Reverse Engineering A Community's High Wing Trainer Contest

[Byrdman]

I am all for this idea except rule 4 (2.0) Posting the plans to the general public is just as bad as Banggood reverse engineering and selling them. This looks to me like you are intentionally stirring the pot over plans OR you are trying to buddy #$!% FT out of being able to produce a product and get some return on that investment.

Regardless of intention this is really bad form to do something like that.

My intention was to get the scratch builders in this forum to come up with their own versions and have a little fun with it to actually take the pressure off FT plans release issues some have here by making a high wing trainer by the community that could be shared with everyone.

I have not been here long, but been in and out of the hobby for years, so maybe my post missed the intended mark. So, let me make everything perfectly clear:

I love what FT has done with this hobby and in the past 3 months, I have bought 3 SPK's, 5 Lemon Rx's, a few esc's, and a few other odds and ends. I have also built 7 scratch builts from their plans and plan to buy a few more SBK's of the ones I like to fly the best once my scratch builts are beat up more. When I run out of my stockpile of turnigy motors I have had for years, I plan to buy motors from them as well. I like to support businesses I like and have the financial means to do so.

I have no intentions of going into competition with FT using their designs, doing SM or YT productions or anything other than building and flying. This is purely a hobby for me and with my regular job, I really dont have the time even if it wanted to. I actually find it amazing and respect that they can make a living with foamboard airplanes and doing this work when so many others have gone out of business over the years trying to do the same thing.

I think my post was misinterpreted by the longtime members such as yourself to protect FT, and probably my fault for the way it was titled so I get that and own it and will change it. But let's be honest about this as well. Almost all of FT's SBK's are their copies of designs that have been out for many years before they came around, and a high wing trainer like their new Tutor is a mash up of other well known high wing trainer designs. It even says so in the description.

 

[Byrdman]

I promised myself I wouldn't do this anymore, but I think you need to be aware of some facts. So I have posted this as an example of buying a Flite Test SBK in the UK, versus an ARTF model:
Flite Test Simple Cub Speed-build Kit with MakerFoam (956mm)
BRAND: FLITE TEST
PART NUMBER: FLT1072
£39.89
$55.02
FLITE TEST Power Pack B - Radials/FLT-3059
£94.07
$129.76

TOTAL COST
£133.96
$184.78

HOBBY KING - TUNDRA (ARTF) (Just add transmitter, receiver and a lipo)
£137.69
$189.93

The point I am trying to make here Sir, is that I can buy an ARTF model with Motor, ESC and servos etc for little more than I can buy a Simple Cub SBK here in the UK, that price does include the power pack B and accessories. So you can probably now understand why people in other countries like the UK loved the free-plan downloads.
Please in future be a bit more respectful of other people on the forum who scratch build from those free plans. Young people in the UK for example don't have funds to buy speed build kits at those prices, scratch building is their only option into the hobby.
I think even the Flite test staff understood that and its why they initially gave away the plans for free, to help get more people into the hobby.
I can understand why they stopped giving away free plans and I don't blame them in the least. Pity they hadn't patented there designs, they could have made a fortune from law suits against the criminals who stole and continue to sell their designs.
I have nothing else to say on the matter.

So go buy the one you feel is the best value, it's your money.

As far as no money for the hobby, I don't understand your point here. There are plenty of free plans to get kids started in the hobby, but Just because the new latest and greatest designs are not going to be released for free anymore is no reason they still cannot get in on the cheap side with the existing designs. Plus a US $12 investment will continue that with FTCA. If you cant afford $12 to keep getting free plans, then you really cant afford this hobby anyway. Kids can still ask the neighbors if they want their car washed, flowerbeds weeded, sweep the sidewalk, etc. If someone wants it bad enough, they will figure out a way to exchange their time and labor for money to get it.

As a new member, I'm looking at it from an outsiders view and all I see are a bunch of grown men complaining about not getting their free stuff anymore. I hope I am wrong here...

 

[Byrdman]

Did you actually read what I posted? Building an FT legacy has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I said...

True, but Thread title changed to not appear to be stepping on FT's toes or in anymore dog excrement, lol...

