vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

I am just wondering what everyone considers scratch building? Fromm drawing plans, to cutting the parts, to building a kit, to assembling an ARF. It seems the definition "scratch" means different things to different people.

ARUP

Semantics are definitely involved in the interpetation of the term 'scratch building'. You hit the nail on the head saying it means different things to different people. To me, it means drawing plans, making up the myriad component parts and assembling them into a functional model. I draw my own plans, make my own cowlings, wheelpants, molds, canopy molds for vac- forming, fittings, rip my own lumber and cut it to make the airframe parts and appropriate anything that will seem useful to build the desired model. I have even made my own wheels and pilots. I try to limit purchasing 'ready made' items. I am even looking into the purchase of a metal lathe and metal mill in order to fabricate metal items- maybe an engine some day!

jonastecknare

I agree! If you start from scratch its gotta be from the ground or rather Drawingboard and up! Otherwise its a plansbuild or kitbuild. or......

foodstick

Here is a bit I wrote for fun on this exact subject along time ago..I will just copy paste it here...

Good question, I think that sort of depends on definitions though. here is how it breaks down to me...

1. ASSEMBLY is putting together an arf (note) you can do so much improvement to most arfs I think its more than that.

2. KIT BUILDING starts with a mostly complete kit and plans with instructions

3. PLAN BUILDING you have some one elses plans, limited or no instructions. (note) includes short kits*

4. SCRATCH BUILDING...... BROTHER you are on your own! no plans ,parts, instructions...

5. and my definition of KIT BASHING...If you build it and it doesn't look anything like the box..its a success !

now I am not trying to start any conflict, but this shall be forever known as the
5 RULES OF DETERMINATION OF TECHNIQUE or " R.O.D.O.T"



* adendum SHORT KITS mean you are to lazy/smart to cut your own parts ...don't worry they still won't fit !

TLH101

My Feedback: (90)

Do we really need to rehash this again?
It always turns into a pi$$ing match, and those with "thin skin" get their feeling hurt..

Avaiojet

This is scratch building, well, most of it!

Charles

cougdave

Scratch building is spending 30 hours rubbing out a laquer finish and then dragging a battery clip from your power panel over the wing while putting in its case just before its maiden flight.

DAMHIKT*

I sure proved that I can build a mighty big scratch!

Seriously, I have always figured that plans building was just that, and scratch build was from your own plans, but I don't get bent out of shape by people calling plans built planes scratchbuilt too. I sort of draw the line when somebody assembles an ARF and talks about scratchbuilding their plane. I just met a guy who was flying his "Scratchbuilt Slow Stick" I guess I don't care what you fly or what you call it as long as we're having fun flying together.


Good Luck,
Dave

* DAMHIKT; acronym for, "Don't Ask Me How I Know That!" one of my more used phrases...

vertical grimmace

My Feedback: (1)

Well, I may be in the minority, but I always considered scratch building when you cut out all of the parts and built your own kit to be assembled on plans. I considered drawing the plans, designing and scratch building. I feel this is described by the "designer scale" event. Even though it may be scale, you are the designer because you drew and designed the aircraft as a model.
I have done a lot of designing, mostly for competition. Combat to be more specific. One thing is for sure, even kit building is a rare thing anymore (at least at my field).

foodstick

Yeah when I came up with MY definitions as posted above it was just a fun thing. But having been in the hobby a couple decades, and seen many builds, and talked to people, read info boards etc ..

I think the list is pretty accurate, with some comedy mixed in.
Plan building feels like scratch building to me, but I realize its still a major shortcut. Its not hard to understand how a first time kit builder would see al kit as scratch building though.

I don't see arf assembly as a bad thing. I do think a traditional builder can guarantee more success with arf's being able to fall back on kit building knowledge. I always assume mine are short on glue and firewall strength..that attitude has given me good experiences with the arf type products ...

Rodney

A true scratch builder grows his own balsa and refines his own metal to cast the engine in the molds he makes. Yes, that would be a ridiculous definition but; how far back do you want to take the definition? To most, it means cutting out your own parts and building to a plan whether it is your own design or some else's.

BMatthews

Sadly this has been the case in the past. And it just confuses folks that are just starting out at building their own from plans they have designed themselves or bought from the various suppliers. And really, who cares?

foodstick

Rodney, you are hardcore growing your own balsa, thats a new category for me Maybe it would be called farmer/builder? Earth to sky scratch?

Seriously though I will never make it into any category I have to grow the wood and make motors,batteries,and servos from basic elements in my basement/lab/shop ! hahahha heck I barely get anything done on half built kits anymore..

Also I don't see how people can get to worked up over building definitions, almost nobody builds.
I don't hate arfs or arf builders, although the shipping rates on arfs are starting to become punitive...

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

I have to admit I have heard all the above definitions for "Scratch build" before. It's really up to individual interpretation for definition satisfaction. I"ve seen where Arf's are defined by some manufactures as being "kits" and in truth I suppose they really are kits but not as we hard core modelers would define a kit. Maybe the term scratch built is misleading. Perhaps everything other than kit building should be called "non kit". There seems to be a unniversal acceptance over the understanding of kit built. Of course, Arf as we would understand it: is assembly of finished parts etc. but can be referred to as a kit. So, if it's not a kit or an ARF we build, then what is it? Must be a "non kit". I think non kit leaves a lot of availability for further embelishment by the builder/describer. Let's try an example of a fellow modeler recognizing the fine airplane you finished and asking who the kit manufacturer is. The response could be: This is actually a non kit, I made the airplane from plans from which I made my own parts, or I designed the airplane, drew the plans and made my own parts, etc., etc.

