why post build threads and why the title is important.

[stuart]

i just posted in my dynaflght this post and thought it would be good to repost as a seperate thread to help others understand how much the google search/and online searchs help others find our threads.

copied from another post:

thanks Steve,it's nice to hear from someone now and then while posting build progress..... funny thing folks don't understand about build threads. they post progress and supply pictures and no one responds as if the build were meant for applause and praise....lol.

for anyone interested in doing a build thread on popular kits you'll see why you did it over time. i did the "Sig hog bipe, when pig fly"it has over 7500 views and the number keeps growing.

i did the "aerocraft skimmer build,please help" thread ,it has 6000 views and keeps growing. so the beauty in doing build threads is to help others with ideas and pictures to complete a fun build with modifications others have done.

i have noticed this to be very important so folks can locate the builds on goggle search or other on line searches. type the manufacturer's name in full first,and then the model type in full ,then with funny quips said in the title to end it .

example of a failed title: GP RV 4-40 build.....very few hits,could also be a lack of interest in a kit that has build issues. but if i had typed the title to the thread "greatplanes RV 40" it might have been found by folks searching on-line.


hummm,I'm going to move this post to a new thread for all to read ,it just may encourage more builders to post and not expect praise and applause..lol. Stu

[foodstick]

I praise and applaud this post !

It does feel lonely out there sometimes ! I really like seeing threads where a lot of comments and participation happens, I have definitely seen really good threads nearly abandoned because the poster doesn't think anyone cares.

There is a Great thread on RCU where a builder posted the entire scratch build of a full scale Fokker DR1, and a Sopwith Pup... He almost quit posting the wonderful pics because nobody was commenting... great reference for moodelers in those two builds..

You are right about a good topic title to aid in web searches,as well.

[Turbojoe]

Unfortunately kit building has come to be associated with opening a bARF box and bolting the wings on. Or gluing some Depron together. I'll catch hell from many for this but to me that's NOT building. A laser cut/die cut/scratch built is. It's getting really hard to find any good real build threads out there any more. Like Stuart says the title of the thread is becoming extremely important so it can be found in the sea of ARF "build" threads out there. I love reading kit/scratch build threads even if it's for a plane I'd never consider building. I can always find some new technique for doing something that I can apply to a plane I'm building or planning to build.

I'm so happy that Wattflyer has a dedicated "Scratch and Kit Built" thread. More and more I feel I'm just wasting my time at RC Groups as almost everything is ARF related. The only reason I hang out there anymore is the hope of seeing something Mountain Models related.

At present I'm working on an Alien Aircraft (Tom Herr) Blinker kit LINK with a few modifications. There is a thread on RC Groups on this plane but seems to draw little interest because you have to actually build the plane not assemble it. I'm working on the build only a few minutes at a time with no rush so it'll be a while before it's done. I'll be posting the build thread on Wattflyer as I think more will appreciate it here. I'll be sure to have a good thread title too.

Joe

[mclarkson]

I went and renamed my light Stryker build thread, just for you.

[StephenW]

Well , personally I just post my scratch builds because someone may get some idea's and have a crack at something them self . Don't really care for the praise and glory stuff, if someone likes it then its a good thing and hopefully spurs them on to a scratch build and away from the ARF's

[stuart]

,hey ...+1 on the barf boxs being called kits..lol.i posted a 3dhs aj slick assembly,and it also got thousands of views,posted a simple question on an eflite extra and it also got tons of veiws..lol..and theres no real content to those threads.


i posted build threads on a towers uproar,hob vtail bonanza,and others on a forum that no longer exists....i have no copy of the excellent advise i was given or shared....so the moral of the story is...


nothing lasts forever!!!! and the question of the day is...


where will you spend eternity?



time to post the pictures of todays effort on the bird of time

[pattern14]

Good to see building is still alive and well, although I never used to see much of it locally though. The LHS before it closed down, was very big on ARF's, and did not even stock balsa kits anymore, as "most people just want to fly". I can't remember the last time I saw a scratchbuild apart from my own........Still, some people just are not building savvy, and ARF's get them airborne I suspect it is just the way of the world now, be it good or bad. I tend to be over critical of companies like parkzone and alpha for the fragile planes they produce, which is a little unfair really, but there does seem to be a bit of an ARF culture on Wattflyer at times.One thing I tried last year was to buy a couple of cheap foamie arf's and totally pull them down and rebuild them with good gear and airframe mods. not the same as building; more like modding, but still fun to do. Nothing will replace scratchbuilding for me though I don't use plans, just photo's or drawings to get my plane together. Happy building and flying

[baz49exe]

I couldn't agree more with the previous posts. IMHO the whole purpose of posting a scratch build thread is to encourage anyone who might just be thinking about it to " have a go!" For me the best part of Wattflyer is seeing the way in which the scratch builders who do post have solved the engineering issues involved, often using the most basic materials and having great fun at the same time. Also it's the only way to build and fly something different!
Making it clear that it's a scratch build in the thread title really helps those who are interested to find it.

