Here's the first stab at the rules

1.  The Re-Engine IT GB begins 00:01 01/07/2023  and ends 23:59 30/09/2023 (all times local).  An extension may/may not be considered/granted according to demand,

2.  Physical models of any scale, profiles, and/or stories are eligible, but they must be whiffery. In this group build all entries must show (or describe in the case of a story) visible evidence of being re-engined from their real-world origins in their shape or form. Just having a different engine indication on the model is not sufficient.

Entries can be as simple or as complex as you wish. If in doubt as to what can be included in the GB then please PM the Moderators.

3.  You may build, draw or write as many entries as you like (good luck!).  The posting of in-progress pictures is encouraged as always. If you are unsure as to how to post pictures of your build on site then please contact Narses2 by Personal Message and he will go through it with you.

When posting your finished models in the Finished Builds Thread can you try and stick as closely as possible to the following format.

Title : By (entrants user name) : a brief description backstory/explanation (100 characters or so) : and a maximum of three pictures with a link to the build/progress thread. This will also apply to profiles/images.

Where members have written a story for their GB entry, they should post it in the Finished Builds Thread as normal.

Can members also refrain from posting any comments regarding entries within the Finished Builds Thread but use the link to the main build/progress thread page for these. This makes the Moderators task when it comes to organising the poll much simpler.

4.  Preparation work is allowed prior to the start of the GB but is limited to removal and cleaning up of parts from sprues, casting blocks or cutting out vacform parts from their backing sheet, even designing and printing your own decals.  The design and printing of 3D parts is also allowed, but no assembly. Anything involving modification of parts, test fitting, pre-painting and actual assembly is not allowed prior to the start of the GB, but see Rule 5 below.

5.  Part-started models may be used purely at the discretion of the Moderators providing they are not too close to being finished, and this will be the Moderators decision. You must send pictures of the model you intend to use in the GB, along with a rough idea of what your plans for it are via a PM and their decision will be final. However, they must have been started prior to the current GB Season's themes being announced. We will be relying on the integrity of the membership to uphold this rule. If using a part started kit then this should be clearly stated at the beginning of your build thread.

Scrapped models that have been reduced to component parts or sections can be used, although you should check with the Moderators if you are not sure about the eligibility of those you intend to use. You can also use a completed sub-assembly taken from a kit which may have been previously assembled and which the whiffer wants to build into their GB entry. If in doubt, then as usual contact the Moderators with as much information as possible.

6.  No rule 6 - is there ever a rule 6? It's one rule or another so from now on it's 6.

7.  Moderators are Wardukw and TomZ. Thank you, gentlemen.

8.  The completed entries thread will be locked at the end of the GB and only those items posted prior to it being locked will be eligible for the vote. shortly afterwards the poll will be set up.  The number of votes per forum member will be based upon a ratio of one vote per three entries, rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

In the event of a tie there will be no run-off. We will simply have a joint first place and then a third place (no second) this is to preserve the three into the Whiffies as detailed in Rule 9. Similarly, a three way tie will mean there is no second and third. (Please don't ask me about a four way tie !)

9.  The first three placed entries in the Group Build will automatically be nominated for a Whiffy in the specific Group Build Class.

Looks good to me Chris with 3 suggestions:

-Add type to 2): "Shape, type or form".  To make it perfectly clear a change in type of powerplant is perfectly OK (piston to jet, sail to steam, horse to horseless...)

- Add a sentence to 2):  Adding auxiliary engines is not sufficient. (like adding the aux turbojets seen on later P2V Neptune's).   Adding engine(s) to a sailboat, or a glider would be allowed.     

-I think it would be best to use month names and dates, since you EU and Colonial guys do the month/day stuff backwards   

Example: July 7, 2023 to September 30, 2023. 

Quote from: sandiego89 on June 03, 2023, 09:25:44 AM-I think it would be best to use month names and dates, since you EU and Colonial guys do the month/day stuff backwards   

Example: July 7, 2023 to September 30, 2023. 

No, we do them the CORRECT way round, you guys across the pond have them reversed for some obscure reason...................

Amongst the many theories is that, like some word spellings*, it's a leftover of British influence as Britain didn't standardize to ddmmyyyy until the 20th century. Both formats were used in written communication, wherein the name of the month was written out, during the colonial period and through much of the 19th century prior to the switch to using all numerals for dates, i.e. June 3, 2023 becomes 6/3/2023 and 3 June 2023 becomes 3/6/2023. 'Tis just one of them things. 

It has led to the somewhat ironically amusing situation where the US Independence Day is often referred to as the "4th of July".


ISO standard is yyyymmdd, so currently China, Japan, Korea, Iran and the US military are the only ones that have it right.


* s vs. z; re vs. er; ou vs. o etc. as
they were used interchangeably in written English before spelling was standardized in the 19th century. Many things that people think of as being "correct" have only been so for a relatively short period of time.

Quote from: jcf on June 03, 2023, 03:17:13 PMMany things that people think of as being "correct" have only been so for a relatively short period of time.

