Restore It, Decommission It, or Recommission It Group Build

[AeroplaneDriver]

Like this? 

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,18177.0/hunter.html

[pyro-manic]

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,20300.0.html

[Spey_Phantom]

those hunters are an excelent exsample of what i mean 

[Joe C-P]

The USN realizes that potential opponents still have submarines and bring back the S-3.

The USMC wants an escort for their V-22s and brings back the OV-10 or Skyraider.

The US Army sneaks a law under the USAF's nose that allows them to operate low-flying, subsonic fixed wing aircraft, and obtain A-10s.

[Joe C-P]

Ah - that would be more interesting. I could part with one or two of my old tank models.

[jcf]

The USMC wants an escort for their V-22s and brings back the OV-10 or Skyraider.

V-22 top speed: 315 mph
OV-10 top speed: 288 mph
AD-7/A-1J top speed: 343 mph

[Jschmus]

That would give me something to do with that Charles F Adams destroyer kit I picked up last year.  Strip off the obsolescent AAW and ASW armament and re-work it for littoral warfare, or as a coastal defense ship.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

"Decomm it GB"

"Recommission It GB"

"Restoration GB"

All three of these group build proposals are similar in theme.  In the spirit of trying to entice more participation in these group builds, I propose that these three group build proposals be combined into one group build with an appropriate title to increase the chances of it becoming elegible for nomination sooner instead of later. 

The votiing will run for one month starting today (08/15/2008) and ending on 09/15/2008

[Mossie]

I've voted yes, but I think that only the Decommissioning and Recommissioning GB's should be merged, as they are very similar.  The Restoration GB is quite seperate as it's about restoring old kits rather than ressurecting aircraft, so I think it should remain so.

[anthonyp]

Combining them is a good idea.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I've voted yes, but I think that only the Decommissioning and Recommissioning GB's should be merged, as they are very similar.  The Restoration GB is quite seperate as it's about restoring old kits rather than ressurecting aircraft, so I think it should remain so.

Simon,

Thanks for the feedback.  I would agree on part of what you say but keep in mind that while the Restoration GB is intended to rebuild or restore a model it also includes a redirection towards performing another mission or role in some cases.  Which is the reasoning behind my merge proposal for these three group builds into one build encompassing all three ideas which are similar but also different from each other.  The idea is to generate sufficient interest by forum members to participate in and focus on one event instead of three separate events.  We still have a month to go on the voting so lets see how it all adds up on 09/15/2008.

[AeroplaneDriver]

The way I saw the Restoration idea when I mentioned it is quite different from the Recommission/Decomission theme.  I'm very interested in the Recom/Decom idea and think merging them is a good idea that wold work well, but I dont know how well the Restoration theme fits in.  If there was a choice for 'Combine Recom/Decom and leave Restoration alone to see how interest develops" that's how I would vote.

[Taiidantomcat]

I agree that the Recom/Decom theme makes sense (after all the gray pride GB is about making colors dull and conversely grays colorful) but the restoration theme i think should be kept separate.

[nev]

Not a bad plan - a very good one in fact.

[Weaver]

Well maybe the hook here could be that the participants swap builds to restore. 

That couldbe an excellentsuggestion. Note: ANYONE who sends me an F4 would have it returned, wrapped around a dog turd.

Wouldn't dream of it. However, I do have this Matchbox Meteor NF.11/12/14..........................