[StephenW]

good point I just fixed my thread title

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by StephenW

Well , personally I just post my scratch builds because someone may get some idea's and have a crack at something them self . Don't really care for the praise and glory stuff, if someone likes it then its a good thing and hopefully spurs them on to a scratch build and away from the ARF's

Pretty much ditto.

I'm a promoter of naming photos with meaningful titles. When you do an image search, you actually get to see something that you want to look at further, rather than having to review a million links. I've found image searches to be more productive that word searches, and it would be even better if all photos had meaningful titles.

Originally Posted by Turbojoe

Unfortunately kit building has come to be associated with opening a bARF box and bolting the wings on. Or gluing some Depron together. I'll catch hell from many for this but to me that's NOT building.

Joe

No flack from me on that one. I get a real kick when I see titles that say "Building XXX ARF".

[pmullen503]

"I get a real kick when I see titles that say "Building XXX ARF"

These days, assembling an ARF is most folks' introduction to building. You've got to be certain age to remember when there where no ARF's and a "kit" was at best some die-crushed balsa or print wood. I you wanted to fly, you had to build. If they are proud that they have graduated from RTF's to ARF's, that's cool with me. It's a step along the path.

There are very few folks who have the skills or inclination to scratch build from a 3 view but those who do probably didn't start there. Since the world is the way it is, future scratch builders will have started "building" ARFs not cutting print wood kits.

There is actually lots of scratch building and new designs being done but they are foamies. There are some that turn up their noses at that. But if you start with a blank sheet of paper and end up with something that flies, I think that fits the definition too. I used to look down on foamies, 'til I saw a Polaris fly.

The original point of the thread was to make it easier for future builders to find information on what you've done by appropriately naming your threads and that is an excellent idea.

I'd like to add that doing a good build thread with photos and detailed information takes time and effort. So I try post a comment or ask a question just to let the builder know that someone is paying attention and appreciates their effort.

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by pmullen503

"I get a real kick when I see titles that say "Building XXX ARF"

These days, assembling an ARF is most folks' introduction to building. You've got to be certain age to remember when there where no ARF's and a "kit" was at best some die-crushed balsa or print wood. I you wanted to fly, you had to build. If they are proud that they have graduated from RTF's to ARF's, that's cool with me. It's a step along the path.

You forgot to quote the "" in there. Humor is not meant to be demeaning. I'll still get a kick out of it. I think what the guy meant who introduced the principle (not me either) was that ARFs and RTFs are not traditional kit building. That's all. Every time this topic is brought up, it seems that some take it to be demeaning. Sometimes the people who bring it up are truly demeaning, which is not cool with me. I haven't seen much at all of that, here at Wattflyer.

I'm 45 and when I got started in this in '04, the GWS kits were a big kick. At that time, builders would sometimes refer to them as an ARF. They were easy to assemble, and were also a great step along, for people to get started with. As of today, I'm not sure what happened, as you can't sell anything on a mass basis, if it's not almost fully assembled. To each their own, but there seems to be fewer people moving on to building. No implications that it is a problem, but just what's happening.

I wouldn't suggest that everyone get started in printwood kits. My dad did an excellent job building the Sterling Peashooter, which I still have today, and converted and have flown as an electric rc flyer. I loved it, and thought I'd try my hand at it, at maybe 12-13. I was a real hobbyist, but you can only do so much with that experience level. Anyway, with what little money I had, I somehow failed to read that the Comet Aeronca kit was a "printwood" kit, which explains why it was so inexpensive. I mangled the parts, and still tried to assemble and cover them. Just this past year, I finally threw the box of parts out of mom's basement, as I doubt that I could even assemble the plane to fly just for humor, and I've successfully done some of those too. I've met a few kids today around that age, who really enjoy being able to fly their manufactured planes, and fly them well. It's a nice option for them to have, versus building a printwood kit for rc.

Originally Posted by pmullen503

I'd like to add that doing a good build thread with photos and detailed information takes time and effort. So I try post a comment or ask a question just to let the builder know that someone is paying attention and appreciates their effort.

That's always a good thing. It is nice to know that people appreciate the amount of effort that I put into my build threads.
Just make sure it's not something that's been answered a few times. I get that a lot.

Originally Posted by pmullen503

The original point of the thread was to make it easier for future builders to find information on what you've done by appropriately naming your threads and that is an excellent idea.

I touched base on that also, although not in the quote, so I'll throw it in here also. It was actually almost all of my post, with the the sentence of mine that was quoted being clear at the end of the post.

