Televised footage from PauP over the last 2 days has shown C-17s (Canada and USAF), Airbuses (Belgium and France), Hercules (USAF, US Coast Guard, Canada, Brazil and Colombia) 2 USN Sea Stallions and 1 lone Spanish C.295.

Here’s one their Phantoms and a close-up of one Tornado tail – taken back in ’96 at El Paso – I think I have one or two more of the Phantom (just have to dig a little deeper.)

JJ

Is the CH46 related to the CH47?

Nic

Both are/were Boeing (Vertol)… the CH-46 was/is known as the Sea Knight… in both cases, CH stands for ‘Cargo Helicopter’ as opposed to the Canadian nomenclature system.

Pls don’t get confused by the CH prefix – this has nothing to do with Canadian Forces nomenclature wherein the CH-47 was known as the CH-147 and the CH-46 was the CH-113 Labrador and -113A Voyageur. Although I believe that with the new purchase of Chinooks, the old designation of CH-147 will be resurrected very soon.

JJ

Cheers from this side of the pond – almost 4 hours into the next one (as I’m typing).

Here’s hoping 2010 is a healthy, safe prosperous year for us all.

Cheers,

JJ

I’ll wade in with my bit an a bit more to boot…

As a Graphic Designer, I’ve had to deal with international copyright law with regard to intellectual property (me being the one wielding said mighty stick)… the sheer complexity if the subject is many times enough to make the opponent fold, and either pay up or drop the usage. (that’s cost me more than a few $10K in Uganda, but that’s another story for another aviation forum)

Regarding copyright on current materials – I have (several years ago) been asked by a client to negotiate a complete buy-out of copyright for a photograph (via a Stock Agency) when the photo would be used initially in one piece, but that piece would continually be promoted for a 12 month duration yet with no set schedule or frequency… (at that point it was cheaper for the client to pay for the complete rights and copyright than to pay an on-going user fee) This scenario could have been avoided IF they had commissioned the photograph – but then again, how easy is it to get a photographer to go find and suitably shoot a Blue Whale?

With regards to old photos, I’ll explain my example…
I am in possession of a wonderful collection of prints taken in the 1915-16 period at Galipoli and Lemnos Island. These prints were given to my grandfather – at the time – by the man who took the photos (they served together in the MEF – although his name was never noted in my grandfathers notes, nor on the prints themselves.) My grandfather gave these photos (and much more) to me some 30 years ago…

Now… I am working on 2 separate projects in which I plan to publish these photos… I, at no time have ever claimed copyright on these photos, but they will all be credited as (and they do belong to me) “JW Jones Collection”.

One prominent author/publisher whose books I design and produce uses the same principal… photos which have been passed along (and the photographer or donor is know) are most easily credited in the following forms:

“John Doe via P.D. Quick” – where the photographer is noted/known to the donor – specially useful in 3rd party usage.
“P.D. Quick Collection” – where the photographer is not known, yet prints are supplied by a donor.

The extra little bit I add here is for further discussion and ‘amusement’….
Lets just take for example… a family decides to donate their late grandfathers effects (including photos) to a national museum which is funded by their own tax dollars… Now, suppose one of those family members – or anyone else for that matter – wishes to access and use one of those photos…. it is right for a tax-payer funded institution (supposedly entrusted with protecting and sharing one’s heritage) to charge $10 to $20 for a 5″ x 7″ print per use?

And what of that print afterwards…. can said user use it again (and again) at no charge, and can they simply credit that photo as “P.D. Quick Collection” or with the appropriate museum collection number since they’ve already paid for and possess that copy of the print? …. (devils advocate) just something to chew on for a while.

JJ

Can anyone identify the roundel on this Kazakh An-26, and does anybody have a clear image of it? Thanks.

Not air force, but rather army or border guards (minor modifications regarding ring radius vs star) … (see the right hand side of my attachment – my redraws roughly a years ago) note that both the air force and ‘army’ emblem are centred upon a 32 point ‘sun’ – each point of which is tear-drop shaped. Still rather difficult to tell whether there is a different colour inside the ring or not.

Let me know if you need a vector version.

I forgot about the CF-18, wasn’t it also assembled in Canada? And the CF-101?

The CF-101s all came from USAF stock, while all the CF-18s (CF-188) were built at St. Louis by McD-D.