[lanslide]

In order for members and manufacturers to easily keep track of what we want we should develop a poll (that includes at least all of the planes we have been asking for) as part of each of the "Manufacturers" headings on this forum. The poll might be too long if it included ALL of the military planes so maybe it should just include the ones that are not produced yet. The categories could be: WW1, WW2, Cold War, and Modern. The poll could be an important and permanent fixture on this web site. This way new members would always get a chance to vote and manufacturers could get a sense of what we want at a glance. Wuduyuthink? Let's have a poll to set up a permanent poll per manufacturer - kidding.

[Epapazian]

I agree that an ongoing poll focusing on planes that have not been rendered in diecast is a good idea. I don't think that this should be done for each manufacturer separately, however, but for a specific group of manufacturers collectively. These would be serious diecast marketers like Corgi, Dragon, Hobby Master, FOV, Witty, Gemini, Franklin Mint ,Carousel 1, GMP, and Century Wings, but not magazine promotional "lines" like Altaya, or Atlas or derivatives such as IXO. The people who select models to be manufactured for such brands do not evaluate their offerings in the same manner as regular diecast-makers and their quality as well as their availability ( Ebay-only ) is of a different order. Also, I would exclude Model Power until it standardizes its scales to conform to industry practice. The most effective way to approach this would be to organize the list by eras, as you suggested, and also by scales. We should also consider what happens when a plane on this list is brought to market. Does it come off the list? Since members may not like the quality of a new diecast product and want another manufacturer to take a stab at the same plane, we may wish to create a second list featuring already made planes that are still in demand.

[lanslide]

I agree Epapazian! Your idea is better. I was hoping to get us all thinking about the best way to implement the poll and then for the forum leaders to make it so.

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

I agree that an ongoing poll focusing on planes that have not been rendered in diecast is a good idea. I don't think that this should be done for each manufacturer separately, however, but for a specific group of manufacturers collectively. These would be serious diecast marketers like Corgi, Dragon, Hobby Master, FOV, Witty, Gemini, Franklin Mint ,Carousel 1, GMP, and Century Wings, but not magazine promotional "lines" like Altaya, or Atlas or derivatives such as IXO. The people who select models to be manufactured for such brands do not evaluate their offerings in the same manner as regular diecast-makers and their quality as well as their availability ( Ebay-only ) is of a different order. Also, I would exclude Model Power until it standardizes its scales to conform to industry practice. The most effective way to approach this would be to organize the list by eras, as you suggested, and also by scales. We should also consider what happens when a plane on this list is brought to market. Does it come off the list? Since members may not like the quality of a new diecast product and want another manufacturer to take a stab at the same plane, we may wish to create a second list featuring already made planes that are still in demand.

I addressed this question in a previous post, and I'll ask it again- how will modifications be handled in this poll? For example, let's say a company comes out with a good F-105D. But, there's a demand for a Wild Weasel model, which would require a two-seat "G" version. Does the Two-seater now get put on the list as a "New" model, therefore bumping another different (not yet produced) airplane off that list? I would think that a manufacturer can adapt a mold to create both single and two seat versions of an aircraft.
I generally agree with how you guys want to handle the poll, but as projected I don't feel that it allows enough room to reasonably accomodate all the possible requests that may be made for models.
Another question- what if a group of people would just like a new paint job for an existing model? Does that paint job go on the list for "new aircraft" (and, again, possibly bumping another as-yet-unbuilt airplane off that list), or can the poll(s) be set up to accomodate just the new paint job?
Again, I agree with a new (comprehensive) poll. However, I do not think that a single poll is going to accomodate all the people making requests.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Rush104

I addressed this question in a previous post, and I'll ask it again- how will modifications be handled in this poll? For example, let's say a company comes out with a good F-105D. But, there's a demand for a Wild Weasel model, which would require a two-seat "G" version. Does the Two-seater now get put on the list as a "New" model, therefore bumping another different (not yet produced) airplane off that list? I would think that a manufacturer can adapt a mold to create both single and two seat versions of an aircraft.
I generally agree with how you guys want to handle the poll, but as projected I don't feel that it allows enough room to reasonably accomodate all the possible requests that may be made for models.
Another question- what if a group of people would just like a new paint job for an existing model? Does that paint job go on the list for "new aircraft" (and, again, possibly bumping another as-yet-unbuilt airplane off that list), or can the poll(s) be set up to accomodate just the new paint job?
Again, I agree with a new (comprehensive) poll. However, I do not think that a single poll is going to accomodate all the people making requests.

You make some very valid points, however I think it may be a mistake to make things overly complicated at the outset. If we try of list many possible variants and paint schemes for each plane in each category then the poll will become so cumbersome that potential voters might be intimidated and pass altogether. The core decision points are the plane and the scale. Even if we stick to that at first, we will have dozens of viable candidates in each category. My recommendation would be to have a poll that closes periodically---say every six months---with a list of five most wanted planes in a category. After that, we could do a follow-up poll covering most desired variants and schemes for each of the winners.

[Rush104]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

My recommendation would be to have a poll that closes periodically---say every six months---with a list of five most wanted planes in a category. After that, we could do a follow-up poll covering most desired variants and schemes for each of the winners.

You know, I could go for that...count me in. May I suggest that since the poll is aimed at all of the manufacturers, we look at the top 6-8 in each category instead?

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Rush104

You know, I could go for that...count me in. May I suggest that since the poll is aimed at all of the manufacturers, we look at the top 6-8 in each category instead?

Good point. We might have a minimum of the top five in a relatively small category, but go as high as ten in a crowded one. Of course , all "winners would be ranked, with an indication of how they fared ( percentage of total votes, for example ) to indicate the relative appeal of each plane. We would also have to decide what happens if there is no response from the manufacturers. I quess that the best answer would be to keep repeating the poll---even if there are the same winners---until something gets done. Also important would be promoting the poll in some way so as to keep interest up. Certain rules might be considered. For example, we often change our minds about the planes we want done. Does this mean that members should be allowed to change their votes during the polling period or, if that poses a programming problem, perhaps members should be allowed multiple votes--say three-- over a six month interval. In any event, I wonder if "management" or any other members have thoughts about this. Or are we just whistling Dixie?

[Rush104]

You hit on some very valid points, sir. A change in preference for a model by someone who previously voted for or against it will have to be considered if the polls are up for six month periods. I certainly hope we aren't just Whistlin' Dixie on this one, either. I will be an active participant in any poll(s) posted here.
Management, do you have any guidance on how we may proceed further with these suggestions?

[Rush104]

BTW, any allowance for a "Special Category" now and then? I don't know if anybody would be interested in a 1/72nd X-15 or 1/144th XB-70 diecast, but the "Special Category" would seem the logical place to put entries like these...

[lanslide]

I think this poll could be THE most powerful, informative, and helpful tool on this forum!