Originally Posted by Bill G

I'm a promoter of naming photos with meaningful titles. When you do an image search, you actually get to see something that you want to look at further, rather than having to review a million links. I've found image searches to be more productive that word searches, and it would be even better if all photos had meaningful titles.

[pmullen503]

No offense or criticism of your post was meant. I am a huge fan of your builds; your Comet is incredible. AND you go to the trouble of posting informative build logs. I appreciate that.

Rather, that sentence reminded me of a certain snobbishness I've experienced since my return to this hobby. IC vs electric, builders vs buyers of ARFs and RTFs, foam vs balsa and what constitutes "scale" to name a few. Read the thread on why people don't join clubs or AMA for more points of contention.

My comments were addressing that issue, not you or your post. I admit I rambled off topic.

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by pmullen503

No offense or criticism of your post was meant. I am a huge fan of your builds; your Comet is incredible. AND you go to the trouble of posting informative build logs. I appreciate that.

Rather, that sentence reminded me of a certain snobbishness I've experienced since my return to this hobby. IC vs electric, builders vs buyers of ARFs and RTFs, foam vs balsa and what constitutes "scale" to name a few. Read the thread on why people don't join clubs or AMA for more points of contention.

My comments were addressing that issue, not you or your post. I admit I rambled off topic.

No problem and understood. Actually it reminds me of some people at RCG.
I haven't renewed with the AMA this year for the first time, and may not, due to their support of some people/site with questionable ethics. I want to renew, but just can't get myself to do it, when they have collaborated with some really snobby people who insist on holding grudges forever. In the case of that place, they don't appreciate builders, and only care about pitching RTFs for a certain business, squelching any problems people have with them. I have no problems with the RTFs, but unfortunately I can't help but have it all put me off a bit. It is sad when things hurt the hobby and the AMA.

[HO-229]

It is my believe names are important but the commitment to the task(s) is the real crux of the matter.
Ok guys… If no pics are available then all you have to post is the proposed 3 view or an artist’s rendition of the concept…
Many a great concept never made it to production for many a reason (goodness knows why).
Scratch building:
It would seem scratch building is a subject we all love and enjoy but not many aspire to master the craft. With China cranking out ARFs at prices that are less than material costs it is understandable why the average Joe chooses to buy ARFs. Interestingly the average China ARF would seem to be crudely shaped and does not accurately follow the fuselage lines of real aircraft.
Scratching from just a 3 view and a set of dividers is a daunting task for some but I find it rewarding… Take away my dividers and put me in front of a computer and my build time in multiplied by a factor of four…. It is my belief many find the time investment unacceptable.
AMA:
Not sure what value the AMA provides the average Joe other than over priced supplemental insurance policy and a mag full of advertising!

[Stevephoon]

Hi Stuart!

One thing that Wattflyer and most of the other RC forums do well is getting the titles of our threads into the popular search engines. For example, when you do a search in Google for the "Sig Hog Bipe" your thread is the 10th item displayed!

So, your correct stuart... Name your thread well so people from outside Wattflyer can find your thread too!

Steve

[stuart]

I've built a few kits[25+], and made modifications on my own or taken from others and included their ideas along with my build to make them unique.

the title "lisf bird of time" opened a door for me to see photos that were not available in the instruction book or on the drawings. especially where the horizontal/elevator is concerned. i already may modify it for ease of building and strength. but if all i had were those basic instructions tonight,i would have been scratching my head as to what they were trying to convey thru drawing that were vague and instructions that stunk..lol

i also just read another 17 page bot thread found at rcg and it modified the rudder for ground clearance with a less curved bottom...agian picture was worth a thousand words.

so the titles we use lead us to the solutions we seek on line and technology is opening a world of information to even tech less savoy folks like me....thanks gang for the response,and lets except the arfs,foamies electric,glows...ect..ect...forums for the value they purposed,to help others decide what to buy and how to build it. it's what makes this such a cool hobby for all ages and experience.

[pattern14]

Has anyone here been following "Flite metal's" B47 build? This represents the far end of the opposite scale (pardon the pun) to what the ARF's are all about. I would not even contemplate taking on anything as detailed as he has, and have never come across a thread even remotely like it. The nearest I come to is "semi" scale, which approximates the shape and dimensions of the plane I want to build, but modified to fly and survive in my real world conditions. The prospect of totalling a major labour of love or work of art has always been a stumbling block for me. Still, lots of admiration for those who do it though

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by pattern14

Has anyone here been following "Flite metal's" B47 build? This represents the far end of the opposite scale (pardon the pun) to what the ARF's are all about. I would not even contemplate taking on anything as detailed as he has, and have never come across a thread even remotely like it. The nearest I come to is "semi" scale, which approximates the shape and dimensions of the plane I want to build, but modified to fly and survive in my real world conditions. The prospect of totalling a major labour of love or work of art has always been a stumbling block for me. Still, lots of admiration for those who do it though

The prospect of totalling a major labour of love or work of art has always been a stumbling block for me.

