mkranitz

My Feedback: (60)

I retract my "whining" comment. I'll delete the thread or have it deleted.

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

Don't delete it, if you want to discuss your magazine and why kit builders, plans builders, scratch builders, etc. should be interested I'm all ears, or eyes in this case. I looked through the freebie also and did not see much for me, but that was one part of one issue. So do you feel the link you posted to, the one about the guy making foam planes and parts for ARFs is the most relevant article we builders will find in you magazine? I'm not talking about the articles that might interest everyone, like engines, radios, set-up, I mean specifically "building" planes?

fly24-7

Mike:

You've gotta take a deep breath and, by God, stop posting until you get your wits back. You're not helping your cause by fighting with the members. This will not develop in new followers to your publication. And don't retract posts, it signals that you don't stand behind what you said. If something was taken out of context or misunderstood, use a subsequent post to clarify so everyone has a better understanding.

With that said, and coming into the thread late, it's a bit difficult to fully discern the topic since the essential posts have been retracted. This is what I read: There's a guy that has a new approach to kit building. And, would his approach create a resurgence in kit building? I can't answer since the relevant information that's needed to make a judgement has been pulled.

Now, here's my thoughts on building from a non-builder (at least to this point).

First, in my opinion, it would take a pretty radical change in approach to kits coupled with a lot of promotion and advertising to get a meaningful number of non-builders to consider it. someone would have to do something really different and convince hobbyists it's worth their money and time. I'm part of a large club (200+) that spans the spectrum of practitioners - RTF foamies to scratch-built giant scale. Here's the general feeling of non-builders.

1. The selection and quality of ARFs is satisfactory. There's enough variety that the great majority of guys can find what they're looking for.
2. They believe they lack the time necessary to complete a project fast enough for their liking.
3. They believe they lack the skil necessary to complete a project they'd be confident to fly.

And 4. They're not big fans of being insulted by builders for being "lazy" or "impatient" because they choose not to build. I've witnessed a lot of comments of this type within RCU and at flying fields. Now, this may be perceived as a "lame" excuse. But let me tell you, it's a valid one. It no different than the guy who says he doesn't belong to a club because he visited his local club and feel's they're unwelcoming. Clearly, not every club is like that, but that is that guy's impression and he's now been turned-off to clubs in general. Same thing applies here. If a guy has encountered a builder who's judgmental and acts like an elitist, he feels, "why would I want to do what those guys do, they're a-holes. Besides, they don't seem like they'd want to help me get started anyways."

The community of builders need to focus their efforts toward educating and recruiting new builders. Not criticizing them because they don't have a default interest in it.

They say that "necessity is the mother of invention." If for some reason the current mainstream standard of ARFs or RTFs were to become cost prohibitive to the masses, I expect you'd have a shift to something else. And, the guy that comes up with a cost-effective and creative solution for what's next will reap the rewards...

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

Somebody give that man a beer !!

Mike, take constructive criticism for what it is. Personally, I don't care for online magazines, even with videos and other enticements. I like to dwell over some articles, whiz through ads unles they have something I'm in need of, and share the mags with my buds. If I brought a tablet device to coffee with the guys, I'd be laughed at or shunned, and I don't blame them.
Not everyone is plugged in 24/7 or wants to be. Kit-building and magazines go hand-in-hand. Both are slow-paced, allow some thought processing, and require patience. I build and have ARFs, and don't discriminate on either group, as do my club members. Your online mag will do well, I believe, with those who enjoy their iPads and tablets.

If you ever put out a newsstand product, I'd be all over it!

mkranitz

My Feedback: (60)

Sorry guys, I'm just at my limit and I did react to the one post by throwing up my hands. The funny thing about all of this is that in less than a decade MOST magazines will be consumed via tablet and not paper. The medium is just too powerful to ignore (remember when you saw funny guys talking into a wireless device called a cell phone?).

essyou35

My Feedback: (11)

Buillding todays chinese arfs is just as involved, it not more difficult, then building a kit. BTW, your grandpa used to get online and talk about scratch building, laser cut parts are for wusses.

JNorton

My Feedback: (2)

Respectfully building a Chinese ARF still takes a lot less talent than building a kit. In one you are putting together completed assemblies. With the other you are building those assemblies.
John

Jim_Purcha

My Feedback: (8)

I actually like the little bit of a tour of Dubro that we saw on line. Sorry, just the mfg engineer in me. Reminds me of the plant tours during university. Also RCM and Man used to do plant tour articles in their magazines. Nice to see some of the production videoed.

