LSP_Kevin

No worries, Gaz. Give the new version a chance. I honestly really like it, though it still remains inferior to the full desktop experience, but that's the case with most sites. Kev

So, I'll get straight to the point: there will be no change in LSP's remit or purpose. Ever. Even if every single member wanted it, it would simply tell us that LSP no longer has a reason to exist, and it would be RIP LSP. Adapt? We're not here to adapt! We're here to serve a specific niche within the scale modelling community, and if that niche should disappear or become irrelevant, then so would we. We don't exist without it; it's that simple. To the definition of "Large Scale Plane": it has, and always will be, a scale-based definition, which encompasses 1/35 and larger aircraft and helicopters. This definition is not open to interpretation or variance, and the physical dimensions of the model have no bearing whatsoever on the definition that is the cornerstone of our site and community. To address the issue of the Non-LSP Works section: LSP is approaching its 20th anniversary, but Non-LSP Works has only been in existence for less than 8 of those years, so the total post-count comparison is not a valid metric with which to assess its relative merits. Personally I build a wide range of subjects and scales, including sci-fi and airliners, and use the Non-LSP Works section as appropriate. Sometimes I don't post them at all. Our focus is our strength, and the only reason we've been relatively successful as an Internet community over the last 20 years. Kev

Thanks to Robert Surcouf for supplying both these book covers for us. Kev

You clearly ever used the previous version! That was a real chore. This one at least offers an equivalent toolset to the desktop version, and I can even interact with the admin and moderation tools properly, which was not possible before. Navigation is much improved, and it's easier to do the big ticket stuff. There's even a proper editing toolbar for posts now! For me, the new mobile version is the biggest win of the upgrade, and I don't even use it that much. Having said that, it is what it is, and I can't actually do anything about any of its shortcomings, real or perceived (just like the previous version, which I hated using). Kev

Here's what it currently looks like for me on an iPhone 5: Obviously the view is now quite limited, and the net result is a very tall 'tube of content', which necessitates a lot of scrolling, but I still find it cleaner and much more functional than the old version. In fact, this one is much closer in style and functionality to the desktop version than the old mobile version was. I'm really curious to see if this is the same as what you're seeing Gaz, as I just can't see how this one could be causing you any grief, and certainly not more than it would have previously. Kev

Really? Can you screenshot it? I say this because one of the most impressive improvements with this version of the software is the way it looks and functions on mobile devices. I'm finding it to be several orders of magnitude better than the old version, and it packs nearly as much utility for me as the desktop version. So, I'm figuring you might be seeing something different, somehow. What phone and browser combination are you using? Kev

No, because the technical cut-off is 1/35, not 1/32. Kev

Very nice work, Michael! Kev

ESPN bought the Cricinfo site a number of years ago, at which point we all feared for its future, but it's been handled well and gone from strength to strength. It's my #1 source of cricket news these days. They even published a question of mine in the live commentary back in 2015! The site looks quite different now of course. Kev

Lovely paintwork and weathering, Brian! Kev

It's not that they don't matter, but simply that they don't represent a large enough segment of the ROI to justify catering to them exclusively. I'd guess that each manufacturer would have their own idea of where they sit on that continuum between dedicated enthusiast and dilettante hobbyist, with companies like Airfix sitting more toward the latter end, and the likes of HK Models more towards the former. Of course, this is mostly speculation - as is most of this thread. My guess is that Kitty Hawk wants to make a play for the broader modelling market, and shift where they sit on the aforementioned continuum, and this is how they plan to facilitate that move. On a related note, I have received some information from the Kitty Hawk camp that greatly improves the likelihood of the kit being well-researched and accurate (meaning the preliminary CAD image already posted is at least premature, if not downright misleading). Kev

I'm really getting at Kitty Hawk's intent (or hopes) here, rather than what the distribution realities are. If they're not selling many kits to the broader modelling market, then that lends further weight to my argument that they need a kit that will. This move may belie financial struggles, or simply a play at broadening their customer base and general appeal. It's hard to survive in a niche, let alone thrive and grow your business. The reality is, we really don't know the motivations behind the decision to develop this kit, but hoping to have a runaway sales success is certainly a valid reason to prioritise it. Kev

Nice! Kev

Superb work, Eric! Kev

That looks terrific, Jeff! Kev