[lanslide]

Wow Rush - you are soooooo worried about the this not becoming a dictatorship! Are you a government official? (kidding of course) You are right!

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by lanslide

Wow Rush - you are soooooo worried about the this not becoming a dictatorship! Are you a government official? (kidding of course) You are right!

Well, other people might not think that if they tally up the number of my entries in this thread! LOL!
Look, all I'm saying is that, as the people who buy these things, we ought to have some kind of input as to what we would like to see. Realistically, we're not going to get everything we ask for, or even a large percentage. But, our input may be enough to get at least one of the companies to look at a plane (or planes)that they may not otherwise consider. In my book, that sure beats getting endless rehashes of the same thing.
Besides, how many of the planes that were suggested, or will be suggested, were a hit when the plastic model companies released them? I can think of two off the bat with Tamiya's F-84 and F4D-1. Both were big hits because they were planes that the model buying public wanted to see, and they were extremely well made models. The same thing can happen in diecast.
And, I agree that only a certain number of airplanes can realistically be included in the poll. My disagreement lies with how the determination will be made as to which airplanes get on to the poll in the first place. My preference is to let the model buyers themselves make it. Unrealsitic choices will fall by the wayside if enough people make their voices heard. What will be left, in my opinion, will be a strong indicator to the manufacturers that there is enough interest in bringing certain models to market.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Rush104

I think I'm missing something here- on the one hand, you're in favor of the poll. On the other, it seems you want the choices of candidate aircraft for the poll to be limited, even before the actual poll is created. Isn't that the point of the write ins? Or, do you prefer that the lists of candidate aircraft come just from the manufacturers themselves?
Assuming enough people participate, won't these lists give enough of an idea of what may be considered "realistic" requests to include in the actual poll?
Besides, who can make a determination of what an "unrealistic request" is unless there is some idea of what people may want?
I agree, this poll may be doomed from the start if not enough people participate. Premature or not, imo, the best way to ensure that the poll succeeds is to allow people to submit their write-in lists. They then have a vested interest in voting in the actual poll.
As far as managements' silence on this, maybe they are waiting for us to step up and actually organize and start up the poll. If that's the case, I'm ready to volunteer to help get this done.

I don't remember saying that the manufacturers should chose the candidates, however if their business needs are ignored and we ask for planes that make no sense from a profit viewpoint I doubt that they will pay any attention. I have designed and supervised many research studies and experience tells me that the designers of any serious study must create common parameters for all respondents. If we allow people to submit lists of any size and include every possible plane, some will do exactly that while others pick two, five, or ten planes they really care about. The resulting mishmash leads to longer candidate lists with fewer responses per plane----not a very good idea if we are trying to present a clear picture. I would suggest that any initial candidate list include a pre set number of candidates from each respondent---perhaps 10 ---, but this requires further thought. If someone gives us a list of 100 planes, as will no doubt happen, we would take only the first 10, in order to keep the playing field level for those who take the instructions seriously. To some this may seem like a dictatorial approach, however this is not the case. It injects some balance and order to the process which forces people to give some thought to their selections and prioritize them.

[lanslide]

Yes! We don't mind being their marketing department! Please let us! BTW - I will PM admin today regarding our desire for this project to happen. You guys can too.

[Captain Eddie]

Well stated, Epapazian, you are absolutely correct! A free-for-all would not accomplish anything.

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

I don't remember saying that the manufacturers should chose the candidates, however if their business needs are ignored and we ask for planes that make no sense from a profit viewpoint I doubt that they will pay any attention. I have designed and supervised many research studies and experience tells me that the designers of any serious study must create common parameters for all respondents. If we allow people to submit lists of any size and include every possible plane, some will do exactly that while others pick two, five, or ten planes they really care about. The resulting mishmash leads to longer candidate lists with fewer responses per plane----not a very good idea if we are trying to present a clear picture. I would suggest that any initial candidate list include a pre set number of candidates from each respondent---perhaps 10 ---, but this requires further thought. If someone gives us a list of 100 planes, as will no doubt happen, we would take only the first 10, in order to keep the playing field level for those who take the instructions seriously. To some this may seem like a dictatorial approach, however this is not the case. It injects some balance and order to the process which forces people to give some thought to their selections and prioritize them.

Believe it or not, I agree with you in principle. I disagree with you as to the method to be used to determine the planes for the poll.
For example, let's say we get (hopefully) 1000 people send in write-in lists. After all the sifting through the lists, 750 people have Plane "A" on their wish list. On the other hand, only 20 people have Plane "B" on their lists. The conclusion is that Plane "A" is a much more realistic choice for a potential future model. Plane "A" then goes on the official poll for people to vote on.
That's why I feel that the write-ins are a part of us doing our homework, so to say. It's a preliminary step that needs to be accomplished so that unrealsitic choices can be weeded out before anything ends up on an official poll. IMO, this will give more of a purpose to the poll.