I think this approach would include all versions for the old meaning of "scratch built" and let the builder accentuate all the features. This seems so much more simpler than endless debating of the term scratch built. I am currently building a "non kit" which is a Top Flite Taurus. I purchased the kit plans , made my own parts, and I am assembling it per the plan. When finished this Taurus will look exactly like the original "Kit", but it is truly a non kit.

Maybe the solution to the argument is to generally classify the final product which is produced. "Non kit" may not have the charisma associated with it we all prefer so if anyone has a better term than "non kit", let's here of it.

Sledge_78

foodstick

I dunno ..

scratch built
plan built
kit built
arf built

and the ever dreaded REBUILT !

they are all honorable,

I am working on some new categories now ..
slow built
un-built
over built
lost under dust built.

Its all about the fun..

ARUP

Yah- 'semantics' rules!

Bax

My Feedback: (11)

Yep, it's all in the fun. Call it what you want. Traditionally, building from "scratch" meant that you sourced your materials and cut your own parts and built to plans...no matter what the source of the plans: yours or someone else's. After all, if you make a cake from a recipe and not from a box, you're making a cake from "scratch"...you don't have to be the originator of the recipe.

If you drew your own plans, then you designed and built the model.

Anyway, that's how I learned it long ago and have used it ever since. If you like a different take on the whole process, then enjoy it! I'm not going to get bent out of shape over any of it...even when a person states that they took a few months to "build" their ARF model...the one that our highly-experienced crew assembled in 12 hours of labor (the highly-experienced part is crucial!)

carlosponti

My Feedback: (1)

im sorry if i have to cut my own parts its building from scratch regardless. I'll continue to call it scratch building. Its semantics just like Cache i still pronounce cash. oh well my airplane my rules

Avaiojet

This is probably streching it a bit, but could "scratch" building mean, you've been so involved with your model, you haven't had time to shower? [sm=bananahead.gif]

Charles

cougdave

Or the cat used the fuselage as a sharpening post while you finished the wing

Ken Kehlet

My Feedback: (89)

For those of you that like to "PLAN BUILD" I own the Harold Osborne and Dale Wiloughby collection of Master Plans and Scale Drawings. Many Military Models, some Sport and some are very unique Beautiful Plans that are more like works of art. Several are 42" wide and 8 -12 Feet Long. I also have the construction articles for most of them.

1970s-1990s construction techniques, add in-wing servos in place of bellcranks and Off-the-shelf hardware, Cut your parts or have a kit-Cutter do it for you and build a good flying R/C model.

Send me a e-mail and I will reply with my 9 pages of Plans, Drawings and prices. I reproduce all copies direct from the Original Master Plan or Drawings.

Regards, [email protected]
Ken

sledge_78

My Feedback: (24)

Yes, we have reason for hope here in the modeling world. We can simply enjoy the hobby without getting tied up with micro definitions of "scratch built". Who cares what you call it, just do it. When you show up at the flying field with it no one cares about the scratch built definition. Yours is different, better, and you've done something that many cannot do as well. The questions usually focus on how you did it, what engine, and WoW that looks great. Let's enjoy the fun and not get hung up on definitions. My spoof for Non-kit was simply to get us out of debating something that is'nt going to be resolved by us anyway. Although, it was fun.

foodstick

Yeah this thread is how ALL of them on rcu should be..everyone leanin back in the chair, trying to make their buddies laugh. Thats just like some of the best times at the field. I wish there was more of it in every aspect of life.

cougdave

If you don't have time for scratch building, come out to the local field. We have a nice poison ivy patch off the end of the runway. If you overshoot, you get to do some scratch flying for the rest of the day...

Yep... Fun thread,
Dave

Highflight

My Feedback: (4)

I really don't understand why some people get all excited about semantics, but terminology is important because people are going to get confused (and frustrated?) when they start a discussion about something only to find that the other person is talking about something entirely different.

While these terms we use are used (very) loosely by some, the following are pretty much accepted by experienced modelers and keep a conversation on track:

Scratch-built: Draw your own design on paper or in CAD, then go from there.
Plans-built: Buying someone else's printed plans and then you supplying all your own material and cutting out your own parts. It's an important distinction from Scratch-built because here, you're relying on someone else's "design" skills and not your own (as when you Scratch-build), an important distinction when it comes time to fly the darn thing.
Kit-built: Buying a kit that includes someone else's plans along with 95%+ of the material needed to build the airplane.
Short-kit: Like Kit-built but only the pre-cut parts and some manufactured items are included with the kit. The builder supplies their own straight stock and other basic materials.
ARF or RTF: In the same league as each other, with the ARF taking a little more time to "put together". Neither is really "built" in the sense of the previous terms.

Everything else is just a subset of one of the above terms and not needed to be broken out, but just mentioned as to the difference in a discussion.

The only term left is "lunatic-built" which is when, as some suggest, that you grow your own balsa.

allanflowers

Highflight, that is about as good a description as I have seen.
Of course semantics is more important if one is talking to experienced modelers at a high end scale event like Scale Masters. If one is talking to the average guy at the local flying field, the term "scratch built" is going to be interpreted in many different ways - usually as building from plans.
The "grow your own balsa" argument seems to demean the effort of actually designing a model yourself - as if the hundreds of hours to do so is trivial unless you also go to such extreme measures as farming trees.

If I buy "carbon credits" does this count??