login   |    register
Site Feedback
Have a suggestion or topic about this site? Post it here.
Hosted by Kevin Brant
Civil Aviation forum?
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,256 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 02:30 AM UTC
Hi all

With all the interest in airliner kits of late, it seems an ideal time to ask if people would like to see a dedicated Civil Aviation forum on Aeroscale.

All the best

Rowan
Jessie_C
_VISITCOMMUNITY
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,752 posts
AeroScale: 6,047 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 03:43 AM UTC
/me rases her hand...

But that's to be expected isn't it?
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,256 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 04:20 AM UTC
Hi Jessie

Now why did I half-guess you might be interested...

All the best

Rowan
helterskelter
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: March 22, 2011
KitMaker: 11 posts
AeroScale: 10 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 06:11 AM UTC
I can see where this is going. Jessica do you mind running the Civilian Aviation forum?
Anyway if there's enough interest I think a Civil Aviation forum is a great idea. Despite my gripe about the number of none new kits being reviewed and the flippant nature of some of the staff on Aeroscale.
Right I will dig out some of those Frog kits and do a review.
H.
betheyn
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#019
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: October 14, 2004
KitMaker: 4,522 posts
AeroScale: 2,207 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 07:01 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Despite my gripe about the number of none new kits being reviewed and the flippant nature of some of the staff on Aeroscale.


I was stating facts not being flippant.
Andy
Jessie_C
_VISITCOMMUNITY
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,752 posts
AeroScale: 6,047 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 07:16 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Right I will dig out some of those Frog kits and do a review.
H.



Please do. And Trumpeter, Special Hobby, Hobby Boss, Airfix, Revell and whatever else you have in your stash. The more reviews, the better is is for everyone.

Seriously, this is (and should be) a member-driven thing. I'm not staff. The site exists for all of us, and we all need to provide content.
Tomcat31
#042
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: November 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,828 posts
AeroScale: 1,720 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 07:18 AM UTC
Sound like a good idea to me. The only problem I can see is when a subject falls into one or more of the forum categories eg. a UH-60 blackhawk in civilian colours, but I suppose we have that at times already.
Jessie_C
_VISITCOMMUNITY
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,752 posts
AeroScale: 6,047 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 07:25 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Sound like a good idea to me. The only problem I can see is when a subject falls into one or more of the forum categories eg. a UH-60 blackhawk in civilian colours, but I suppose we have that at times already.



I don't see a problem with that. There are many ex military types that went on to second careers in civvies, not to mention all the airliners that got (and still get) put into uniform. If there's overlap so much the better. That just means that more stories get told : )
NickZour
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Attica, Greece / Ελλάδα
Joined: May 01, 2008
KitMaker: 1,437 posts
AeroScale: 1,241 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 08:59 AM UTC
Hello to all fellow aeroscalers

I am opposed to a new Civil Aviation Forum.
You want to know why ?
Because, admins, can JUST create a new category for Civil airliners in aeroscale.


Cheers Nick
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,256 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 09:07 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Seriously, this is (and should be) a member-driven thing. I'm not staff. The site exists for all of us, and we all need to provide content.



Hi again

At the risk of going a little off-topic, I couldn't have put it better myself.

I think it's really important that Aeroscale's reviews reflect all the kits its members are buying and building - not just the one's we're fortunate enough to receive as samples. It's individual passion for a subject that can lead us in exciting new directions, so I really want to encourage as many people as possible to share their own modelling experiences.

And, yes, bring on those Frog, Renwall, Pyro kits et al! If there's enough demand, I'm sure we can create a proper Vintage Kits category. (Note: Another job for Staff_Jim! )

All the best

Rowan
Jessie_C
_VISITCOMMUNITY
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,752 posts
AeroScale: 6,047 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 09:46 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Because, admins, can JUST create a new category for Civil airliners in aeroscale.
Cheers Nick



Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's exactly what we're discussing, no?

And not just airliners either. There's all sorts of airplanes that were never painted green out there: Bizjets, bushplanes, firebombers, freighters, private planes, gliders, record breakers...
betheyn
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#019
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: October 14, 2004
KitMaker: 4,522 posts
AeroScale: 2,207 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 10:14 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Because, admins, can JUST create a new category for Civil airliners in aeroscale.


Only Staff Jim can create a new category, the Admins only moderate it, while the rest of us fill it .
Andy
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,256 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 10:47 AM UTC
Hi again

Just to put things in context for everyone, the Aeroscale forum was designed to expand from the old Armorama set up. It was never going to be a "perfect" system because of so much inherited baggage, but we plumped for rather arbitory date-related categories (which is what we're still using broadly for Civil stuff) but that was blurred the moment the demand for a dedicated Helicopter Forum warranted its inclusion.

So there is plenty of scope to widen the forum to reflect our members' interests. It's just a a question of what works best for the majority. As I always try to stress - Aeroscale is your site - it's our job to reflect what you want to see.