 

[Byrdman]

yah, I think that gets you the same goal [free plans] without stepping on FT's stuff. I have my doubts of you getting many entries with the $5 entry fee however (at least based on the 'intended target')

Yeah, I guess you have a point there

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Annnnd here we go...

I think this thread is a good idea, poorly explained.

To try to directly reverse engineer an FT design, so you can post the plans online is the really hard way to to get to the "stealing" of FT plans.

Which is sort of the joke behind the OP's post I think.

To be honest, the better way to go about this would have been to just say what (I think) the real point was, encourage people to take a design, use it as inspiration, and make it your own.

Which at the end of the day is exactly what FT tries to do. They want to get people excited to do this themselves. The hobby is all about shared experiences, learning, and passing on that knowledge.

So if Flite Test inspires someone to come up with their own design, take the effort to share it with the public, and let someone else be inspired that if that person could do it, so could they, that's a win!

Otherwise, why take the effort of adding the "resources" section to the forum?

Look what Flite Test has done in the past. With Jake's class of kids, who were inspired by Flite Test, and made an entire class out of how to run a hobby design and manufacturing business. FT wasn't intimidated, or upset about this, they supported it, and even benefited from it!

So, as much as I like to debate... the arguments in here are a bit silly since I don't think the OP was actually trying to do what people thought they should be upset about.

 

[Ratcheeroo]

I think it would be cool if FT were putting out an occasional challenge of this type, maybe something with small prizes such as this one with FTCA memberships or such. There are so many great builders out there, maybe a chance at having your design published by FT. So I'm a little confused as to this challenge, good idea or no? Is sharing plans a good thing? I used to think so , but the thought of someone taking something that I would freely share and take it to make money is something I never considered, I seem to remember @SquirrelTail having something like that happen with his Telemaster design. This has all become very confusing guys.

 

[leaded50]

dont share because someone perhaps would take it, would anyway be negative for the community. It will not help community to develope their skills. We are persons here, sharing to other private persons, not contending companys.
They need have other thoughts in mind , because the costs of beeing a company.

 

[Byrdman]

Annnnd here we go...

I think this thread is a good idea, poorly explained.

To try to directly reverse engineer an FT design, so you can post the plans online is the really hard way to to get to the "stealing" of FT plans.

Which is sort of the joke behind the OP's post I think.

To be honest, the better way to go about this would have been to just say what (I think) the real point was, encourage people to take a design, use it as inspiration, and make it your own.

Which at the end of the day is exactly what FT tries to do. They want to get people excited to do this themselves. The hobby is all about shared experiences, learning, and passing on that knowledge.

So if Flite Test inspires someone to come up with their own design, take the effort to share it with the public, and let someone else be inspired that if that person could do it, so could they, that's a win!

Otherwise, why take the effort of adding the "resources" section to the forum?

Look what Flite Test has done in the past. With Jake's class of kids, who were inspired by Flite Test, and made an entire class out of how to run a hobby design and manufacturing business. FT wasn't intimidated, or upset about this, they supported it, and even benefited from it!

So, as much as I like to debate... the arguments in here are a bit silly since I don't think the OP was actually trying to do what people thought they should be upset about.

Thank you! I agree it was poorly explained. I hoped others would see it the way you did. That was my full intentions but understood where some were coming from.

 

[FlyerInStyle]

Did you actually read what I posted? Building an FT legacy has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I said...

sorry I quoted the wrong post... Sorry for that. I meant to quote @TheFlyingBrit 's quote

 

[PsyBorg]

My intention was to get the scratch builders in this forum to come up with their own versions and have a little fun with it to actually take the pressure off FT plans release issues some have here by making a high wing trainer by the community that could be shared with everyone.

I have not been here long, but been in and out of the hobby for years, so maybe my post missed the intended mark. So, let me make everything perfectly clear:

I love what FT has done with this hobby and in the past 3 months, I have bought 3 SPK's, 5 Lemon Rx's, a few esc's, and a few other odds and ends. I have also built 7 scratch builts from their plans and plan to buy a few more SBK's of the ones I like to fly the best once my scratch builts are beat up more. When I run out of my stockpile of turnigy motors I have had for years, I plan to buy motors from them as well. I like to support businesses I like and have the financial means to do so.

