Well said....! I understand your position entirely.

I'm not sure why people were so vociferous in the first postings either - especially when some of the points made were (IMHO) valid - like the quality of the Bixler fittings. A complete newcomer would assume that the control horns would have been firmly affixed "cos it were dun at de factory weren't it"..... until one of them parts company on the maiden and the newbie is left with a pile of broken foam and no idea why it happened.. Better to recommend a model whcih doesnt need fettling before first flight.

Keep at it - honing and changing things. As you say, perhaps you are closer to the 'newbie' end of the scale than many detractors. You can probably well remember that feeling of a completely fried brain trying to interpret what the eyes are seeing the 'perfect docile beginner's model' (which seems anything but) is doing into stick movements to counteract the impending disaster!!

On a difefrent subject, I've dropped you a quick IM

I could provide a page of links to extinct dinosaur websites just like his: prima donnas who were interested in garnering attention, were dead set that they had the answer the world lacked and positing the perfect site for beginners. Every one had the same glaring deficiencies. None of them were ever fixed. They all became extinct, never to be heard from again. We get about one per month. After awhile it just gets tiresome.

Usually I just ignore them, but in this case I analyzed the site and actually posted my evaluation of each section and, for most, options to make the section useful. I noted some plain sloppy work: recommended #1 plane that was discontinued, a link to a strange European website for a plane readily available just about everywhere, a video about prop selection whose complete content can be summarized as "props are different. Pick the right one." I forget most of what I found but most was equally flawed.

Actually I spent over an hour on his site. I provided suggestions to fix it, even though I was convinced that, like the laundry list of similar wannabes, it would never be. I hope he proves me wrong. I'd LOVE to be wrong about this one out of the tens of others which ended up on the scrap heap of history.

My position is that RC Groups already does the job he wants to do, and it does it well, with contributions from many dozens of qualified and knowledgeable authors. One exceptional person CAN do better, but the likelihood is somewhat less than that of being struck by lightning in a cave. But PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG! I love to be wrong about stuff like this.

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

I could provide a page of links to extinct dinosaur websites just like his...........etc etc etc.

Hmmm....

You still seem to have an exasperated and aggressive tone, don't you? I saw no prima donna - I saw a chap who hadn't found the help he felt he needed when starting out, so was trying to at least cover some of that for others.

I really don't see the need for condescending posts tearing the guy apart under the guise of 'advice', whilst actually offering very little genuine help.

At least I have given advice. Others have dismissed him and put him on ignore. This is a recurring story at RCG, people being parasites, trying to leverage the well-deserved RCG traffic into their website, which will finally reveal what nobody else will tell you. They would rather play messiah and pied piper to compete with the standard of excellence than join us and contribute here.

I think it's to their credit that RCG allows people to do this, when just about every other site in the universe would have a policy against parasites, labeled as such. It's a tremendous thing that RCG has the self-confidence to realize that none of these people is going to succeed going against the incredible talent base that is Radio Control Groups.

That doesn't mean I can't call a spade a spade. And I'm doing it, along with issuing a challenge: prove me wrong! I tell the truth when I say I'd LOVE to be wrong here.

By the way, beginner plane #1 is now a good link to a UK (Americans can find one easily, this is a good call) supplier and a current model. Several points to the web czar!

Beginner plane #2 is a mode 1 Bixler. Do UK people fly mode 1 with the throttle on the right stick? I didn't know that!

Beginner plane #3 is now a Dynam EZ Hawk with a nice functioning UK link. Good job there too.

Beginner plane #4 has a great link to Wonderland Models, and what makes it great is that on the same page is their inventory of spare parts, which makes this plane so superior to the Bixler and EZ Hawk. You know, it's even cheaper than the Bixler after you buy batteries for the Bixler's TX.

Same propellor (all my spell checkers still hate that one!) size video. Save the viewing. "Propellers are different. Get the right one." You now have the benefit without wasting the time.

Same RC Model Reviews video of Bruce screwing up his explanation of the mAh rating of batteries. Darn, that's painful to watch from one of the most knowledgeable and best communicators on RC. But he really missed that one badly.