Perhaps because we thought it through over time and realised what was 'correct' and what wasn't?

Very interesting discussion .... 

But I can't find any basic information about the explanation for the THEME , only that it is about engine change.
Could someone please kick my ... to that .

Quote from: killnoizer on June 04, 2023, 09:07:38 AMVery interesting discussion .... 

But I can't find any basic information about the explanation for the THEME , only that it is about engine change.
Could someone please kick my ... to that .

Rule #2 covers your question fairly well, killnoizer.

Quote from: NARSES2 on June 02, 2023, 06:47:21 AM2.  Physical models of any scale, profiles, and/or stories are eligible, but they must be whiffery. In this group build all entries must show (or describe in the case of a story) visible evidence of being re-engined from their real-world origins in their shape or form. Just having a different engine indication on the model is not sufficient.

In short: You can put any engine into/onto any thing BUT it must be visibly different (must look different) to the original power plant.

Quote from: killnoizer on June 04, 2023, 09:07:38 AMVery interesting discussion .... 

But I can't find any basic information about the explanation for the THEME , only that it is about engine change.
Could someone please kick my ... to that .

At its simplest, in terms of piston engine aircraft modelling, it's a matter of cutting the nose/engine nacelles off of one type and sticking
it/them on the fuselage/wings of a type that had a different engine. Which can be inline/V "A" to inline/V "B"; inline/V to radial or vice versa;
piston engine to turbojet/turboprop or vice versa; turbojet/turboprop "A" to turbojet/turboprop "B", etc. etc.

Of course the farther away one gets from piston-engined prop-jobs the more complicated it becomes. The requirement for an obvious change
in "external appearance/form/shape" becomes difficult in terms of armoured vehicles, larger marine vehicles and, to some extent, automobiles
and trucks.

In truth the majority of "engine swaps" are airplane nosejobs.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on June 04, 2023, 02:46:31 AM

Quote from: jcf on June 03, 2023, 03:17:13 PMMany things that people think of as being "correct" have only been so for a relatively short period of time.

Perhaps because we thought it through over time and realised what was 'correct' and what wasn't?

Except that humans don't actually work that way, as a simple examination of "traditions"
makes starkly clear. 

Quote from: killnoizer on June 04, 2023, 09:07:38 AMVery interesting discussion .... 

But I can't find any basic information about the explanation for the THEME , only that it is about engine change.
Could someone please kick my ... to that!

A few thoughts on "Re-engine It"    This can be subtle.......an FW190 with a Griffon engine, the Great Eastern with diesel uptakes and no paddle wheels  or more obvious.........a Land Rover with a honking great V12 8.5 litre in an open engine space, a De Havilland DH2  with a Bristol Centaurus ,  a nuclear powered Tiger class cruiser  or absolutely ridiculous ................an X wing spacecraft with a Bentley BR2 rotary engine,  a three masted Leander class frigate  or a Morris Minor with a V-1 type pulse jet on the roof rack.

These are only my ideas; I'd be interested to see other peoples' suggestions.

I did it already with my V12 engined Rolls Royce Silver Cloud in the 'Prototypes GB'.

Perhaps I'll take the engine out and put it back in again, and then enter it?

A viking drakkar with an outboard engine...

Quote from: jcf on June 03, 2023, 03:17:13 PMISO standard is yyyymmdd, so currently China, Japan, Korea, Iran and the US military are the only ones that have it right.

Nah, plenty more than these (I spent my whole working life using that format and have not been incolved with any of them!).

Quote from: loupgarou on June 04, 2023, 10:35:45 AMA viking drakkar with an outboard engine...

Possibly a Volvo Penta engine,  and if armed,  a BOFORS gun..........................always assuming that the Vikings support home industries.

Quote from: sandiego89 on June 03, 2023, 09:25:44 AM- Add type to 2): "Shape, type or form".  To make it perfectly clear a change in type of powerplant is perfectly OK (piston to jet, sail to steam, horse to horseless...)
- Add a sentence to 2):  Adding auxiliary engines is not sufficient. (like adding the aux turbojets seen on later P2V Neptune's).   Adding engine(s) to a sailboat, or a glider would be allowed.     
- I think it would be best to use month names and dates, since you EU and Colonial guys do the month/day stuff backwards   

The moderators have discussed these points and have thought about it. We want to make these comments:

1) We feel that the current rules are sufficiently clear in that a different TYPE of propulsion is certainly included in the rules. The condition that the change should be visible remains however. Simply building a standard Spitfire and saying in the back story that the Merlin was replaced by a nuclear reactor without visible evidence is NOT OK.

2) We agree that the "RE" in re-engine means that the propulsion method is changed to a new one. So just adding an auxiliary engine will not be allowed. The new propulsion method should be the only propulsion system.

3) The moderators will not get involved in the discussion on date formats, however "interesting" that discussion appears to be 

This is our verdict and you will have to live with it.

The moderators