I have no intentions of going into competition with FT using their designs, doing SM or YT productions or anything other than building and flying. This is purely a hobby for me and with my regular job, I really dont have the time even if it wanted to. I actually find it amazing and respect that they can make a living with foamboard airplanes and doing this work when so many others have gone out of business over the years trying to do the same thing.

I think my post was misinterpreted by the longtime members such as yourself to protect FT, and probably my fault for the way it was titled so I get that and own it and will change it. But let's be honest about this as well. Almost all of FT's SBK's are their copies of designs that have been out for many years before they came around, and a high wing trainer like their new Tutor is a mash up of other well known high wing trainer designs. It even says so in the description.

You intentions are great. I just think its lame and uncouth to be doing a build that is meant as a reward for members of the FTCA not the entire world. By doing this you pretty much on FT, any member of the FTCA as well as long time supporters. There are PLENTY of planes out in the wild NOT designated to a specific purpose like the Tutor. Changing the title is not a fix. Change the aircraft and show some respect please and thank you.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

I think it would be cool if FT were putting out an occasional challenge of this type, maybe something with small prizes such as this one with FTCA memberships or such. There are so many great builders out there, maybe a chance at having your design published by FT. So I'm a little confused as to this challenge, good idea or no? Is sharing plans a good thing? I used to think so , but the thought of someone taking something that I would freely share and take it to make money is something I never considered, I seem to remember @SquirrelTail having something like that happen with his Telemaster design. This has all become very confusing guys.

Maybe something for FTCA members? @FTCA Director

 

[Byrdman]

You intentions are great. I just think its lame and uncouth to be doing a build that is meant as a reward for members of the FTCA not the entire world. By doing this you pretty much on FT, any member of the FTCA as well as long time supporters. There are PLENTY of planes out in the wild NOT designated to a specific purpose like the Tutor. Changing the title is not a fix. Change the aircraft and show some respect please and thank you.

I respect your opinion on the matter. Dont agree with you, but respect it either way. I seriously doubt this will come to fruition anyway, but maybe something else good will come out of it after all.

 

[PsyBorg]

I think it would be cool if FT were putting out an occasional challenge of this type, maybe something with small prizes such as this one with FTCA memberships or such. There are so many great builders out there, maybe a chance at having your design published by FT. So I'm a little confused as to this challenge, good idea or no? Is sharing plans a good thing? I used to think so , but the thought of someone taking something that I would freely share and take it to make money is something I never considered, I seem to remember @SquirrelTail having something like that happen with his Telemaster design. This has all become very confusing guys.

Anyone's designs can be published here. That is one of reasons the articles section is made for. Posting and using plans that have been released to the general public already is fine and dandy. Specialty plans or limited release plans like the Tutor and the Founders Edition plan should not be let free in the general public. They were made and produced with special intentions and not for just anyone.

I look at it like this. I give my phone number to a friend with the exception it does not get passed on. Said friend passes it on to another friend common to both of us for a specific reason. That friend uses the number gets what help they need from me and all is good. Right up to the point he shares my number with other people because he wasn't directly asked to NOT do that. Now my number is in peoples contact lists getting shared all over the world. See where this is going?

 

[TheFlyingBrit]

Anyone's designs can be published here. That is one of reasons the articles section is made for. Posting and using plans that have been released to the general public already is fine and dandy. Specialty plans or limited release plans like the Tutor and the Founders Edition plan should not be let free in the general public. They were made and produced with special intentions and not for just anyone.

I look at it like this. I give my phone number to a friend with the exception it does not get passed on. Said friend passes it on to another friend common to both of us for a specific reason. That friend uses the number gets what help they need from me and all is good. Right up to the point he shares my number with other people because he wasn't directly asked to NOT do that. Now my number is in peoples contact lists getting shared all over the world. See where this is going?

The moral of the story is don't give out your phone number to friends you can't trust them

 

[PsyBorg]

The moral of the story is don't give out your phone number to friends you can't trust them

I saved more time and aggravation by simply getting rid of friends..


EDIT: although I seemed to have acquired more when I came here.

