Talk:Fin flash

Hang on
Artcle is growing, and will be based on the Military aircraft insignia Jetijonez (talk) 00:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge

 * Oppose. As the creator of the Fin flash article; I say it would be an "eye overload" on the sense, to merge w/ the Military aircraft insignia page. Besides this page is still growing, with more info and additions on the way. Just takes time, so be patient. Jetijonez (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I also oppose a merge. Fry1989 (talk) 01:44, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Bahamas Fin Flash
Up for review, is the distinct black outline on the Bahamas fin flash as seen  here . There seem to be a conflicting point of view on the weather it should be in or a out. Please weight in between this one with the outline, or this one without. Jetijonez (talk) 17:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * As I have clearly explained countless times, the black border is not part of the flash itself.It's there because the white of the flash is on the white background of the fuselage paint. I have even given two pics on Jetijonez talk page, of examples where the fin flash does not have this black border, because it is on a grey fuselage paint, and therefor there's not contrast issues. There is also another problem with Jetijonez version of the flash: the ratio. ALL photographic evidence shows the flash in the ratio of 1:2, like the naval ensign of Bahamas, which the flash essentially is. Jetijonez, you know this to be true, idk why you continue to fight it. You claim all this photographic evidence for your version of the Finnish roundel, yet you ignore it for the Bahamas flash. Here's the difference though. There are some pics that do show the Finnish roundel darker, so that one isn't absolutely clear, whereas the Bahamas flash, ALL pics (unless you can find me one that says otherwaise) say the flash is 1:2, not 3:5. Fry1989 (talk) 20:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

The pics you are reffering to from airlines.net, are NOT concusive, both shots have the grey Cessna 404 in the backround. Now I just happned to have an account with airliners.net, and w/ that I have the option to enlarge the pictures, to full screen. Sorry to say but with enhancemnt it looks to a blackout line on the light grey aircraft, as well. Although this not 100% clear, and of course I can't prove this (unless there is an editor) with an account with "airliners.net". As to the ratio, it apprears to me at least the 3:5 seems fine. but thats just me on my screen. Jetijonez (talk) 01:05, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * None, and I mean NONE show your ratio, they all show 1:2. I will never stop removing your 3:5 ratio version until you can prove to me with a pic that it has also been applied in 3:5. You've complained to me about my lack of attention to detail, yet you lack understanding of something so simple. Fry1989 (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Back up for discussion after hiatuses: After careful examination the issue in question, I cannot consider this file of the Naval Ensign of Bahamas flag duplication. Based on the information provided by Fry1989 he has made the assumption that the ratio of the naval flag, should somehow match those of the images shown. And unless he has gone down to the Bahamas recently and took a measuring tape to verify its dimensions on these aircraft, then I’m sorry you cannot make that claim. Furthermore he cannot speak on behalf of the Bahamas Air force in regards to the Black outline, again that’s an assumption. As noted earlier the aircraft in this  photo  shows a Cessna 404 in the background that is light grey, yet it's with a "black outline". Finally the images in this article are a gallery set up, so ratios shouldn't be a concern Jetijonez (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2011 (UTC)


 *  Here  is a photo of a grey Bahamanian Partenavia with said fin flash and it lacks the black border. Assuming there is an official specification I doubt it includes the border as a normal part of the marking but could include it on a specific application. For our purposes we should be going by general usage rather than a specific instance as that opens a can of worms. I am not a fan of using black outlines as it creates the assumption that the outline is a standard part of the insignia - though I realize getting everyone to use the same light grey that should be used as a background would be a major undertaking. The ratio of said fin flash would seen to be either that of a standard white ensign which is 1 x 2, or it is close to 7 x 13 (the red bars seem a bit smaller than the bars on the national flag). The refs I have indicate the standard flag is 1 x 2 and the inset flag would seem to match this unless it has been squashed to fit the space. Beyond actually measuring an example I see no resolution to the proportions question.NiD.29 (talk) 08:42, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I see boarder as two kinds. Hard to say, two images one with, and one no with. For ratio yes I agree with Jet. The same in Military aircraft insignias, and cause we see these gallery, roundels hold a single same pattern. We should model after these same format. I see this en Almanac Books every ware. Ghost rider14 (talk) 00:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah after reviewing Nid's photo I can't really say one way or another, but to be fair to Fry we could loose the Black outline. I would definitely still like to see some standardization to this gallery and ratio's Jetijonez (talk) 06:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think you'll find a way to standardize the ratios - the originals were whatever proportions the particular country settled on so some will be wider than others. Forcing them would result in some odd and unnecessary compromises. Be thankful none used a long thin pennant.NiD.29 (talk) 16:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thats just the problem, we don't to many fin flash files created. Jetijonez (talk) 01:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Bahamas' fin flash


