Why the animosity towards WIFFs (What If builds)?

[Rex]

Wayne,,,,,you do get the irony of your car example, I hope?

if someone asked me about "a Dodge Hemi in a Ford Mustang",,,,,,I would just send him to looking for "Ford Hemi in Ford Mustang" info (two different Ford vintage engines),,,,,,,,,or send him to look for "Micky Thompson swapped 426 Hemi heads onto a 427 Ford block" references

I fully get that someone would want his AIM-120 to be on the correct launcher, or to ask how they were painted, etc,,,,,on a Whiff build,,,,,,same with seats, etc

the part I don't agree with is that a Whiffer build should get those answers, and on the very same day, an Accu-build should get posts that say "don't ask that, just build it, it's Goodnuff"

lol, I am only thinking of it, because it is happening today, as this thread is developing

if "Accu's" don't need the info,,,,,,why do Whiffers?

I am only pointing things out,,,,,my opinion is simple,,,,,,if you need the best and greatest AIM-120s, rails, decals and remove before flight tags,,and I have some and don't need them,,,,,or you need a paint guide, what have you,,,,,,,,if I have it, I will share it,,,,,,for Whiffs or Accu's or Almost's or Whateva's

[dmk0210]

Thanks for keeping this civil and on track guys.

[dmk0210]

the part I don't agree with is that a Whiffer build should get those answers, and on the very same day, an Accu-build should get posts that say "don't ask that, just build it, it's Goodnuff"

lol, I am only thinking of it, because it is happening today, as this thread is developing

if "Accu's" don't need the info,,,,,,why do Whiffers?

This isn't an us vs them thing. Either folks believe in detail or they don't.

I saw in one of the comments that this was wasting peoples time to answer these question ...well if you feel your wasting your time then just dont answer it.

Well this is the question. Why is it a waste of one's time? ...that is any more that all the other discussions about paint color, shape, panel lines, and whatever, that we normally have here.

Edited July 9, 2012 by dmk0210

[Supertom]

I remember a couple of years back when WI's were treated like the lepers of the modeling community. If anything it runs the gamut from crazy, humorous stuff like Alvis', to some neat marking schemes like the ones from Keith Diamond. There's a guy on whatifmodelers.com who specializes in WI Spitfires, but you'd never know from looking at them - he does all the various paper sub-variants.

I like the whole approach of "what if so-and-so-country bought so-and-so aircraft?" like the RAF B-1 I'm doing. I'm working on figuring out how to graft 4 Bristol Pegasus engines from the Airfix Concorde on the narrower space on the B-1. In the meantime I'll be writing a backstory.

One of the things I will never understand is how some modelers get into a huff about WI, going off on how it's of waste of time, etc. It's a hobby, after all. Most importantly, it's your own hobby and it's what you choose to do with it. I understand how some folks would ask something on a forum like "how would AIM-120s hang off an F-14?" as these guys want it look right. Check out whatifmodelers.com by the way, the folks there are very enthused about stuff like that (disclaimer - I help run the site). Also check out beyondthesprues.com,

Now if anything, being unshackled from reality and history makes for some really creative stuff. WI's can give you a pretty good idea of the modeler's personality, creativity, or sense of humor. I still build the regular, "real world" stuff but I totally enjoy WI and the flexibility and creative freedom it gives me.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Supertom

[geedubelyer]

You do realize that ALL of these models are just small representations and ALL of them have flaws when held against the real subject don't you?

Hello again Bill, yes I do.

I mean, do you ask someone who is asking for research help on a model what their skill level is to insure that they are technically able to incorporate that oh so valuable advice in their model?

No, I don't. The modellers ability is not an issue to me. I don't judge people on how well they are able to build models. We all build to the best of our ability and that's fine by me. ;)

You know, just so you don't "waste your time" helping them

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm Bill? :unsure:

At first I didn't think the OP was correct in saying there was animosity towards whiffs, but now I see the attitude does indeed exists. It's pretty sad I must say. To me, (I understand it's just my opinion and you don't have to share it) but to me if a modeler asks me what the official color purple of the Joker's goon cars were from the first Keaten Batman movie was because he wants to paint an F-14 that color, then as a fellow modeler; if I knew that information or was able to find it I'd feel very happy to pass that along. I don't see the need to judge his intentions or ability to use that information. But I guess some modelers are below the need of help from some others.

