New Helicopter Forum Section
 

Hi Mods! What chance of creating a Forum Sub-Section that deals with those issues relating to the helicopter world that are currently lost in the vast tide of fixed wing rhubarb.

How about we have Rotorheads, then Flight Instructors and Examiners, Military Flying, and Private Flying. Plus others - suggestions please.

I think the more accurate focus will lead to more contributions.

G.

Good idea.

This is sarcasm right? Or am I missing something?

I think it is a good idea (but could be it's just me and GinC!)

For example - I can't be bothered to troll through the main PPRUNE Instructor and Examiner bit because it's mostly full of fixed wing dross, but a specific Rotary FI/TRI/FE/TRE sub-section would be of interest.

agreed! FI/FE/TRI/TRE section would be good!

Helimut
 

FT has it right, it's a fag to wade through the FW stuff and when you ask a question on these forums you never get a response because they are all on another planet.

G.

Location: button moon, next to mr spoon :E
Only joking

Sub-forums of Rotorheads
 

Methinks you is missing something!
Geoffers' idea is very good as it would certainly help focus all the rotary related info. What do the Moderators think?

Just one thread 'Rotorheads' is a gross underepresentation of the helicopter industry as a whole. I also think it is a good idea to split it into general interest, training and revenue sections.

I think the idea of having sub-divisions within the Rotorheads main forum is a very good idea. In defence of helimutt, it's possible that he might've not seen that it is for sub-forums (fora?) within Rotorheads, not a repeat of the already existing forums that exist elsewhere within PPRuNe.

Yep, good idea! Well said, Geoff!

One participates within a Thread.

Current system seems fine to me....you want something to do specifically with Helicopters....go to Rotorheads. If one is interested in the topic within a Thread....pitch in!

I look at Rotorheads Forum as being the center of the Universe for all things Helicopter. The Industry needs to come together as a whole if we are to progress as a trade, profession, and collegial group of people.

I would vote to keep things as they are.....otherwise the tendency would be to skip over several sub-forums as one assumes there is little of current personal interest to be found.

Now...you do get the benefit of seeing all the Active Threads within the Rotorheads Forum as you scroll down through the Threads thus you might trip into what might be a missed topic if you did not enter that particular sub-forum.

In a left handed way that encourages people to read things they might not normally do...and perhaps get a bit of vicarious cross training which cannot hurt anyone.

The idea of Rotorheads sub-forums has been discussed a few times over the years (search Forum in thread titles) and has taken a number of variations. Through the PPRuNe Forums that we have now (I know that Fora is technically correct, but we tend to use Forums by default these days!) there are few aviation topics/specialisations that aren't covered already.

While I understand the desires expressed here, we have found that Rotorheads generally is more of a community than other sections of PPRuNe and as such gets a great deal more latitude than elsewhere. Creating sub forums is fraught with problems: what topics would be appropriate in which sub forum, how do we decide what sub forums should be created, and how do we resolve cross-posting? As mentioned, how do we keep up interest in small specialised sub forums? How do you find a topic that has been previously discussed, in which sub forum?

The Mil Forum is a single forum and covers FW, helicopters, instructing, etc etc, without sub forums.

Even more important, how do I moderate it all and make choices of where to direct threads/posts without upsetting the OP? ;)

Please keep discussing the idea, as I don't have a definitive answer: these are just issues that need consideration from my point of view. In defence of Geoff's concern that the plank posters don't respond to FI issues on the other Forum: that's why we have FI threads here on Rotorheads :ok:

SASless wrote a post that's sums up our feeling very well indeed - especially the last sentence.

It's my 17th year of running PPRuNe and my biggest single regret is us dealing with the scale of the site by turning it into a series of geographical, job type and specialisation ghettos that many people never venture out of.

It's our fault, it's the way we coped with the overwhelming traffic. I do have at least a partial solution for it but the funding for the software to allow a single thread to exist across more than one forum has never been set aside or simply has been seen as 'far too difficult.' In this way a training thread could exist here, the instructors' forum and also the most relevant geographical one.