RC Powers says

Hot Glue: Hot Glue is the heaviest, and the fastest drying, and if you know how to use it, it works great. I use hot glue the most. Hot glue dries in seconds and is ready to fly. This glue trims easily with a DREMAL, but is difficult to sand. Hot glue, in its molten form, is painful on your skin. This is not a good glue for motor mounts or places that might be exposed to heat.

among other things in his terrible section on glues. Hot glue does not dry and there is no such thing as a "DREMAL." This is the same guy who talks about beginner stuff whilst stunting a jet. "Listen to what I say, don't watch my video!" Needs fixing badly. He is a popularizer, NOT an instructor. Well, maybe he IS a BAD instructor....

Good progress! Prove me wrong!

I saw a chap who hadn't found the help he felt he needed when starting out, so was trying to at least cover some of that for others.

Negative, that's not what I see. On the surface that's what it looks like but RR is closer to hitting the mark I think.


@Mr Biggles,

Your intention might, and that's a slim might, be noble and I'd love nothing more than a one stop solid resource for beginner RC pilots, but I don't think you're doing it right. I half way believe you are genuine in your interest in RC piloting and helping others, but moreso I think your web site is nothing more than a... "Oh, hey, I can make some cash from Google Ads" kinda site. I've seen too many not to think so.

I also think I may have some bad news for you. I been known to dabble in Internet Marketing, Search Engine Optimization and various other aspects involved with such things and I can most certainly assure you that your site will never reach high rankings in Google. And I'll tell you why...

Google hates link sites but loves usable content.

Right now your web site is nothing more than cookie cut template and a poor home for Google Ads. I know that sounds harsh but that's what it looks like. Not a very "RC" oriented design at all.

Now if you managed to get enough high ranking web sites to link to your site, (hence your web site plug here on RCGroups I imagine), you may obtain a fairly high rank in the search...but Google still won't see it as a true resource because all it is is a bunch of links to other web sites and this in turn may actually get your site penalized by Google, reducing it's ranking. It's basically an intersection of information, not a destination.

The best way to make Google love your site is exactly the same way you make people love your site. Usable...Relevant...Content. Right now someone visiting your site will most likely visit one of your YouTube references, like it, but will they link to your site to relay the same info to their visitors/friends? Not likely, they'll instead simply refer them to the YouTube link itself.

Now, to do it properly, each one of your links that you have there already should link to another page on your web site and each page in turn should have proper useful articles or information pertaining to each subject matter. You would then be providing actual relevant content both for your visitors and Google. Each of these content pages, if so needed could then link to your third party content.

Now I do believe your sincerity here simply because if you were just another affiliate marketer trying to set up a flimsy Google Ads site you would've been gone after your first post, but instead you have tried to defend what you've done which means you are truly trying to give the people something worth while, at least I hope you are. If you change things and do it the right way you may just see a modicum of success.

With that said, and because this is a RC forum and not a forum about search engine optimization all I'll say is that if you continue with your web site the way you have been you will end up, as RR said, going the way of the dinosaur.



Best Regards...

Wrong or right, I appreciate the effort. We are in a similar boat, willing to help, passionate about the hobby and we've instructed pilots in real life. Also we don't really know what we're doing only that we enjoy it. We'll get better as we go. Putting yourself out there is scary business.
At first I was doing the ads on our videos, I decided I'd rather not. I am glad that he has linked folks to our youtube channel, we have more videos than he linked to, but that's OK. Some are reviews of more advanced Warbirds and some are aimed at the fledgling flyer. I'm having a ball and ultimately I want folks to be successful in their flying. It is harder than it looks and extremely rewarding. Best of luck Biggles and happy flying all.

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

Well, there goes the contention that three channel planes can't recover from a bad attitude quickly enough to save the crash. Repeated stalls and just pulling back the throttle and leaving controls alone recovered the Champ so quickly that you really are risk-free even at the photography height of 50 to 75 feet there. I like your stuff there. It's not smooth, but the information makes sense. Your "Why does my airplane always go left" is just a bit shakey in the explanation of the causes, but the stuff on landing with high angle of attack is really spot on.