Oh well, it is what it is.

Bill

Now I'm sad that you're sad thinking that there is animosity toward whiffs

One key sentiment in your example above is the fact that the modeller initially told you that the shade of purple from the Joker's Goon car was to be used on an F-14. You were aware in the first instance that the model was to be a What-If which allowed you the choice to provide the information. If the modeller had asked what colour the Goon car was and left it at that, you might have been expecting him or her to be building a Goon car. Let us suppose that you did n't know the shade of purple right off the bat and you had to dig through your references to find the exact hue. You left your workbench, trawled through old magazine after old magazine and finally, after an hours worth of searching..."eureka" ...you found it. Excitedly, you race back to your computer, find the thread and happily relay the information (battling a recalcitrant broadband connection just for good measure ). This has taken you an hour and ten minutes (possibly of modelling time, who knows?). After a little while, the OP responds and thanks you for the information. In fact, he/she's not actually building the Goon car but likes the colour and wishes to paint a Tomcat that shade. You might be forgiven for thinking that any shade of purple that closely approximates the Goon car would have been perfectly ok for an imaginary Tomcat scheme which would have saved you an hour and ten minutes if you'd known that in the beginning....... :mellow:

I'm just sayin'

At this stage, may I re-iterate that I personally bear no animosity toward the builders of What-Ifs. As I explained earlier, I'm all for folk enjoying the hobby in any way (and any skill level) that they see fit. I don't share the enthusiasm for this particular branch of the hobby but that in no way makes it wrong in my eyes. What would be ideal is if the What-If modellers would make it clearly apparent that the build is to be a What-If giving folk the choice of whether to respond or walk on by.

Guess it depends on who is asking or replying to the question. If the OP of the WIFF is asking on accuracy/information of a ACES II maybe said person just wants the information and or knowledge, or would like to have the ACES II as a "component" of the model to be accurate.

Just because "hate those words together" someone is making a WIFF project, does not necessarily mean every single component and or part is worthless to them.

Like I wrote above, even when someone is doing a project and asking questions, at times knowledge/ information might be all they are after and the project its self might actually be irrelevant to the question.

God forbid asking a single question could enter into many pages of worthless non needed debate.

Picture this. A person asked a simple question "What color is the shaft of an F-15E's joystick". Then is found out it is going into a F-14 or 109K.

Hi Wayne, I've found the conversation interesting and informative for the most part.

Your argument above and the previous example posted by Dave have given me a clearer perspective on how important certain elements become to some What-Ifers and I'm grateful for that.

I guess, one way to put it into perspective is to keep it out of the airplane side of the discussion.

Instance, Person is building a 69 Mustang Mach1 and asked for accuracy of a Mopar 426 Hemi that they decided to put in the vehicle as a WIFF. Now is there is there really a problem with it? Does the Mopar 426 Hemi still exist in the real world. Certainly making said Hemi look more or less realistic as a big factor on the project is one wants it to be accurate, "specially" since they put brain power on that part of the project of wanting to do it in the first place.

Is that understandable?

Now a reason why I used the above is,,,,,,, the other side of the coin a WIFF project might get into, with a discussion. Now the person is dealing in a matter, where they get blind sided from the Left and the Right by diehard Mopar/Hemi fans and diehard Ford/Mustang fans.

I'm ever so sorry but I don't actually understand all that you said there. My knowledge of American Muscle cars is severely limited so apologies for that. I think I understand the sentiment though, cheers.

