This may already have been said in one of the other posts so I apologise if i'm repeating the point but, while I think it would be a good idea for a site, I think it should be open to all aviation professionals and academics with aviation interest not just pilots. I am not a pilot myself but the job I do means that I end up researching a lot of accident information which otherwise would not be generally known. Pilots obviously have unique knowledge and practical experience but they don't know everything; engineers, ATC, service providers, academics etc can all contribute valuable insights.

Please don't leave out the oldies who have retired. We lack current information but as the saying goes..."There is no thing as a new accident" and with memory data bases going back up to eighty years....

The hangar has moved into cyberspace and learning IS moving from the formal to the informal and from brick classroom to the internet. A lot of information which used to be found solely in the formal classroom is now available to the constant student on the internet.

You will see more and more often ancora imparo meaning "I'm still learning". When I first started flying in the 60s, the distilled wisdom was usually found by hangar flying with the old boys who had been there, done that. A lot of listening and asking questions.

It is no doubt a problem but we need neophytes to ask questions. They are not intimidated by boundaries nor are the so soaked in the culture that they merely accept things as 'the way it is."

Limiting the input to current airline pilots may dampen down the background noise but it would also limit the expanse of input. The airlines fly into a very limited number of airfields when compared to the fractionals and corporate airplanes. And most of the time those airports serving the airlines are fairly pristine compared to the airports other fliers are using (no ILS, funky approaches, hazardous terrain)

I'm new to this website but have found it very informative and educating.
Do it.

PPRuNe going "closed"?
 

More importantly:

a) How will they verify genuine information?

b) How can I be sure that any genuine information I provide is going only to a reputable destination?

c) Will it mean we get rid of these poxy adverts below?

It costs money to run a web site. The advantage of using adwords rather than other funding sources is that it takes you a few minutes' work, once, ever(*), and the money starts rolling in and just keeps rolling in.

All other methods of fund raising are vastly more effort.

(I stuck a few ads on just one page on my site, just to see what happened. Adwords instantly started paying my hosting costs several times over, and continues to do so, and I've had exactly zero complaints.)

(*) Unless you keep fiddling with format and layout of course.

It's amazing where all this "non-real" money comes from :hmm:

Adverts
 

We have sponsors ads on banners at the top of the page, and pretty unobtrusive Google ads on the left side in "spare space".

If many/most of the contributors here can't/won't splash a few bucks for PTs and Avatars, the site has to be paid for somehow (with the size of the membership, it's not just "hosting" costs, the "bandwidth" charges must give Danny nightmares!)

And I certainly don't think the site has excessive ads!

(keeping this small, to minimise bandwidth :E )

* interesting (I think so anyway!) note - I just picked one thread at random on R&N and, out of 12 posts, only 2 had contributed by PT or Avatar. Another "random check" on JB showed 4 contributions in 11 posts - does that mean anything :confused:

(probably only that "stats" can be used to prove anything , and what does this suggest anyway? :} )

Just to make myself clear and to stop the thread getting further off track, I have no problem with advertising on PPrune. I appreciate that it's essential. However, I'd like to express a preference for it not to happen at the bottom of my posts. In the margins perhaps, but away from the main post. Maybe I'm being pedantic (don't answer that).:rolleyes:

Right, back to the thread......

I am not an airline pilot. I don't work in aviation. But I have an interest in commercial aviation and this is my favourite forum to browse. I have never posted, or I may have once (can't remember) but only to contribute information about a medical query. There are times I wish I could post to ask a question, but don't want to muck up the thread with what would probably seem like an inane question to the pros.
Likely, the vast majority of non-aviation folk who browse this forum either browse only or make decent contributions. It would be a shame that a few people ruin it for the majority, although alot of those 'few' likely don't realise how they are being annoying.
Running a website/forum of my own, I know it would be quite the feat and costly to boot to ensure that everyone with access to this forum was who they said they were. Additionally, it may create a false sense of security for the posters. Might I suggest people take advantage of the 'ignore user' feature?

ignore!

ha.

it is the very thunderous debates that make this place interesting...even the name calling.

if you limit this forum in any way you should change the scope and title, and to those who self limit using "IGNORE" you are closing your collective minds.


the forum has gotten quite dull in recent weeks.

j

What would you call it?

PPrune Elite?


If you think I'm submitting copies of my licence to you, or giving you £1 a month - think again buddy.

With BLOGGING on the increase the days of pprune are numbered anyway.

Can I just turn the discussion around for a minute?

What is the point of having this closed forum?