I actually think we've got far too many forums and over the period I'm discussing the number of visits has grown immensely but the number of pages read per visit has halved - the ghetto effect.

Regards to all,
Rob

OK then.....
 

..... so from now on all the Fora in Pprune now have an invisible prefix 'Fixed Wing'. I can live with that. It will at least prevent me from labouring under the illusion that if I post on any other forum (Trainers and examiners, military etc etc) that I will get a response. Plank people are generally of the opinion that helicopters are objects that defy the natural laws of motion, gravity aerodynamics and common sense so we will remain within our SILO and read interesting posts that we otherwise would not have seen.

maybe the positive thing to do is to change the Fora titles so that the categories state:

Fixed Wing Airline Forums
Fixed Wing Non-airline Forums

Etc etc - that would at least add clarity to the situation. We could then be in a
section called...... way for it ......

ROTORHEADS - the forum that is home to all things relating to helicopters and gyroplanes.

Newbies would not misunderstand that if they are an FI(H), TRI(H) they should not post on the Forum of that name because they will get little if any response.

One way or another let's decide what we want (happy with SAS's analysis and Pprune towers) but please can be have a system that reinforces that rather than one that depends on chance to direct our members.

G. :)

I've been here longer than most (1995) and seen many changes, including the initial introduction of a separate Rotorheads section, and indeed, the introduction of a website, rather than the original BBS and email system.

I think I'd still prefer to keep the present format, for similar reasons to SASless.I hold a QHI ticket (now ex-military but also civilian) and an ex-military QFI one too, plus a CPL(A). Although I'm not instructing for now. I've flown military all roles, civilian SAR, Police, VIP/corporate, etc etc , so my interest is fairly wide ranging and I enjoy reading the whole lot. It's easy enough to miss out a topic if it provides no interest.

my two cents.

In my opinion the forum structure is quite ok as it is; I like it more than other kind of aviation/gettos multi sub forums over the net.

Maeroda (hems helo driver)

I like it as it is, it's borne the test of time, you can 'nip in' and quickly check out the area you are interested in and catch a little bit of something different going on too. It's worn and shiney, the room smells of leather and coffee.............:uhoh:
Ooops, nearly lost it then.....nurse?

It does not seem to be broken? so why fix it

i had misread it, my apologies. Now I understand what you mean. Good Idea. :ok::O

I was initially for the idea - but after reading SASless post I've just about changed my mind, just one thing.

What needs to be changed is the description (A haven for professional helicopter pilots to discuss the things that affect them) - it comes down to the word "professional", there seems to be an increasing number of individuals who seem to think you can only post in Rotorheads if you have tens of thousands of hours logged - this is no longer the case, Rotorheads is a place for all types in the rotary world.

A number of Pros don't like the "basic" questions being posted. This leads to helicopter based questions being posted in the "Private Flying" section, which is completely wrong and defeats the purpose of a single heli forum - especially as the poster will miss out on vital advice, or more importantly lifesaving advice from those with more experience !

Splitting the forum into Commercial and Private is one option - but we then lose the relationship between the two types, which Rotorheads did/should have!

That is an unfortunate attitude and one which, I hope, is not propagated by too many professionals as we were all there once!

While on the matter of forum labelling I have to say that I would be far more comfortable if Rotorheads were badged as "A Haven for Helicopter Professionals .." as opposed to pilots exclusively. Where would the pilots be without the mechanics, and the mechanics without the manufacturers technical support and all of us without seasoned aviation staff in a host of disciplines ranging from admin through to ops. Indeed this rationale applies equally to the very title PPRuNe .. but to keep reinforcing this 'pilot exclusivity' seems unnecessary given that so many additional professional aviation specialisations participate in Rotorheads.

I may be wrong.