[niart17]

..One key sentiment in your example above is the fact that the modeller initially told you that the shade of purple from the Joker's Goon car was to be used on an F-14. You were aware in the first instance that the model was to be a What-If which allowed you the choice to provide the information. If the modeller had asked what colour the Goon car was and left it at that, you might have been expecting him or her to be building a Goon car. Let us suppose that you did n't know the shade of purple right off the bat and you had to dig through your references to find the exact hue. You left your workbench, trawled through old magazine after old magazine and finally, after an hours worth of searching..."eureka" ...you found it. Excitedly, you race back to your computer, find the thread and happily relay the information (battling a recalcitrant broadband connection just for good measure ). This has taken you an hour and ten minutes (possibly of modelling time, who knows?). After a little while, the OP responds and thanks you for the information. In fact, he/she's not actually building the Goon car but likes the colour and wishes to paint a Tomcat that shade. You might be forgiven for thinking that any shade of purple that closely approximates the Goon car would have been perfectly ok for an imaginary Tomcat scheme which would have saved you an hour and ten minutes if you'd known that in the beginning....... :mellow:

I'm just sayin'...

Again, I understand what you're saying. But personally I would feel just as good had I not known what the use of information was for and wouldn't feel cheated of my time. For me personally, it's the helping of others parts that makes it a worth while investment in time. Not the outcome, but the sharing of knowledge. It's cool that you wouldn't want to help a guy out once you found out it was for a whif project, that's your perogative. I just see the goal of helping someone a bit different then you might. But that's ok. not judging, just not seeing the sentiment that's all.

Bill

[TaiidanTomcat]

[FAR148]

Again, I understand what you're saying. But personally I would feel just as good had I not known what the use of information was for and wouldn't feel cheated of my time. For me personally, it's the helping of others parts that makes it a worth while investment in time. Not the outcome, but the sharing of knowledge. It's cool that you wouldn't want to help a guy out once you found out it was for a whif project, that's your perogative. I just see the goal of helping someone a bit different then you might. But that's ok. not judging, just not seeing the sentiment that's all.

Bill

Well said

Steven L

[HOLMES]

Deleted

Edited July 9, 2012 by HOLMES

[HOLMES]

LOVELY... ....I LIKE IT...

[Rex]

TT, nice looking "Meet-skito" or "Mosq-truder",,,,,lol, I am not sure which jet you started with before you added plywood wings to it

Geedubelyer,,,,,,I would hope that people wouldn't get too wrapped around the axle about how much time gets spent seeking answers to aircraft questions asked online

I myself have asked plenty of questions,,,,and I would hope that all the people that have given me answers are not sitting and expecting the "Accu-build" models I intend to use their answers for,,,,,,to appear online in the next few days

If they are,,,,,,,I am in BIG trouble,,,,I have info for models that I just know I am not going to get to for a good long time, yet,,,,,,,not on purpose, but, just giving them a number and having them wait in the lobby for my "fantastic build skills" to get to their turn will take some time

[dmk0210]

Holmes, lets keep this civil and not answer for others please. This can easily turn into a touchy subject and so far everyone has been gracious

[HOLMES]

:D

Edited July 9, 2012 by HOLMES

[Rex]

Holmes,,,,,,,you are reading that the wrong way,,,,,,,well, you are reading it in one of the right ways, but, not for this context

what you say is right,,,,,,how long a questions sits and waits for an answer should not matter,,,,it will be a free answer whenever it gets posted

I was talking about "how long it takes to get the answer for the person to post it up online for the person that asked the question",,,,,in answer to a post from above

all of us must know that every question and every answer is not just for "immediate action on the kit in progress at this very minute",,,,,,,granted, some of them are,,,,,but, most are for projects during the planning stage,,,,and that varies for each modeler

[geedubelyer]

I'm finding this very fascinating. It's a pleasure to read everyone's views on this.

This is the part I don't understand. I mean if I was building a Hasegawa Eggplane, I could see my question not being taken seriously. But if I was asking about something about a model similar to the example I had described, how is that different from the model of an actual aircraft.

Hi Dave, the difference to me is genuine but subtle. If you were asking about something on an actual airframe that had no bearing on the What-Ifness of your model (like the F-4 gear wells that Bill mentioned earlier) then I for one might be happy to offer any help I could as often as I could if I knew about what you needed to know.