 

[TheFlyingBrit]

If you are a guy your mum's your best friend, if your a woman your dad's usually your best friend. However If your a child then your dog or pet is your best friend.

 

[Taildragger]

I think it would be cool if FT were putting out an occasional challenge of this type, maybe something with small prizes such as this one with FTCA memberships or such. There are so many great builders out there, maybe a chance at having your design published by FT. So I'm a little confused as to this challenge, good idea or no? Is sharing plans a good thing? I used to think so , but the thought of someone taking something that I would freely share and take it to make money is something I never considered, I seem to remember @SquirrelTail having something like that happen with his Telemaster design. This has all become very confusing guys.

Some person on rcg took the plans from here and started offering to sell a kit for it on rcg

 

[FlyingMonkey]

There's always going to be the risk that someone will try to profit off of your efforts.

At the end of the day, if someone takes a design you make, and they build and sell kits from that design, there's no injured party unless you were, or were planning to, sell kits yourself.

Heck, even with the FT situation, that had been going on for years, and FT didn't bat an eye. The trigger point was when the cloners were doing such a bad job at it, that customer support kept getting quality control complaints about kits, that FT didn't make or sell.

I love the idea of a design contest.

I'd love to see it as an FTCA contest, or at least announced in the newsletter.

So if it's something you'd like to see as a reality, decide when you want the contest to be, and get with Lee soon, so if he chooses to accept the idea, it can get added to the next newsletter.

 

[Ratcheeroo]

There's always going to be the risk that someone will try to profit off of your efforts.

At the end of the day, if someone takes a design you make, and they build and sell kits from that design, there's no injured party unless you were, or were planning to, sell kits yourself.

Heck, even with the FT situation, that had been going on for years, and FT didn't bat an eye. The trigger point was when the cloners were doing such a bad job at it, that customer support kept getting quality control complaints about kits, that FT didn't make or sell.

I love the idea of a design contest.

I'd love to see it as an FTCA contest, or at least announced in the newsletter.

So if it's something you'd like to see as a reality, decide when you want the contest to be, and get with Lee soon, so if he chooses to accept the idea, it can get added to the next newsletter.

So what say you Lee @FTCA Director ? Does this sound like a good idea to you?

 

[TheFlyingBrit]

To be fair @FlyingMonkey has a point.
If you submit a design on line and place no patent or restrictions on the ability of others to download that design, then you open yourself up to others potentially profiting from your work and have to accept that fact.
Its human nature that greedy un-talented people will always live off the backs of those who are more industrious and skilled. Thieves for example: that's there living, they can't be arsed getting out of bed, going to work and earning money to buy things. So they take from others, who have worked and earned their possessions.
Flite Test could have asked fans to log onto a special Flite Test plan site. Once enrolled they confirm there identity etc. they then get an encryption decoder sent to there email address. The plans could then be downloaded free incorporating encryption. The member can then decrypted the file on their own PC and have the plan for personal use.
But there again, even a system like that could be easily circumvented and the result would be the same criminals copying and profiting from the designs, so would it have been worth the cost and effort ? Probably not.
Yes Flite Test may have lost revenue on the free early model designs. But those free plans gained them a loyal following which is priceless, this is clearly visible by the number of followers on this forum.
I personally would never buy a Flite Test kit from anyone other than Flite Test themselves, even if the supplier was selling them at 50% of the Flite Test price, its a matter of principle.
I would also consider buying plans off Flite Test in the future. That's if they went back to producing decent simple model designs like the original models they produced in the early days. The new "Tutor" is a perfect example of what they should be selling, its a simple straight forward design a couple of nights to build and probably a lot of fun to fly to.
I really can't be arsed with the over the top, over complicated Master Series models that John Overstreet produces. If I wanted a scale looking plane I would just build a balsa model, they look better and will last longer.
So to conclude, did Flite Test get hurt by someone ripping off their early designs, probably not. If anything its a testament to those early designs that people did want to copy them and try to sell them. I think the loyal fan base and followers have given Flite Test more back than they would have gained from the loss of revenue giving those plans away. Lets face facts if you bought one kit from Flite Test, the design is already there you can copy and reproduce that model as many times as you want, I am sure they realised that fact.
Sorry for ranting again its just my age