Secrets of Silk
 

Just got my latest magazine that has a article all about the "Secrets of Silk". Good, I thought, I might have missed something 40+ years ago when I covered my Falcon 56. So I read the whole article, quite well written on how to cover with silkspan. Well that took me further back to when I was just 8, so I did get some good techniques.

But how come the Editorial staff at MA doesn't know the difference between silk and silkspan? I had assumed that at least some of them know something about basic modeling, but perhaps not.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

He,He, Ha, Ha! Isn't that what computer nerds do? Glad to know that I wasn't the only one looking for something hidden in that topic? :D :D [:-]

Definition of NERD
XXXXXXX especially : one slavishly devoted to intellectual or academic pursuits (computer nerds) Merriam Webster.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

I wrote the editor about the article. I suggested a better method of sticking down silkspan; the same way one does silk. I also made the point, not mentioned in the article, that wings should be covered on both sides at a sitting, and both sides kept moist until finished. Then hang the wing vertically so it will dry evenly on both sides and not develop warps due to uneven drying of the silkspan.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana, Arial; font-size: 14px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; ">the Editorial staff at MA only care about selling ads. Time they put some content in the rag.</span>

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

In defense of any magazine, the editor can only print what is submitted. I recall some discussion of how you go about this on the AMA forum, and also on the AMA website. I've suggested five articles, and had two published. Model Aviation pays on acceptance.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

No, he can completely rewrite the article if he so choses.  The word editor implies he can edit the article.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

The editor prepares the article for publishing, checks spelling, grammar and layout. The writer/author is responsible for the content. If an article requires a rewrite it should be returned to the writer/author, not rewritten by the editor. As a technical writer edits (other than spelling/grammar) need to be approved by the writer to ensure the intent was not changed by the editing.

Regards
Frank

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

aww man, that poor editor,
unable to stop the writers from putting whatever they want into the magazine if its spelled right
... I feel sorry for the guy [&:]

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

The editor has the capability to reject articles.:(

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

As said, three of my article suggestions were rejected, two were accepted, written up and published. In one article the editor removed a section which was tangential to the article.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

oh
so editors ARE fully capable of rejecting an article about Silk that doesnt actually talk about silk
... they just chose to keep it in this case

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

First, there has been, it seems. a recent change of editors. There is inevitable confusion, dropped balls, etc. in transition. I also wonder if it was a problem with the graphics person not understanding what was going on, and it getting caught too late to change. I recall some such problems with MA in the distant past.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

The article was kinda weak/incomplete. Wet/dry techniques? When to use different weights/grades? The tearing rather than slicing method for edges? It also kinda disses nitrate dope, which is completely bogus.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Well it usually takes me less time to find errors in each issue of MAN than MA.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Seems like it should work that way, but it doesn't for writers of regular MA columns (articles may be handled differently but I can't comment on that from experience). Once the draft is submitted the writer doesn't see it again until he gets the magazine.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

why would you expect them to operate MA any differently than they do their forum. editing stuff that changes the intent and meaning of a post happens there a lot.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

This statement is untrue. I am sent a copy of the edited Battery Clinic column for approval before it goes to press.

- Original Message -
From: Jay Smith
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:06 PM
Subject: Model Aviation May column

Hi Red,

Attached is our initial edit of your column submission that is scheduled to run in the May 2011 issue.

Please take this opportunity to proofread your words, evaluate them for content purposes, and let us know if your text is okay to run as-is or not. Do not use this courtesy as a chance to rewrite your submission; it is an opportunity to catch factual errors.

Replies not received within 24 hours of your receipt of this message are not guaranteed to make the final proofing stage. Please send any corrections to Editor Jay Smith at [email protected].

Thank you for your cooperation and input!

Sincerely,

MA editorial staff

Jay Smith

Editor, Model Aviation Magazine

5161 East Memorial Drive

Muncie, IN 47302

Phone: (765) 287-1256 Ext. 225

Fax: (765) 281-7907

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Looks like MA editorial staff changes over the past couple years have had some positive impact, then.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Some people will complain about anything. Thanks for interjecting some reality Red.

Mongo, please provide examples to back your claim, nobody will be holding their breath.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

I think we should be fairly gentle in our suggestions about how the silkspan article could been more in line with our personal methodology. After all, nothing was said about ARF's, and the airplane in question was a modification of an old Comet kit.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

As Isaid he can complety rewrite the article if he wants too. Too be legit he must rewrite it completly and put his name as the author, or put his name up as co author.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Just saw this thread. Too funny. I read the article and rolled my eyes (again). Silk is great stuff and it's hard to believe anyone writing an article about such doesn't know the difference between it and silkspan. hahahahahaha It is so pitifully funny! C'mere you little silkworm... gimme some of that good stuff! lol

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Then why don't you submit an article?... let's see what you come up with.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Sport_Pilot,
You obviously have never had anything published professionally. There is a process and relationship between writer/author and editors. Writers write, editors edit. If an editor totally rewrites an article he/she has now become the writer and they are no longer doing what they are paid to do (edit). In my professional writing career I’ve had things returned for rewrite but never had or heard of an editor totally rewriting anything. Rejecting yes, rewriting no.

Regards
Frank

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Paul,
I do not agree with Mongo that the MA editing is anything like the AMA forum; however as far as examples go the FHHuber’s “AMA Today Survey” thread comes to mind.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/forums/tm.aspx?m=12723

You edited the original poster’s (FHHuber) post then banned him. You also edited and removed easytiger posts and banned him. Some of my posts were edited and some removed by you. I have not been banned yet. Off topic post by you and a past moderator were left to stand and negative responses to those same posts have been removed by you. Just one example where the tone of a thread has been changed by biased editing.

Regards
Frank

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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"..

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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]

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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. :D

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.

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

Doh!

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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

RE: Secrets of Silk
 

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