Arbo

I suppose in your mind that is the case. The reality is the rules state that posts that violate the rules will be edited or removed. The rules also state that multiple violations of the rules can lead to a ban. If people do not want the imaginary 'tone' disturbed, then it is in their best interest to not violate the rules. You are also making an assumption that I have done all the editing and removing, which in itself goes to show your bias... there are administrators there that get involved as well, and yes, remove rules violations as well.

phlpsfrnk

I'm sorry, you are correct, I was making an assumption, however you are the only moderator that edited posts of three separate people (Re: posts #1, 4, 6 and 26) so you can see how easy it was for me to make that mistake. Who else removed posts besides yourself?

Regards
Frank

phlpsfrnk

Kid,
I know you do not read MA so here's the issue. The article talked to silk, silkspan and Japanese tissue and included the use of nitrate and butyrate dopes. I think the OP’s issue is that the title “secrets of silk” should have read “secrets of silkspan” because silkspan was addressed the most and used as an example. I have used all three of these products in the distant past and they are all three similar in use and I had no problem understanding what the author was talking about. I did not personally agree with all his techniques but they would be a good place for a beginner to start and then develop his own techniques. One thing I don’t recall being mentioned in the article is to always use nitrate and butyrate dopes only in a well ventilated space.

Regards
Frank

phlpsfrnk

Red,
I'm jealous; I never got a nice polite letter. Usually my stuff appeared back on my desk after the editor and reviewers bled all over it. But I can’t complain much, that’s what I used to get paid for.

Regards
Frank

tinner1

Did anyone complaining about this article actually read it?! For those that don't get MA or haven't read the article, here is the first line of the first paragraph word for word, INCLUDING the "bolded" as was published in the original article, immediately after the title...

"SILKSPAN IS A unique variety of tissue paper made from carefully selected plant fiber"....

All this hoopla over a "title"? Come on guys can't you find better things to rant about? "Silkspan" was the FIRST word in the article! I too think this was a VERY basic beginning article about silkspan, and a lot of things were missed, for example "grain". Cover a wing with silkspan and don't pay attention to the grain of it and you will be sorry, and your wing will show you didn't know silkspan has a "grain"..

FILE IFR

I agree 100%. The curmudgeons dominate.. and I mean DOMINATE the RCU-AMA section.

I'm waiting for someone to complain about a fiberglassing article where the author refers to it as 'glassing'..... I can't wait for that entertaining thread.

KidEpoxy

I dont get your analogy:
Its my understanding that
fiberglass is made outta glass fibers, so one would be 'glassing'
while silkspan is made outta ... uh.. tree fibers not silk

so the title shoulda been The Secret of Tree ?? [8D]

FILE IFR

That's unfortunate, but I'm really not surprised, but hey, hang in there Kid.. your posts are always facinating.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

It is a shame that people with so much knowledge in the modeling field don't share some of it and submit an enlightening article to MA themselves.

KidEpoxy

Well thanx for recognizing my expertise Red.
I thought you didnt like me,
but that was real nice of ya

Hossfly

Regardless of the TEXT, first or last or in-between, the article is TITLED in BIG BOLD BLACK and even LARGER shaded blues and gray, "Secrets of SILK."

An editor should have caught the difference, especially the bold "SILKSPAN" first word of first paragraph. Just because I READ the article does not mean the editor did so. Of course I read it and caught the error, however I wasn't on the payroll to do so. Where was the editor?

Very good points and I have found other omissions to what I think such article should cover, but what the devil? I would bet that if such could be factually known, less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the readers even noticed the flaw, much less read it.

So go through the magazine. You just maybe will notice that the entire magazine is being changed to eye-catching colorful and standout artistic articles and event items. Isn't that the way of the world today? The BIG-SPLASH and then be gone. Look at the articles, Miss-E, Mister-E, and the Electrified Stunter.

Even I have to say that these are GREAT articles especially for those modelers of today that have no clue about how to build an airplane from wood, covering, whatever. The only thing that could have been added is the application of these models to glow power. Miss-E did say that the original was once a glow power, and even wings for 3-channel or 4-channel were displayed. How much better could it get?

Mr. E could be quickly built using foam-board or cardboard fuselage and with a .15-.29 be a great little RC or CL sport flier. Approximate some dimensions onto some shelf-paper and one don' need no stinkin' plans.

Same for the Apache, "Electrified Stunter". An airplane is an airplane. It follows the control demands and does not care if it is from Control Lines or Radio Control. RC has more demand-options but the model doesn't know that. It follows control-central and that is what it does, be the demand right or wrong.

Now look at all the picture applications for these 3 models. Have you ever seen such a fine presentation displaying so much information and HOW-TO in MA before? If so I don't remember when. Guys it's OK to be critical and I certainly am, however over-all it's also OK to point out the good stuff.