Appreciate your comments. Thanks, Ryan

Thanks teknokraze thats just the sort of useful critisism I need, no sarcasm or judgement and straight to the point (well almost no judgement ) I had no idea about google not liking linked sites I will get on that straight away, Bear with me though, like Ive said before I'm not an expert on this subject and it might take me a little while to find the right info to put with the links but I'm sure they will be on here somewhere

by the way teknokraze I have sent you a message

You can do the battery section yourself. It's not all that difficult (says Bruce, who screwed the pooch on that one) but just like I know for a fact that Bruce knows what all those numbers mean better than I do, it's easy to mangle an explanation trying to oversimplify or just having a brain fart.

Now I doubt that Google will penalize you if you have your own original content and links too. They're looking for content and this is a good place to provide it, with photos of course.

On propellers, things get mighty complicated mighty quickly and "Props are different. Choose the right one." won't cut it. Most discussions most anywhere don't cut it.

There has been one fairly exhaustive study of model airplane propellers done, Brandt, J.B. and Selig, M.S., "Propeller Performance Data at Low Reynolds Numbers," 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2011-1255, Orlando, FL, January 2011 from researchers at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Dept of Aerospace Engineering.

This is heavy-duty engineering talk and linking there might not be a great idea for beginners unless you want them to think "this stuff is so complicated I can NEVER learn it." It requires a translator.

Taking the cream off the top, the study revealed that there is a very wide range in quality for UAV/RC propellers. From the study

Also, over a range of propellers, the propeller efficiency varied greatly from a peak near 0.65 down to near 0.28 for an exceptionally poor propeller.

This means predicting propeller performance using diameter and pitch numbers is next to useless with model airplane props. Yet you see thread after thread treating props as if all you have to know is diameter and pitch. Test results rule and that restricts your software tools to Drive Calculator and MotoCalc.

Somebody, you perhaps, needs to take the soapbox and say "Hey, man, it's more complicated than that. But with these two pieces of software you can pick props pretty well." You may or may not enjoy the University of Illinois study results. I love that stuff But it's worth a look.

Really decent progress has been made on your site. You're the first I've seen that has ever used information from here to improve their site. That already differentiates you from the prima-donnas. I'd LOVE to have to eat a heaping plate of crow on this one. Hold the ketchup please....

[QUOTE=teknokraze;23167639]
@Mr Biggles,

.....I half way believe you are genuine in your interest in RC piloting and helping others, but moreso I think your web site is nothing more than a... "Oh, hey, I can make some cash from Google Ads" kinda site. I've seen too many not to think so.
..... QUOTE]

teknokraze has hit the nail on the head,I think.It appears to be an attempt to make a site popular (and make a bit of money) without the imput of anything new or original.That was what first put me off, but I did not realise what it was.I believe the same think is around on facebook, where peeps are asked to click "like" (I don't know much about it).

I can assure you guys, based on a PM I received from him, that biggles is making an effort to make his site more of a resource. His site has been updated and changed a fair bit from when he originally posted. He's definitely making an effort to change it for the better. I sent him even more advice on changes so you may see it change rather drastically in the near future, if he heeds my advice.

Regards...

I have a similar experience and am now searching the Interwebs for interesting recipes for crow.

Originally Posted by Rockin Robbins

I have a similar experience and am now searching the Interwebs for interesting recipes for crow.

Just plug your nose while eating, crow then tastes like apples.

Hi everyone
I have been putting some hours in to my website and it seems its starting to pay off,have a look at the post #7 on this thread http://forum.flitetest.com/showthrea...6169#post36169
I'm hoping that more people will find it as useful as this chap did and if they do I would like to thank colonel blink for his encouragement, rockin robin for his brutal advice and criticism and teknokraze for the time and effort he put in with his excellent advice about web sites.
its still far from perfect I know and I still have a lot of work to do but I'm getting there and hopefully the website will keep improving

I'll take a look later in the day! Good to see you still working on it.