A multicoloured Porter. That’s a bit better

There seems to be some confusion. Both LA189 and LA198 are referred to above, sometimes in the same thread:

…and what follows is the official history of Spitfire LA189:

Spitfire LA198 History

21 September 1944
Aircraft built at South Marston, Wiltshire, test flight by Flight Lieutenant Johnson, duration 25 minutes.

I think the Glasgow one is LA198. So it is not surprising that Dr John Smith finds a different history for LA189.

No further comments about the new “rules” then. So I will ask the mods if we can have a “sticky” as Avion Ancien suggested:

A contributor posts a photograph of an aircraft to identify. Either use your own picture or be prepared to acknowledge its origin when finally identified (beware copyright).
The first forumite to identify the aircraft (confirmed by whoever posted the picture) gets the right to post the next one, and so on.
If he or she wishes to desist, “open house” is declared and anyone can post the next picture.
Only manned aircraft that have actually flown allowed, so no missiles/drones and no obscure unbuilt projects or flights of fancy.
A variant is to post a relatively well-known type but to ask a question as to when, where, why or who is in it.
Timing: in order not to block the thread for too long, if there is no sign of an answer or a guess within 48 hours, the poster should offer a clue. If nothing within another 24 hours, a second clue. 24 hours later the answer should be given and a new “wot plane” posted, this time as “open house”.
“Open house” automatically takes effect if the one with the right to post the next picture fails to do so 48 hours after confirmation by the previous poster.

Mods: can one of you advise me on this? How can we get this as a “sticky”?
Thanks

Should we extend it to 48 hours then? I have no problem with gliders or microlights. As I said before we have no intention to be “elitist”, and I don’t think we are, whatever it may mean. Just “difficult” sometimes maybe.
When we are sure about the new “rules” I shall try to get a “sticky” then.

I agree with Al. So:

A contributor posts a photograph of an aircraft to identify. Either use your own picture or be prepared to acknowledge its origin when finally identified (beware copyright).
The first forumite to identify the aircraft (confirmed by whoever posted the picture) gets the right to post the next one, and so on.
If he or she wishes to desist, “open house” is declared and anyone can post the next picture.
Only manned aircraft that have actually flown allowed, so no missiles/drones and no obscure unbuilt projects or flights of fancy.
A variant is to post a relatively well-known type but to ask a question as to when, where, why or who is in it.
Timing: in order not to block the thread for too long, if there is no sign of an answer or a guess within 24 hours, the poster should offer a clue. If nothing within another 24 hours, a second clue. 24 hours later the answer should be given and a new “wot plane” posted.
“Open house” automatically takes effect if the one with the right to post the next picture fails to do so 48 hours after confirmation by the previous poster.

Dan: let’s avoid “elitism”.

Or a Turkish one

I think wilkofife is offering us the same machine, but with another engine. But I agree that a clue or two are needed. So far I have no idea.
Maybe we should impose a time limit, as has been done on similar “games” on other fora. Say, if no guesses after 48 hours, give a clue. If not found after another 24 hours, then reveal all, or something like that.
As to changing the nature of the thread, I already suggested some time ago that we might ask not just “wot plane”, but where and when or who is it or something: ie show an easy aircraft in special circumstances. We could mix and match as we felt the whim.
The important thing is not how many of us play, but that it goes on without too much delay. I learn a lot from this thread, and I guess many others do too, without them necessarily offering guesses.
Another point: I do not think it matters if the same aircraft type gets repeated, but preferably not the same photo twice. We learn by repetition.