Where it becomes a bit of a grey area for me is the fictional parts. Things like the mounting of weapons rails that don't or have n't actually existed on that airframe, imaginary colour schemes that sort of thing. I would probably be less inclined to offer any input on those aspects of a build given the choice.

What if I'm building an aircraft in correct markings, correct loadout, for a real squadron, but with a fictitious serial number. Where does one draw the line where is it not worth the time to help someone?

Let me answer that with a question.......why would you? Why would you not just build a squadron airframe? :blink: If everything but the serial is factual, why not just go the whole hog and build a real aircraft? Now I'm all confused again..... :wacko:

:lol:

But to me some questions are still relevent i.e builing a CF-14 i would like to know the FS of the canadian Airforce so to make it plausible/acurate since this is a what if canadians had F-14

So in this instance, would n't you just ask what the actual FS numbers were?

There would be no need for anyone to know what you were going to apply those colours to and asking what the actual FS numbers of the Canadian Airforce are seems like a valid question to me. In this case, the fact that you would apply it to a fictional build is not relevant. It's another subtle grey area that is destined to cause further confusion I fear but perhaps it's a matter of perspectives?

I saw in one of the comments that this was wasting peoples time to answer these question ...well if you feel your wasting your time then just dont answer it.

Hi Neo, good advice. This supports a point I raised earlier. If the OP alerted the readership to the subject matter of the thread then each individual would be free to choose whether to follow along or skip over. ^_^

[Rex]

hmmm,,,,,if you leave the Name in my post, and read all five lines of it from Gee and onward,,,,,,,I didn't have to explain what I meant by that post,,,,,it explained itself (until it was highlighted for parsing)

is everything okay today, Holmes?,,,,you seem off

[dmk0210]

What if I'm building an aircraft in correct markings, correct loadout, for a real squadron, but with a fictitious serial number. Where does one draw the line where is it not worth the time to help someone?

Let me answer that with a question.......why would you? Why would you not just build a squadron airframe? :blink: If everything but the serial is factual, why not just go the whole hog and build a real aircraft? Now I'm all confused again.....

Actually this is something I've thought about quite a bit and there are a few reasons why I may do this:

For one, I may not be able to obtain decals for the aircraft I want to build. However, with some minor modifications to existing decals, I can get close but not exactly the same serial number/tail number.

Or, I may not have good reference photos of the aircraft I want to build, but may have photos of squadron mates from different angles. In this case, I could build a model that would represent a composite of various aircraft that were in that place at that time.

Third, I may just like the features of different aircraft (weathering, replacement panels, markings) and again, I could build a model that would represent a composite of various aircraft that were in that place at that time. (Heavily weathered WWII aircraft come to mind, like B-17s that have various panels replaced for a combination of NMF and OD ones, or Vietnam era Seawolves Hueys that had panels repainted with different colors. In these cases, it is often just one photo available so what it looks like from other angles may be conjecture anyway.)

Edited July 9, 2012 by dmk0210

[geedubelyer]

Again, I understand what you're saying. But personally I would feel just as good had I not known what the use of information was for and wouldn't feel cheated of my time. For me personally, it's the helping of others parts that makes it a worth while investment in time. Not the outcome, but the sharing of knowledge. It's cool that you wouldn't want to help a guy out once you found out it was for a whif project, that's your perogative. I just see the goal of helping someone a bit different then you might. But that's ok. not judging, just not seeing the sentiment that's all.

Bill

Bill, that statement speaks volumes to your unselfish nature and generosity. You have my utmost respect Sir. I genuinely wish I had the strength of character to be more like that. I appreciate your candour and truly strive to be as selfless as you and others like you here on ARC and other forums.

[niart17]

So in this instance, would n't you just ask what the actual FS numbers were?