Jim

Termites Dream

My Feedback: (11)

ABSOLUTELY! I have been flying for 4 years or so and have plenty of ARFs, up to an 88 inch top flite B25 with 80+ flights, a 110 inch extreme flight yak with 100+ flights etc. Now I want to go bigger in warbirds and am planning a 101 inch Ziroli B 25 build. I would do the 118 inch version if I thought I had the building skills and thought it would pass sound restrictions at my field. Some ARFs, like the top flite B25 and an ESM Stuka, seem like nearly as much work as a small kit build, but involve different skills. I have only done one kit, a small aerobatic plane, in the last 25 years. I want to tackle the Ziroli but the plans were drawn in the 1980s/1990s and assume everyone can build. I think there are a lot of people like me who have done ARFs and now want to build to get the planes that can't be bought as ARFs. Yet the instructions are poor or non existent. I will be spending a lot of quality time on the build threads to figure out what I need to do on this one.

telejojo

I have been flying arf's for 7 yrs. and decided to build a kit (profile 3d) and made mistakes but but I think I can do better on the next one and it flew great did'nt have to add but 2 clicks of trim.A box of sticks is intimadating for me and everybody who has never built.I'm going to build some more until I can build a 150cc Cardon but that's a few kits down the road.

JRgraham

My Feedback: (1)

Mike, Ithink I realized something that created the issue here.. or at least some. Its not that you were stealth advertising, really.. because who really cares about that? Ithink what it is here, is that us old builders, you know, the few of us around here that grew up building planes from sticks. The few of us that were building before there was such a thing as an ARF.. well almost.. Laineer had a couple in the early early days, called 'rubber duckies', they were heavy but they were allright. My Dad use to tell me about them in somewhat of a joking mannor.. Still, Ibuilt kits and before the ARF erra.. Royal back in the 80's had a couple ARFs was about it.. Ibelieve the Super Chipmunk was one, and it was a decent one. I have spent as much as a full calendar year building one pattern plane in mid 90's.

Point is, theres been many arguments 'round here about the definition of BUILDING. People claim they build arf's now days. They use the word build when talking about an ARF, and it strikes a nerve with the older generation in RC.Its not building! its assembling! Its not surprising that the newer generation does not understand this. You mentioned you have only been flying for 4 years.. yes, Isaid Only. So it makes sence that you yourself misused the word Build in our point of view. Ithink we even have a hard time with someone saying they built a foamy.. because to the true builders, thats still not building! Ithink its just a play on words, and old die hards that have too too much pride in the craft! Iadmit, Iam one of those..

Maybe Im way off here.. but, thats what Ikinda feel. We dont let go of the way things were very easy!

Anyways, good luck to you and your mag. Im sure it will pick up. Ijust wish you wouldnt be so certain that the paper products were going obsolete.. Iknow what you mean though.. for instance, why is the Kindle.. named what it is.. Kindle.. Fire?? Yes gentlemen, Its intentional... Kindle Fire = Burning Books. And they do. btw, that was not a question Iwas asking about the kindle name, its a fact.

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

Any answer to this? I'm not trying to be judgmental about the content of your magazine. IMO, the downfall of most RC magazines is they try to be everything to everyone and in the end please no one. So it your target audience does not include builders that's fine, I hope you do find a large enough audience to support the publication. My wife just ordered me a subscription to "Flying Scale Models" from England for my birthday. Talk about a specific and small audience. I'm looking forward to seeing the first issue. It's not cheap so I hope it's good, but I'm sure most of the people interested in your magazine wouldn't have any interest in it.

essyou35

My Feedback: (11)

Respectfully I disagree. Modifying something already built, and something that my be severely flawed, takes a lot of creativity and building skills to get done. There is not manual on how to do it like there is with building a kit.

All I am saying that in many areas building is still active in the form chinese arfs that require overhall to fly right. Lots of discussion, lots feedback, lots of ideas. Similar like back in the day.

I am not going to split hairs on which one is harder, I am just saying that it is still quite involved, just as much so. Especially when you are going to put a turbine in it. You'll be cussing up a storm as you try to re-enforce glued in formers and create new support structures from scratch to try to keep from failing like the last guy.

Heck some of my arfs didnt een have gear mounts, I had to come up with it from scratch.

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

I agree with essyou35. Many of the present chinese ARFs are much like the first ARFs in the 80's, which usually required some disassembly and re-engineering to be airworthy. Lightweight gear blocks and wing mounts had to be removed, lest one have the wing depart or make the bird a retractable on the maiden. Wing and tail saddles had to be straightened, many small details like that.  ;^),

I recently had what I thought was a low-impact arrival in the brush after the engine flamed out at low altitude in what I thought was one of the better ARFs, an Ultra-Stick 40:
http://www.horizonhobby.com/products...40-arf-HAN1730

When we got to it, we were amazed to find the engine and firewall laying on the ground. There was only evidence of one side having been glued, the others had possibly been tacked, just the one side and the covering was all that held it on. Am putting on a thicker, better-reinforced firewall now.