As some of you will know, I was the Moderator of this forum from 2000 -2007. During that time, there were suggestions every couple of years that Rotorheads should have sub-forums. If there had been sufficient support, I would have arranged it. There never was.

Neither necessary nor desirable IMHO: Rotorheads is primarily a forum for professional pilots.
Most of the regular contributors are professionals but PPLs and student-pilots have always been made welcome and are free to ask questions and learn.
Others involved in the industry, engineers for example, post regularly and make valuable contributions.

The forum has a well-established ethos: It's a friendly 'crew-room' where we discuss everything from helicopter ops to highly technical topics, enjoy a laugh, have the occasional row and willingly help each other - which includes people with enormous experience and expertise helping PPLs and student pilots who wish to learn.

An 'increasing number' is obviously relative. I don't believe there's a problem. PPLs and student-pilots post regularly.

Over the years, there were entirely justified complaints from professionals about beginners constantly asking questions that had already been asked and answered endless times. We reduced that problem significantly by having the 'So you want to be a Helicopter Pilot' sticky at the top of the forum but, even if it was in flashing lights, some newbies would still post without reading it.
R22 questions and discussions have, for some time, been kept in one place as far as practicably possible: 'The R22 Corner'. There's bound to be some delay before threads are merged – all PRuNe Mods are volunteers who do the job in their spare time.

Things do get a little heated between the Pros and the PPLs from time to time; they always have. I no longer monitor the forum closely but, when I did, more often than not it wasn't the fault of the Pros – they occasionally became exasperated by the sort of PPLs who think they know as much as the professionals and argue instead of learning.

The single forum formula works. Rotorheads grew into one of the busiest forums on PPRuNe, one of the two biggest helicopter forums on the internet, and the biggest international forum with members working in a wide variety of ops all over the world.
Those who’ve joined in recent years might find it hard to believe but, in 2000, it was good going if the number of posts on a thread reached double figures, the number of views per thread didn't reach three figures very often and the number of people on the forum at any one time never exceeded very low double figures. (There are over 300 as I write this.)
These two threads from 2000 illustrate the point: Drying Paint and Dead Forum


It's no longer my decision but, if it was, I'd keep it as it is.

H.

The last post ?
 

As I began the debate and if, as heliport says this subject crops up every now and again, maybe on this occasion I can end it.

OK - so I have been persuaded that things should remain as they are. But I will have a soft spot in my heart for those unfortunates that mistakenly post on those other fora that are frequented by strange plank driving people who don't have any interest in things rotary and by learning the hard way they will henceforth ignore them and post directly on Rotorheads.

G. :}

Savoia....I agree the Mechanics/Engineers should definitely be part of Rotorheads as they are very much the backbone of the industry. Pilots can fly the machines only so long before they go U/S for defects, Inspections, and TBO requirements. Their input and arguments would be informative reading (assuming we could be satisifed with limiting ourselves to monosyllabic words).

They would be much easier to seek out for answers when we. who decided to work with our hands instead of our brains, have questions about the technical aspects of our aircraft and its care and feeding.

Treading into the Engineers Tea Room as a Pilot has always been a dicey thing to do. Perhaps we might find a way to lure them into this one.

Aw!! you say the nicest things!!

S

...
 

I'm with Sas et al...It seems to work just fine as it is;
why tinker with it for only minimal 'subjective' gain...

Speaking as someone working one's way up into and through the professional ranks, I've always found it really useful that rotorheads has such a mix. I've met great people, seen shining examples and dire warnings, had plenty of encouragement, and learned a lot. I tend to check prooon in spare moments around doing other things, so it's nice to have everything in one place - splitting it out into sub-fora would probably mean I'd miss stuff. So another vote for the status quo.

Good idea! You have all my support

Given the leanings towards maintaining the status quo (as mentioned above) what would be useful in a single-forum set-up such as Rotorheads is if the number of threads per page were increased from the current 25 (not including stickys) to say 35 or 40. This would enable those dropping-in for a quick glance to access more topics more easily.