There would be no need for anyone to know what you were going to apply those colours to and asking what the actual FS numbers of the Canadian Airforce are seems like a valid question to me. In this case, the fact that you would apply it to a fictional build is not relevant. It's another subtle grey area that is destined to cause further confusion I fear but perhaps it's a matter of perspectives?....

Hi Neo, good advice. This supports a point I raised earlier. If the OP alerted the readership to the subject matter of the thread then each individual would be free to choose whether to follow along or skip over. ^_^

OK, you're right, now I am confused. Don't these two points contradict each other? And also in the Goon car example you stated one would feel like they wasted time not knowing that the answer was going to be on a purple painted F-14. Now you're saying there is no reason to mention that the Canadian colour is going on a fictitous F-14. So if the person asked the general question, and then you found out that you dug through your resourced to find that correct Canadian color. When that person posted a pic of their F-14, didn't you say that would make one feel like they wasted their time? Not seeing the thoughts.

Bill

[HOLMES]

hmmm,,,,,if you leave the Name in my post, and read all five lines of it from Gee and onward,,,,,,,I didn't have to explain what I meant by that post,,,,,it explained itself (until it was highlighted for parsing)

is everything okay today, Holmes?,,,,you seem off

:

Sorry ...I knew should have just shut up and kept MY mouth tightly shut..Next time it wont happen...

Edited July 13, 2012 by HOLMES

[geedubelyer]

Dave, apologies for taking up so much space in the thread and not letting anyone else get a word in edgewise.

Actually this is something I've thought about quite a bit and there are a few reasons why I may do this:

For one, I may not be able to obtain decals for the aircraft I want to build. However, with some minor modifications to existing decals, I can get close but not exactly the same serial number/tail number.

Or, I may not have good reference photos of the aircraft I want to build, but may have photos of squadron mates from different angles. In this case, I could build a model that would represent a composite of various aircraft that were in that place at that time.

Does this still qualify as a What-If? Do you mean you would create a virtually factual aircraft except for the serial number? All other details as actual but for the airframe serial because you had inadequate references?

[Rex]

Dave, I will give you another line that helps somewhat with what you are saying

I have many decal sheets,,,,,they are of popular and well known units and aircraft,,,,,but, nearly half of them were produced from pictures that are not in my book collection and don't come up during an online Google

for me, that makes them "nearly Whiff" material, because some of those decals are old enough to fall into the "wrong assumptions" era of decal companies, or the "that company made lots of errors" group of companies

if I want some squadrons on the shelves at all from some of those sheets,,,,,,I am going to have to "just build those" as is, without my usual photo to go with them

at that point, they become almost the same as the 1960's decal sheets,,,,,the "oh, I am glad it came with insignia" days

so, building F-4J 155861 as the CAG aircraft from VF-31 might be the best choice for that model (instead of as AC-104),,,,,,,,just don't build it as an F-4B with that BuNo, please, haha

[HOLMES]

Holmes, lets keep this civil and not answer for others please. This can easily turn into a touchy subject and so far everyone has been gracious

*

Edited July 13, 2012 by HOLMES

[dmk0210]

Dave, apologies for taking up so much space in the thread and not letting anyone else get a word in edgewise.

Does this still qualify as a What-If? Do you mean you would create a virtually factual aircraft except for the serial number? All other details as actual but for the airframe serial because you had inadequate references?

Not at all. I was asking for opinions after all! :)

I supposes that if I knew I couldn't get the markings right, after that it does become a slippery slope to some extent, where I would probably take "artists liberty" in other places as well. But again, that goes back to where do you draw the line on calling it a WIFF.

[Rex]

lol,,,,yeah,,,,I guess I will shut MY mouth

I am NOT going to watch words get parsed to say what I clearly didn't say,,,,,,,,not when I am being supportive of "a more open minded approach",,,in a "more open minded thread"

you wanna know how people draw "hard lines" and "inflexible attitudes" and "close their minds"?

it is simple,,,,,chew away when they are being "open minded"

click

I will only look at Accu-Builds from now on (and I know, my REACTION is somehow wrong,,,,,look it the hell up,,,,,REACTION follows ACTION)