"Cessna Down" isn't very descriptive, especially when it turns out to be a missing Jab. "Accident Kambukta West VIC 29 Aug 2016" with a link to the article or source, a precis of the event or cut & paste of the article (for those of us on SLOOOOOW internet who can't get some news sites to load, or from subscription only sites) should be enough to get the ball rolling. I use the full date because this is becoming an international site, and some users have a different date format, 2/5/16 could be 2nd May or 5 Feb.

 

 

[flying dog]

"Cessna Down" isn't very descriptive, especially when it turns out to be a missing Jab. "Accident Kambukta West VIC 29 Aug 2016" with a link to the article or source, a precis of the event or cut & paste of the article (for those of us on SLOOOOOW internet who can't get some news sites to load, or from subscription only sites) should be enough to get the ball rolling. I use the full date because this is becoming an international site, and some users have a different date format, 2/5/16 could be 2nd May or 5 Feb.

 

AARRGGHH!!

 

The C Word!

 

 

[DWF]

The best format for date for ease of searching and computer/database listing is yyyymmdd - year month day.

 

 

[Robbo]

AARRGGHH!!The C Word!

But all aircraft that crash are Cessna's its in the journalism for dummys book.

 

 

[flying dog]

If we are reporting accidents, I think YYMMDD should suffice.

 

20 is a given now.

 

 

[flying dog]

Robbo, I was kidding. It wasn't used on the Menangle report.

 

 

[DWF]

If we are reporting accidents, I think YYMMDD should suffice. 20 is a given now.

Only for another 84 years

 

 

 

And how about if you want to indicate an event last century?

 

 

[flying dog]

Then you include the 19 but otherwise.....

 

 

[Robbo]

Robbo, I was kidding. It wasn't used on the Menangle report.

So was I, well sort of.

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

YYMMDD = 160829 might get confused with post number, and might need some explanation, particularly for new users and visitors. People searching for "plane crash Kambukta Vic yesterday" might get this one way down the list, unless Mr Google is now converting likely numbers to dates. The YYMMDD format is excellent for databases and files, but not that great for titles. But still a good suggestion Flying Dog.

 

 

[facthunter]

Just write " another Jabiru falls from sky again, today". and you get 365 a year. Nev

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Naughty, naughty.

 

 

[DWF]

Then you include the 19 but otherwise.....

If you do that for 19xx but not for 20xx you will confuse the system as all the 19xx entries will be perceived as 2019.

 

Use yyyy in all cases to avoid this confusion.

 

 

 

 

YYMMDD = 160829 might get confused with post number, ........

If you use yyyymmdd it is going to take quite a while before post numbers get close enough to be confused with dates.

 

 

[SDQDI]

So why year first?

 

Nearly every time in real life (mine anyway) that the date is written it is done dd/mm/yyyy, why put the year first and confuse me, ESPECIALLY if you only do yy and not yyyy.

 

To me 16/08/29 is totally confusing and reads (for me) the 16th of August 2029 or 1929.

 

In case I wasn't clear enough I prefer DD/MM/YYYY and don't get me started on mm/dd/yyyy!!!!!!!

 

"Rant paused!"

 

 

[DWF]

So why year first? .....

dd/mm/yyyy is the conventional way of writing dates (unless you are from USA where they do things differently ) and our human brains have come to accept it as the norm (or the way it should be), however ....

 

With the age of computers, databases and other records the best way to access a particular instant is to work from large to small:

 

first you have the year - eg 2016

 

then the month - eg 08

 

then the day - eg 29

 

and you can then continue to the hour 18 (24 hour clock)

 

and the minute 16

 

and even to the second 35

 

and you get a unique and precise instant of 20160829 181635

 

It can take a little while to get your head around it but computers love it!

 

Next time you look at a NOTAM (what's that you ask?) or a met report or forecast have a look at the date/time group they are always in the format yyyymmddhhmm - sometimes with yyyy or minutes left off but it is always the same sequence.

 

 

 

I am not asking you to like it but that is the way it is.

 

 

 

Does that help?

 

 

[red750]

SDQDI

 

Look at these two columns of dates (they happen to be dates of Avalon Airshows):

 

20030216 16 Feb 2003 | 01032015 1 Mar 2015

 

20070325 25 Mar 2007 | 03032013 3 Mar 2013

 

20110306 06 Mar 2011 | 06032011 6 Mar 2011

 

20130303 03 Mar 2013 | 16022003 16 Mar 2003

 

20150301 01 Mar 2015 | 25032007 7 Mar 2007

 

The first column has the year first, then month, then day. When sorted by the computer, they end up in chronological order.

 

The second column are the same dates, but entered as day, month year. When sorted by a computer, they are out of order.

 

 

[Admin]

The yearmonthday format is really only good for organising a list in date order such as document naming conventions...

 

Project Status Report 20160823

 

Project Status Report 20160830

 

 

[SDQDI]

SDQDILook at these two columns of dates (they happen to be dates of Avalon Airshows):

 

20030216 16 Feb 2003 | 01032015 1 Mar 2015

 

20070325 25 Mar 2007 | 03032013 3 Mar 2013

 

20110306 06 Mar 2011 | 06032011 6 Mar 2011

 

20130303 03 Mar 2013 | 16022003 16 Mar 2003

 

20150301 01 Mar 2015 | 25032007 7 Mar 2007

 

The first column has the year first, then month, then day. When sorted by the computer, they end up in chronological order.

 

The second column are the same dates, but entered as day, month year. When sorted by a computer, they are out of order.

When I was younger we used computers so that they would make our lives easier, if we are making things harder for ourselves to make it easier for the computer then we really are looking at it back to front. Surely it isn't that hard to program a computer to sort dates chronologically in whichever format suits us as people best?

 

And yes DWF I do know what a notam is and I peruse those met reports occasionally and as far as I am concerned they are a horrible example of how things should be written (for the average private pilot anyway!) and are a prime example of where a more human friendly text could be obtained without inconveniencing a computer too much. (Actually now that ozrunways has a simple plain translation right there I find I actually read the reports more often, go figure!)

 

 

[pylon500]

Thought about HOW to make the topic here.

Crash a plane....?