ARFs do require some building...   [X(]

smithcreek

My Feedback: (25)

As usual any thread that mentions ARFs turns into the ARF people defending their wounded pride. I never understood this. I don't knit my own sweaters, but I don't get all defensive when someone shows me their handmade one.

eddieC

My Feedback: (2)

I hope you're not referring to moi.  [8D]  I've been building since the mid-60's, started RC on a reed set in 67, and love to build.  Have (built/assembled) a few ARFs, and they're far from the 'shake the box and an airplane falls out' assemblage the makers would have you think.  To each his own, all my buds who build also have one or more ARFs, hard to avoid in this climate of few and overpriced kits.

I guess I'm not as condescending as some other builders.... 

essyou35

My Feedback: (11)

Wounded pride? Your ego is way too big. You are just implying that somehow I am not a "real rc" guy. My only point is that a lot goes into making some of these cheaper arfs fly.

I built the modellbau f-86D "ARF", and it took my 6 months of modifying and fixing, and lot of creativity not only by me but another guy who has serious skills.

I am just saying that obviously you dont have any idea what it takes to make some arfs go.

Some arfs do fall out of the box and fly like a lot of the H9 and e-flite stuff.

PropsnWings

My Feedback: (9)

\


I was fairly impressed with the magazine, but the price point is a bit high. For the price I can buy two paper subscriptions, mailed to me. If you'd find a lower price point, I'd be interested.

Dick T.

My Feedback: (243)

My entire working, and retirement, career has been in graphics, printing and publishing. Twenty five plus year ago the same technological pronouncement was made concerning printed products. Guess what....more paper and printed products than ever are now consumed daily.

The tablet revolution brings dandy tools in many forms to the marketplace and I am glad to see it and use them myself. Your product currently appeals to a select market segment that likes to be fed videos rather then spending time reading and digesting content. Personally I do both but prefer the printed page from a good writer over listening to some pumped up personality half-*****ed explaining something.

Hobby print magazines may go the way you predict due to their whimsical style and uninformed content. The print publications I subscribe too are still geared to thinking adults and supplement their content with good web pages, the best combination in my opinion.

I appreciate the amount of work and technology that goes into your electronic delivery but it won't replace the printed piece.

EscapeFlyer

My Feedback: (1)

Meanwhile, back on the ranch.....


Kieth Sparks has shown there is a truly innovative way to continue forward in our hobby, Building with balsa is now an "option" among other options. I like the idea and am greatful for the OP's desire to invogorate others to try new ideas.

Bravo.

Brian

tucker11

As far as the ARF/Kit debate, Ive been looking to buy a large zero kit and I see on the Meister Scale website that they have a zero full kit for 565.00. If I understand it right it doesn't come with anything but wood, no canopie, cowling or anything else. Ive seen large zero ARF'S for the same price that look great. By the time I built the Meister I would probably be close to 1000.00. It seems crazy to spend 600 on just wood when you can get a built plane. My point with this post is that maybe kit manufacturers need to look at their prices to make future builders want to buy their product and see the savings in building it themselves.

JRgraham

My Feedback: (1)

smithcreek is right for the most part. And essyou35, man go re-read your posts.. how can you respectfully dissagree to something, claim you dont want to split hairs and all that, when you are putting the insults you claim smithcreek has made, in his mouth for him?! We all know there is an argument on whether or not ARFassembly is worthy of being called building... just about anytime it gets brought up.. no one said your not a 'real rc' guy because you are not really building! Or, maybe you really are building???

Jeeeeez, take a breath and dont make more out of it than it really is..

JNorton

My Feedback: (2)

If you don't understand then who am I to quibble. Goto RCScalebuilder.com I've built ARF and kits and one plansbuilt. I understand some ARF are garbage - some kits are too. Have fun.
John

rv9-a

A big bunch is right! I purchased a Goldberg Chipmunk in February of this year for $159.00 from Tower. I just checked and the price is now $ 189.00. Add three rolls of covering for about 40 bucks, wheels, tank and miscellaneous hardware you can't live without and you can easily push the cost up another 100 bucks or so! Then you get to build it. But it is your build and it won't look like the plane on the next table.

rv9-a

wdelorme

Well I really enjoyed Art of the Build with Keith Sparks! I also enjoyed the mobile magazine as well. I prefer to get my rags via my iPad too. It is convienient, and when was the last time you saw a video from a magazine or an advertisement that actually talks to you. Since RC PILOT is now gone I will miss it. I hope that Keith Sparks will continue to teach building techniques may be on YouTube. Art of the Build is worth not losing and so was RC Pilot. I will settle for Art of the Build on YouTube though!

Keith if you are reading we would love Art of the Build in some form to continue.

thanks