Its not that selecting "page 2" or more is in anyway difficult but I am reaonably confident that there are those who, with limited available time, simply glance at "page one" to see what's new. Slightly longer pages would offer a wider selection of topics more conveniently.
.

Also support old format. KIS method - keep it simple, the best way always for me. I saw many different forums but I've never liked many closed corners or ghetos with only one or two topics... This is quite enough for such a small helicopter community in the world. Very efficient, open and fast.
Regards from Middle Europe.

Yes but.....
 

...... you are all missing the point. Of course it's the best helicopter forum on the web but raise your eyes a little and there are fora that beg your attention - Instructors and examiners, military flying etc etc. but don't let that siren call steal your post for it will lie forlornly unanswered for we are the Homo Sapiens in a world full of Neandertals. They (FW chappies) don't understand us and they cannot respond to discussions about our world. We need a sign that says HELICOPTER STUFF HERE - DONT POST ELSEWHERE.

Good threads can be lost if we don't remind the unfamiliar that although it does not say so, ALL the other threads (like the FAA CAA and all other NAAs) have a built-in fixed wing majority and bias.

G :{

Savoia Leanings?
It's almost horizontal.


You can select the number of threads you wish to see per page (up to 40) in User Control Panel.

H.

I don't know, but I think that you can always open a
new thread like "Instructors & examiners" or "'military corner" and there you can discuss about everything you want ...because if you "move" that somewhere on the side, half of people will never open that gheto, after that seems like you have two separate helicopter forums, some chemistry is lost. That's experience from my country... Now it's better, I Like this way.
But, its only my opinion.

Like most others, I like the current system - but mainly because I tend to dip in most days (and several times a day). It is the eclectic nature of Rotorheads that makes it attractive to most followers. However, for infrequent readers/contributors, a more hierarchical schema might be more practical.

What might be useful is to extend a organisation/practice that is in use - the mods have established dedicated threads for: aircraft types; photographs; videos etc. Perhaps this practice could be extended to a number of the other categories that were mentioned by Geoff. If merited, these could be retained on the font page with a judicious use of sticky's. Additionally, if they are originated by the mods, they will also be persistent.

It might be preferable to have a thread naming convention - thus avoiding multiple threads on the same subject and the lucky-dip approach (although the subject of most threads can (usually) be discerned from the first post).

Jim

With an emphasis on 'professionals' in attitude if not in employment, that is a good idea :ok:

The success of "Rotorheads" is in no small part owed to the wisdom of Heliport....as he provided a steady and judicious hand in his Moderation of the Forum. I know it was his genius and not just merely his good looks and charm that helped bring us to the point we are here.

If he had seen the benefit of making a change....it would have happened.

I would hate to see the basis of the success of this Forum undone by making major changes to the format.

For Heliport and Senior Pilot.....in consideration of their efforts....:D:D:D:D:D

I'm with all y'all.

I think we should leave it as a single forum but maybe with a broader description. Many PPL and private owners provide welcome contributions and in turn benefit from some great wisdom from contributors who are professionals. Many of us have 20-30 years in the industry and should encourage those who will be the industry's future.

One observes that our intrepid Moderator Signore Pilota Superiore has re-badged the forum so that it now reads .. "A Haven for Helicopter Professionals .." as opposed to pilots exclusively!

When I PM'd SP offering my congratulations on this advancement he responded as follows:

Well, anyway well done SP. :ok:

And I suppose .. welcome to the new 'all inclusive' Rotorheads!!!

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-b...vil%252521.jpg
The New Rotorheads: (L-R) Pilots, ATCO's, Mechanics

Very possibly, and the rest of us mere mortals (non-professional and non-pilots) may not post because of that, because before even contemplating a post they may already feel intimidated by the possible response.

Why should this forum just be for professionals and pilots?

What about all the other people involved in Helicopters?

Agreed.