[planenutsfrog]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

Sorry about the Potez 631. It's French, of course. As for the Hudson, while U.S.-made it was used mainly by the British. On the others, I think you will find that many members have expressed a preference for the TBD, despite its limited and indifferent service. I like this plane because it symbolizes a futile but heroic action at Midway. The HE 219,as you indicate, had a limited service life, but it's an impressive design---certainly WWII.s best nightfighter and I like its mean, wasp-like look. It's really a matter of taste. I wouldn't mind having a "Tojo", but in a limited selection, it doesn't make the cut--at least, not for me.

I understand of course the interest of US members for the TBD.

I mentionned it only to illustrate, how relative the perception of what's more important or less can be.

It is essential to let as little subjectivity as possible interfere in the making of the official poll :

A wide survey of members desires, would provide the necessary data, to include the most popular types in the poll.

That's why I support Rush option : Let's members choose a given number (?) of THEIR most desirable models.

Pre-selecting a list would be arbitrary and counter-productive.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Rush104

Believe it or not, I agree with you in principle. I disagree with you as to the method to be used to determine the planes for the poll.
For example, let's say we get (hopefully) 1000 people send in write-in lists. After all the sifting through the lists, 750 people have Plane "A" on their wish list. On the other hand, only 20 people have Plane "B" on their lists. The conclusion is that Plane "A" is a much more realistic choice for a potential future model. Plane "A" then goes on the official poll for people to vote on.
That's why I feel that the write-ins are a part of us doing our homework, so to say. It's a preliminary step that needs to be accomplished so that unrealsitic choices can be weeded out before anything ends up on an official poll. IMO, this will give more of a purpose to the poll.

It looks to me like we all are in agreement but don't realize it. What I am suggesting is a preliminary screening poll for each scale and era to determine the candidates for the final poll. I can see the argument that this phase could be open ended, although I am still concerned aboud less familiar or publicized planes getting lost in the shuffle. Still, each respondent should obey the same rules. As we have discussed, we should make it clear that we are not counting IXO, Altaya, Model Power, et al and even provide a reference list of the planes those entities have done that respondents can scan. We don't want a respondent to leave off a Yak-9 or Tony just because IXO put out one. Also, the number of votes per scale and category should be constant---I still favor a top ten approach, tentatively. As I noted earlier on this thread, this prevents a fragmented response and makes members prioritize their votes. One of the problems with the open ended method is editing the results. People may refer to the same plane in many ways---"Zero", "Zeke", Mitsubishi A6M2, etc. If we go this route, someone will have to do this job by hand, unless a program can be written which knows the most common designations for each possible plane in advance and does that task for us ( an unlikely prospect ). This is one reason why I favor the closed end option---with a write in option-- even at the outset. However, I am flexible on this and other issues. We just need to appreciate the trade-offs and their consequences.

[lanslide]

Well said Epap. I can't wait to see Skunky's list!

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

It looks to me like we all are in agreement but don't realize it. What I am suggesting is a preliminary screening poll for each scale and era to determine the candidates for the final poll. I can see the argument that this phase could be open ended, although I am still concerned aboud less familiar or publicized planes getting lost in the shuffle. Still, each respondent should obey the same rules. As we have discussed, we should make it clear that we are not counting IXO, Altaya, Model Power, et al and even provide a reference list of the planes those entities have done that respondents can scan. We don't want a respondent to leave off a Yak-9 or Tony just because IXO put out one. Also, the number of votes per scale and category should be constant---I still favor a top ten approach, tentatively. As I noted earlier on this thread, this prevents a fragmented response and makes members prioritize their votes. One of the problems with the open ended method is editing the results. People may refer to the same plane in many ways---"Zero", "Zeke", Mitsubishi A6M2, etc. If we go this route, someone will have to do this job by hand, unless a program can be written which knows the most common designations for each possible plane in advance and does that task for us ( an unlikely prospect ). This is one reason why I favor the closed end option---with a write in option-- even at the outset. However, I am flexible on this and other issues. We just need to appreciate the trade-offs and their consequences.

Very good points. I, too, think we are in basic agreement on the final result; in disagreement on the methods used to get there. I would favor a "Top Ten" or "Dirty Dozen" per era in the final poll.
However the candidate planes are tallied prior to going on the poll, a little research does need to be done by each member submitting candidate planes. For example, like on some of the earlier posts by lanslide and I, we talked about the F-84. There's quite a bit of difference between an F-84G and an F-84F. If that kind of situation can be prevented, I think it would help the poll.
Either way, it is going to be a lot of work up front before anything makes it onto a poll.