If it is designed to be a place where aircrew can discuss the aircrew aspects and implications of CHIRP, then it should be closed to anyone else, viewing not allowed either.

If it is designed to be a place where CHIRP reports can be analysed and discussed amongst people who may well be able to add to the debate, then allow ATCOs, licensed engineers, regulators, perhaps even airline senior management to take part.

The big issue I am trying to illustrate is that if you define what this forum will be for before you start it, then the answer to who should have access will become clear.

For the record, as an airline manager rather than a commercial pilot, I would be happy for such private fora to exist. I suspect I would add very little to it of value anyway.

Could we have another forum like it for discussions on airline business issues though? AA&R is, despite the best efforts of the mods, dissolving into a discussion amongst spotters about how they could do a better job than Walsh/O'Leary/AN Other....

Suggest you bill either quarterly, six-monthly or annually in advance to cut down your admin!

Sorry, but this thread was revived after a post was merged into it. The original thread was just a discussion document but a few people seem unable to comprehend what that means. The post that was merged into it and revived it was about a mention elsewhere that we are in the process of revamping the forums and that some forums will be merged together thereby reducing the overall number of forums.

With regards to private forums that are only accessible to subscribers, that is a separate issue and no decisions have been taken on that for now.

There are times one would wish to discuss or debate certain issues without involving ATC, engineers, cabin crew or your granny: we do this behind the locked door.

What Dan is suggesting is no different: if a subscription is necessary and verification of one's status, is it any different to the "club" we already belong to?

Forum discipline
 

A significant issue in the forum has been poor discipline; self discipline in both thought and action (posting).
Discipline is the founding value in our profession. The forum offers opportunity to learn, exchange views, and seek personal improvement, but for those who lack discipline, particularly novice participants, their involvement reduces the potential offered by this unique facility.

We now have forum rules; these have to be both respected and enforced.
Moderators have to moderate, instilling discipline; professional contributors have to set an example so that we all might improve.
Novice participants should seek the skills and disciplines worthy of association with a professional group, and those invited ‘outsiders’ must remember the rules of etiquette and good manners applicable to any guest. If they seek knowledge through learning then this too requires a disciplined approach; first think about the question to asked, is the information available elsewhere, are you asking the ‘right’ question.

To progress this forum we must take something which is good and improve it, this requires all of us to exercise controlled thought involving consideration of the subject based on personal knowledge, if something will be of value to others, is it fact or supposition, or just rumour.

In terms of airmanship (professionalism) we have to build on self discipline with skills of thought and communication, which in turn enable knowledge. (after T. Kern – Airmanship.) I hope that Pprune will regain many of its earlier values which include the discipline revered by professional contributors.

Sorry, my fault! I merged the threads as it seemed to be a continuation of the 'future shape of Pprune' discussion, and demonstrates the fact that the site is evolving as time goes by. In any case, the debate over the way Pprune is presented, paid for, and used should be a live one for all our benefit.

Scroggs

I agree that Pprune is spoiled by poor discipline. Some threads/topics contain useful information, well-argued on all sides with (almost) no mud-slinging - like the current one on approach speeds which has already sharpened my attitude to 160kt to 4. Sadly, many others degenerate to be of little practical use.
If there were a way of weeding out the degeneration then I don't think there would be a need for a 'SuperPprune'. How that could be done is quite a different and difficult matter. More muscular intervention by moderators perhaps - which would require more time/money to be invested by them.
I've returned to reading Pprune after several years' boycotting. Danny has shamed me into buying a PT and I'm looking in to it at the moment. Perhaps this could be the way forward for Pprune?

I for one, often tend to start a pprune session after dinner and plenty of wine. It's in lieu of heading for the ‘Greasy Spoon' and relaxing with one's crew; it's good fun. However, the discipline mentioned above, should extend to only posting on this dedicated forum, while maintaining the same standards of sobriety as one would with being on duty.

Discussing Chirps issues, with comments from others, would add a whole new dimension to receiving the cold print through the post.

I think it could be a very important aviation site.

Only a safety engineer
 

Since I am being invited to comment. I would like to state how useful these forums are to a safety engineer in learning from other people's experiences both good and bad. Whilst I do not practice in the aviation field the lessons learned can be applied in other areas and perhaps sometimes experiences of other areas of industry might be of use to those at the sharp end of the plane. The only negative comment I would make is that sometimes people who put their head above the parapet on the site tend to get their heads well and truly bitten off. I would like to make a plea to be allowed continued access to all the forums and if the professionals are really concerned perhaps make some areas read only

Cheers