Just to make it absolutely clear for anyone who views this, this is the issue. Jetijones created this article, and added all the fin flashes of various national air forces. However, one of them was File:Bahama fin Flash.svg, which Jetijones uploaded to Commons. Having looked at the sources Jetijones provided in the file's description box, it turned out that his ratio was wrong. For that reason, I nominated the file for deletion, and added File:Naval Ensign of the Bahamas.svg, which is in the proper ratio, to the article. Jetijones again uploaded the file to Commons, and it was deleted a second time, and now he's uploaded it to Wikipedia to bypass any further discussion of the issue on Commons.


 * The sources are the following. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Three of these sources were provided by Jetijones in the description box of his files, while the other two I was able to dig up.

As you can all see, the fin flash is the Naval Ensign of the Bahamas, and is applied in the ratio of 1:2, same as our File:Naval Ensign of the Bahamas.svg. However, over the past year, Jetijones has constantly reverted and inserted his file with the shortened ratio, demanding that I need consensus. Since all the sources show the contrary, I would actually argue it is Jetijones who needs consensus for his file, but since I have no other choice, I'm bringing this here. Please vote below on which one should be used.  Fry1989  eh? 19:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

--Kanga-Kucha (talk) 23:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)I think we would use Fry's naval ensign file, because that is how it is on the planes.

I vote for my insignia, but more importantly I find very suspiciously Kanga-Kucha (talk) has come out of a 5 year retirement to vote on this very subject, one of which he has delved into before. Looks like shill voting Jetijonez (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Whether you question this user's vote or not, others will come along, I can be patient. I of course, am refraining from voting, as my opinion, and the sources, are clear.  Fry1989  eh?   07:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking at #2 and #3 of the sources above, which are the only ones of the five that give a full side-on view of the flashes, both are (almost exactly, I might add) in a 1:2 ratio. There is little suggestion of any distortion that would be masking a different ratio, as the horizontal and vertical red stripes are the same width, so it seems completely reasonable to deduce that the ratio is 1:2.  I fail to see any evidence to the contrary, and a justification that "flashes should be the same size" for these images, which are meant to be accurate representations of the real-world usage, is not valid here.   Nik Naks  talk - gallery 13:01, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Niknaks, for hitting the nail on the head. Infact, Jetijones has never provided any proof of it being applied in a different ratio. I take this as a vote for File:Naval Ensign of the Bahamas.svg then?  Fry1989  eh?   19:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Reversed fin flashes
I originally came here when I saw a reversed fin flash in an episode of The Saint and thought: "Revealing mistake!" But further research found that RAF fin flashes are "reversed" on the starboard side as also shown in the picture to the right with "reversed" being one implementation of "blue to the tail, red to the front". Perhaps someone with access to proper sources can amend the article. In its present form it's misleading. --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The representations shown on this page are always done as seen from the left side of the aircraft to eliminate just this sort of confusion, ie with the left hand side of the image towards the nose of the aircraft, and the right towards the tail. Markings that are handed with broad areas of colour are usually mirrored for the opposite side of the aircraft, while those with lettering or small details (such as coats of arms) are reversed. added info to page regarding this.NiD.29 (talk) 18:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The comparison with a flag is very intuitive (and it hadn't occured to me :-)).  --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 14:41, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Low visibility
What is the purpose or usage of the low-visibility versions in the article? --Error (talk) 17:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)