It sure is a major stumbling block!

As for the part of the title question "Why post build threads", it is one of my hangups. I have been known to take quite a while sometimes to maiden planes, for the reason you stated. I have had some people call me out on maidens in less than polite fashion, as it's just cheap entertainment for them. In almost every case, I'll have far more build threads and videos posted than the person who calls me out.

[CNY_Dave]

An ARF becomes a kit build just after the first major crash...

Fixing mine (2x? 3x? heh) taught a lot more than putting it together from the box!

Dave

[StephenW]

Originally Posted by CNY_Dave

An ARF becomes a kit build just after the first major crash...

Fixing mine (2x? 3x? heh) taught a lot more than putting it together from the box!

Dave

Dave I'm not absolutely convinced about that , assembly from the box is the basis of building skills , sure you have repaired some damage but are you 100% sure that the repair is capable of flight loads ,which can be quite great at times.
So without assembling from the start you really cant be sure that it meets the original design intent. Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying that the repairs are dodgy or anything ,but just maybe with a better knowledge of the complete assembly of the model the repairs may have been carried out differently with a better strength ratio and perhaps not need to be carried out 2 or 3 times

P.S I do think its good that you did the repairs most of the people I know who fly the rtf and arf just bin them and buy a new one ,thats what really upsets me

[crxmanpat]

I think thread title is important, no matter what you are building (Scratch, Kit, ARF, foam, balsa, whatever). I hate seeing thread titles like "My new plane!", "Look what I just got", etc.

If you just got a Great Planes Micro Tx-R F-86 Sabre, then say so in the title. For example, I got a GWS Cargotrans (basically a C-130) and bashed it into an EC-130 "Compass Call". And that's what my thread title says "GWS Cargotrans Quad EC-130 Compass Call Build Thread".

[CNY_Dave]

Originally Posted by StephenW

Dave I'm not absolutely convinced about that , assembly from the box is the basis of building skills , sure you have repaired some damage but are you 100% sure that the repair is capable of flight loads ,which can be quite great at times.
So without assembling from the start you really cant be sure that it meets the original design intent. Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying that the repairs are dodgy or anything ,but just maybe with a better knowledge of the complete assembly of the model the repairs may have been carried out differently with a better strength ratio and perhaps not need to be carried out 2 or 3 times

P.S I do think its good that you did the repairs most of the people I know who fly the rtf and arf just bin them and buy a new one ,thats what really upsets me

Much as you say: As strong as original is easy. As light as original is easy.

As light and as strong as original- craftsmanship required.

I just went for at least as strong (and ran the same 15 lbs weight on the wing center while supporting at the ends as I did after initial 'build') and accepted the weight penalty.

[Bill G]

Originally Posted by crxmanpat

I think thread title is important, no matter what you are building (Scratch, Kit, ARF, foam, balsa, whatever). I hate seeing thread titles like "My new plane!", "Look what I just got", etc.

If you just got a Great Planes Micro Tx-R F-86 Sabre, then say so in the title. For example, I got a GWS Cargotrans (basically a C-130) and bashed it into an EC-130 "Compass Call". And that's what my thread title says "GWS Cargotrans Quad EC-130 Compass Call Build Thread".

You bet Pat.
Especially when they have 5 thousand "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" in the title.

Originally Posted by CNY_Dave

An ARF becomes a kit build just after the first major crash...

Fixing mine (2x? 3x? heh) taught a lot more than putting it together from the box!

Dave

Even more true, when you end up bashing it into something else, after the wrecks.

[pattern14]

Originally Posted by StephenW

Dave I'm not absolutely convinced about that , assembly from the box is the basis of building skills , sure you have repaired some damage but are you 100% sure that the repair is capable of flight loads ,which can be quite great at times.
So without assembling from the start you really cant be sure that it meets the original design intent. Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying that the repairs are dodgy or anything ,but just maybe with a better knowledge of the complete assembly of the model the repairs may have been carried out differently with a better strength ratio and perhaps not need to be carried out 2 or 3 times

P.S I do think its good that you did the repairs most of the people I know who fly the rtf and arf just bin them and buy a new one ,thats what really upsets me

To just expand on my previous post..... I am not an ARF fan by nature, but decided to apply some learned skills from scratching my luft 46 inspired combat planes. My latest has been the Starmax He 162 edf, which was horribly fragile and had questionable electrics. I did a thread on it under my name in the EDF forum just a few days back. The results turned out much better than hoped for, and I now have a near scale version of a quirky warbird that flies quite well and does not disintegrate on landing. No way would you call this building, but it took me longer to do than had I bought a traditional kit and started from scratch. Just another variation on modelling I suppose