Time for an RV consturction wiki?

Paul Eastham · #1 10-07-2006, 11:20 AM

The Problem

There are so many places where it seems like a few extra words in the construction manual would make things so much easier. And places where if you build something a little bit different, things will be much easier down the road.

Problem is, I often don't find out about these gotchas until it's too late. If I'm lucky, maybe I saw a clue on one of the 200 great build logs out there, or I thought to do a search on VAF ahead of time, but it's still not foolproof enough for my taste.

In an ideal world, Van's would update the docs with all the questions, complaints and flame-mails they get, giving newer builders the benefit of experience from those who built before them. However, they have clearly shown that they are not interested in doing so. Even simple advice like "build the (rv-9) VS before the HS" is apparently too much trouble for them to include. But I'm primarily thinking about critical dimensions, incorrect dimensions or callouts, and areas where many people make mistakes. For example, the HS attach (rv-9 at least) could be made much less difficult if you make the cross-angle slightly longer than specified, reducing the likelihood of edge-distance problems.

The Solution?

I'm wondering if it's time to solve this problem for ourselves and for future builders. But it's too big a task for any one person. The solution could be a wiki. If you haven't seen one before, it is simply a web document that anyone can edit. It would be organized just like the current builder's manual, with all the section and subsection headers copied over.

The idea is that once any builder realizes a big gotcha or improvement, they could deposit a note in the wiki in the appropriate spot. Hopefully this will be less work, and more productive, than sending off an angry email to the black hole at support@vansaircraft.com

Then future builders can follow along in the wiki just like they do in the build manual, hopefully avoiding all the annoying gotchas. (I'd like to keep it factual and based on improving the provided documentation, so no long rants about priming or canopy types -- the community message boards are better for that.)

I'm willing to set it up, if others think it would be useful and would be willing to contribute to the content. It'll only be as good as we make it. What do you all think?

LettersFromFlyoverCountry · #2 10-07-2006, 11:37 AM

There is one.

Here .

Paul Eastham · #3 10-07-2006, 11:50 AM

Cool. Too bad there is little construction-oriented content....it doesn't seem to be positioned as a construction errata. There are also 2 problems that currently prevent it from being used for that purpose:
- no directory structure that distinguishes among models
- no directory structure more specific than "fuselage", etc.

LettersFromFlyoverCountry · #4 10-07-2006, 11:51 AM

I just changed the link. Apparently that one had been closed and merged with the Matronics one.

As with all Wikis, it depends on the user to keep it up. The infrastructure is certainly there, it just needs more user input.

HAL Pilot · #5 01-09-2018, 02:05 AM

Aloha All

Putting the word out so you might see this reply in multiple threads.

I tried paying someone to produce a wiki that is PDF/builder plan friendly and so far have not found any software that works the way I want it to.

BUT....TADA......I have taken the RV-14 plans and using Adobe added hyperlinks and notes to most of the threads from the RV14 pages on to it. It resides on a dropbox account.

I just discovered that I can send a read only access link so am enclosing .

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xu5p6f4l7...bU0ck0pJa?dl=0

BUT....... a wiki works best with folks inputting into it. So if you would like Edit access I will need your email in a PM. I know some of you do not want to put your email out there so feel free to make a disposable one that forwards to your main account.

N941WR · #6 01-09-2018, 04:29 AM

Why do you want to fragment the Van's knowledge base?

Granted posting pictures on this site is a pain and there is no index, but the Advanced search function does work well, if it is used.

With over 1,000,000 posts, this site is invaluable!

DanH · #7 01-09-2018, 06:51 AM

Reality: There is no level of self-serve support at which all builders will be sure of what to do. Vans could ship a fully functional robotic assistant with every kit, and somebody would request help with the charging cord.

You're supposed to figure it out.

Personally I doubt a wiki is an appropriate media for "how to build". The wiki system does well with facts (2+2=4). It is not so good with methods, or opinions, or advice contrary to the manufacturer. And it will never make up for poor shop skills. They require practice, and foundation knowledge way deeper than airframe build guidance.

A forum offers direct peer review. Sometimes it is messy, or even brutal, but it works.

airguy · #8 01-09-2018, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanH

Reality: There is no level of self-serve support at which all builders will be sure of what to do. Vans could ship a fully functional robotic assistant with every kit, and somebody would request help with the charging cord.

You're supposed to figure it out.

Personally I doubt a wiki is an appropriate media for "how to build". The wiki system does well with facts (2+2=4). It is not so good with methods, or opinions, or advice contrary to the manufacturer. And it will never make up for poor shop skills. They require practice, and foundation knowledge way deeper than airframe build guidance.

A forum offers direct peer review. Sometimes it is messy, or even brutal, but it works.

I'm with Dan on this one. We're building airplanes here, it's not a place for "kinder and gentler." It's time to put on your big-girl panties and figure it out.

wirejock · #9 01-09-2018, 08:38 AM

Is that why most model forums have a "Gotcha" thread?

Mach.26 · #10 01-09-2018, 10:33 AM

I get it. I like the idea. If it was organized well by model and had the latest build manuals. Users should not be able to alter original instructions BUT merely put notes,highlights, videos, hyperlinks, etc. to the original instructions.

For example, I trimmed the R-710 Rudder Brace exactly per the plans and found out it compromised edge distance on a subsequent hole and had to order a new one. If a builder were to skim through a WIKI manual during their plans study they would have noticed a caution by other builders that have had similar issues with that part...

Sure you could have searched through VAF and found the same information if you knew what you didn't know....