All the best

Rowan
SHarjacek
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Croatia Hrvatska
Joined: January 29, 2011
KitMaker: 977 posts
AeroScale: 263 posts
Posted: Friday, July 22, 2011 - 11:18 AM UTC
Why not? Should be interesting!

mtnflyer
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Alberta, Canada
Joined: March 08, 2009
KitMaker: 394 posts
AeroScale: 360 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 23, 2011 - 03:07 AM UTC
I'll throw my vote in as a 'Yay'. However, I do believe it destined to become one of the slower forums with less active input.
RedwingNev
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - East Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: February 07, 2004
KitMaker: 791 posts
AeroScale: 357 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 06, 2011 - 04:47 AM UTC
Funnily enough I was wondering this morning why there wasn't a civil aviation forum on here
Keeperofsouls2099
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Florida, United States
Joined: January 14, 2009
KitMaker: 2,798 posts
AeroScale: 2,443 posts
Posted: Thursday, September 08, 2011 - 12:37 PM UTC
Being a moderator on the modern forum (don't know if this makes me admin or not)always wondered but I believe there is a place for everything so civil would be a go for me
Merlin
Staff MemberSenior Editor
AEROSCALE
#017
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: June 11, 2003
KitMaker: 17,256 posts
AeroScale: 12,639 posts
Posted: Friday, September 09, 2011 - 12:06 AM UTC
Hi again

Judging by the limited number of replies, I think the best thing might be to ask Staff_Jim to simply create a Civil sub-cat for each era.

All the best

Rowan
tinbanger
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: February 04, 2008
KitMaker: 2,414 posts
AeroScale: 1,814 posts
Posted: Friday, August 10, 2012 - 11:59 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Hi again

Judging by the limited number of replies, I think the best thing might be to ask Staff_Jim to simply create a Civil sub-cat for each era.

All the best

Rowan


Staff Jim
Are you there?
Jessie_C
_VISITCOMMUNITY
British Columbia, Canada
Joined: September 03, 2009
KitMaker: 6,752 posts
AeroScale: 6,047 posts
Posted: Friday, August 10, 2012 - 02:31 PM UTC
I have a feeling that this will be a part of the Big Forum Overhaul that Jim's been working on.
Siderius
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Tennessee, United States
Joined: September 20, 2005
KitMaker: 1,747 posts
AeroScale: 1,673 posts
Posted: Friday, August 10, 2012 - 02:53 PM UTC
Hey, neat idea. Looking forward to seeing it. Russell
robot_
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United Kingdom
Joined: March 08, 2009
KitMaker: 719 posts
AeroScale: 691 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 11, 2012 - 05:21 AM UTC
As this site (like 99% of web sites these days) is basically a database, having fixed sub-forums like it is structured now might not be the best way of getting traffic to threads.

Instead threads could have required tags: e.g. WW2, British, Civil, Fixed Wing; and then users can view virtual sub-forums that are actually just ways of filtering the threads.

This way, people interested in only ww2-era will also see all the interesting threads about ww2 era civil aircraft when they click on ww2.

Same with the modern era forum and the rotary wing forum- people with interest in modern aircraft seem to have overlapping interest in helicopters, so the rotary threads turning up in modern would probably increase traffic for the helicopter threads.

Edit: While I'm thinking about this, maybe the beginners forum can be combined into the general forum, and there be required tags for the threads (target audience: beginner/experienced, topic: techniques/materials/kits/other) that enable there to be links to virtual sub-forums for techniques, beginners, etc.
amegan
#243
_VISITCOMMUNITY
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: March 21, 2008
KitMaker: 968 posts
AeroScale: 888 posts
Posted: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 - 08:16 AM UTC
I'd go for a civil forum, or anything that brings some of the neat subjects that exist in the civvie world. It would be somewhere to put that Dragon Rapide, the 1/48 Eduard Bf108, ASW19 and 1/48 Revell DC3 in the stash not to mention those on the wish list, another DH88 (No3,G-ACSR, the green one), a DH60 Moth and that nice Revell 1/48 Piper Cub. I just counted up, since joining Aeroscale I have built 16 military aircraft and 5 civilian, DH88 (G-ACSP), Ju52 (D-ALYL), ASW21, Hawker Hunter (G-PSST) and a Super Connie (D-ALIN). I also have a AN-2 in civvie colours and another DH88 (G-ACSS of course). Civvie aircraft don't have to be airliners, or modern, the variety can be startling.
sweaver
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Kentucky, United States
Joined: April 19, 2007
KitMaker: 759 posts
AeroScale: 184 posts
Posted: Thursday, August 16, 2012 - 10:05 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I'll throw my vote in as a 'Yay'. However, I do believe it destined to become one of the slower forums with less active input.



I would agree. Even though I have made comments about wishing there were more general aviation/civilian models around, I don't think a dedicated forum is worth it.

Not nearly enough interest.....
tinbanger
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: February 04, 2008
KitMaker: 2,414 posts
AeroScale: 1,814 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 26, 2012 - 03:28 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I'll throw my vote in as a 'Yay'. However, I do believe it destined to become one of the slower forums with less active input.



I would agree. Even though I have made comments about wishing there were more general aviation/civilian models around, I don't think a dedicated forum is worth it.

Not nearly enough interest.....



Lets set up a forum and see how it goes!
You will get out of it what you put in.
Admin can always remove it later if it turns out to be a dead duck1