Now here is a picture of some years ago, a Genuwine Warp Bird that I built from foam wings and foam board. 52" wingspan, and heavy with piped OPS .60. Had a lot of fun with it. Once a modeler gets into building he can really enjoy this hobby, but those with little spare time do need the ARFs. Glad to see AMA's MA moving in the right direction. Don't forget that explanation of dope. My bet say that 80% of today's population have never heard "dope" applied to a paint. Speaking of nitrate, I still have some that I liberated from Nouressieur (sp?) AFB in Morocco back around the 1960 period when I was pulling Alert there in the B-47s.

bradpaul

While you guys are at it you might want to complain about Tower Hobbies........ this is their description of Silkspan:

This is the K&S Engineering 000 weight Silkspan Covering.

FEATURES: Silk fibers in this paper based covering give it the look of
traditional silk and dope finishes with the lightness of paper
Ideal for kites and gliders where lightness is crucial


Brad

K-Bob

My Feedback: (1)

Doh!

KidEpoxy

what kind of covering, ande what other material does it have the look of?

FEATURES: Silk fibers in this paper based covering give it the look of
traditional silk and dope finishes with the lightness of paper
Ideal for kites and gliders where lightness is crucial


Doh indeed, for it IS a paper covering
that has a property of a different covering, namely the LOOK as if it really were SILK (which it is not)

1 Silk + 1 Silkspan does not equal 2 Silks



If you guys are trying to say Silk and Silkspan are synonymous terms, then you are wrong.
If you are trying to say its OK for AMA to consider them synonymous, then you and AMA are wrong.

I dont believe AMA is trying to teach folks to call Silkspan by the name 'Silk',
I think AMA knows the difference, and it was just a simple goof that someone at MA sent that to print,
and I further believe guys here will say whatever it takes to defend everything the AMA says, even if AMA accidentally said up was down.

When there is an article titled Nations Best Applesauce that I choose to read
I dont want to read something about lap splicing balsa sticks... wheres my applesauce dag-nabbit

bradpaul

I guess your understanding was ............ wrong.

FILE IFR

Will you ever grow tired of chasing your own tail and typing useless drivel?

... I mean really, will you ever??

Take a break for a couple of days... head out to a field and have someone buddybox you on their trainer or something.... sheeesh!

KidEpoxy

Brad
You may tell people you drink a glass of chlorine every morning,
but the rest of us call that stuff coming out your kitchen sink "water'
(yes, we call it water even though it has some chlorine in it
just like we call a paper product with some silk fibers added 'Silkspan', not Silk)

So go have a tall cool glass of chlorine, no hard feelings

phlpsfrnk

Just curious Kid, have you ever used silk and/or silkspan?

Regards
Frank

ARUP

(AMA 340189) Propietary secrets! - troll...

bradpaul

Kidepoxy post #32

Kidepoxy post # 42

Just holding you to the same level of accuracy that you want from MA.

KidEpoxy

Frank
Great question: if I say
I've used silk & dope to cover a plane
are you guys thinking I really did use silk, or are you thinking I used silkspan,
or are you guys just considering them the same thing that doesnt need differentiation

So, whats your answer to that,
does saying silk was used mean silk was used or does it mean silkspan was used
(aka, is it wrong to claim silk used if one used silkspan) ?
And what about using other tissue & doping skins,
do they count as using Silkspan tissue (which you guys count as Silk)

How can I answer your question if we dont know how you are going to interpret the answer I give


of course
none of you guys' smoke and mirrors focus on me personally
is actually justifying MA making a goof on the magazine.... I just dont see how MA being right or wrong hinges on what Kid Epoxy has / hasnt done (nor that hilarious insult about me needing a buddybox). I never walked on the sun, but I know its freakin hot even without that hands on experience, just as even with MA's goof calling silkspan Silk, I know they are not the same... What I dont know is why folks here have a need to oppose me when I say silk is silk and silkspan aint that

Jim Thomerson

Kid, I'm sure some of these modern guys think we are talking about different kinds of plastic film such as they have seen on their crashed ARF's. I've used films some but never got good at it, so about fifteen years ago I went back exclusively to silk, silkspan, or tissue, and dope.

ARUP

Hi KidE- I agree with you. If you state you covered with Japanese tissue and nitrate dope I wouldn't 'convert' the meaning to silk and butyrate dope or silkspan and nitrate dope. The AMA article had some glaring miscrepencies. This isn't about semantics. It's about accuracy. Silkspan does not equal silk. I have used silk, silkspan Jap tissue, domestic tissue, various films and fabrics and even Tyvek and cardboard to cover wings and things. I keep silk and silkspan 'in stock' at my house. I buy and use thinners and dopes by the gallons, in some cases.

phlpsfrnk

Ask a simple question and I get a 200+ word verbose rant. If I read between the lines I think the simple answer is No. My only point is that if you have ever used any of these fabrics you would know that their application is pretty much the same whether you use silk, silkspan, Japanese tissue, cotton, Dacron, Stits fabric, etc, etc…. I would not recommend silk or silkspan for a FF penny plane nor would I recommend Japanese tissue for a CL stunter however the applications would be similar in their use. So what is the argument here? That all these different fabrics are different or that the editing of a magazine that you don’t read is bad?

Regards
Frank

cj_rumley

I think you do know.........
If there is anything about MA or the org that publishes it that doesn't meet your standards, there is a problem with your standards. Simple............. adjust your expectations and all will be well.