That is correct ShortC.

Lets try a slightly more modern aircraft:

I think it would be alot of work, but I also think it could be done. However, it would hardly be a Spitfire anymore, as i suspect it would need serious structural modifications.

Maybe, but I have noticed the lack of use of these forums. Classic cars are much less specialised than what we discuss here, but the forums I am referring to on one of the largest single make clubs in the world do not get the traffic they should.

I would argue that they are too confusing. Just because lots of clubs do it that way doesnt make it the right way!

Bruce

What Bruce said x2.

Once a forum is subdivided it will appear that it only gets a few posts a day. This will not encourage new users.

I’m a member of another forum, where the content is divided and it does not make for a better usability. If the users need to check more than one, or two, subforums, they will have a tendency to skip some and a valuable input could have been lost.

I would hate to have to check two subfora each time i visit this forum. There are rarely more than 10-15 new threads each day, so it does not move very fast and can easily be contained in one main forum.

Subfora is a solution for a heavy trafic forum, where they get hundreds of posts daily. The Sun Java forum springs to mind as a good example.

I belive the aircraft is:

HA-1112-M1L c/n 234 C.4K-169 (N109W).
Used as “Red 5” in the “Battle of Britain” movie.

Owner: Harold Kindsvater, Castle Air Force Base, CA (A)

The N reg database have the Manufacturer Name Messerschmitt. Is that normal?

Yes, Waco UPF-7

Pointless and free for all?

The thread with second most views on this forum is the “Scrapyard Photos; Any More?” with 138,897 views. That is hardly pointless, as it seem to attract quite an interest.

The other photo threads also generate quite an interest, as can be seen from their view count and their position on the forum pages.

The forum is entirely driven by user generated content, so per definition it has to be free for all (with moderation by the forum Moderators).

I’m sorry, but I completely fail to see the point in making an issue out of this. If anything its more pointless that any photo thread currently on forum. Just skip the photo threads if its not your interest. Im sure most people here skip certain threads, that fall outside their personal interest.

Personally I have never read the “The XH558 Discussion”, but I would never dispute that its rightfull place is here in this forum.

For Moggy C:

I enjoy the picture threads as much as I enjoy the written posts. Granted its not always I browse through every picture, but I try to have a look at most of the period pictures (those taken when the aircraft was in service).

For those that don’t appreciate these threads, maybe the forum can device an icon to mark a post as a “photo thread”. So they are easier to identify and skip.

Right now there are 6 photo threads out of 25 threads on page one. I don’t think thats too much to accept. The forum system works in a way, that will bury any thread that don’t generate a response in the back pages. When a thread stays on the front page, its because it has generated interest among the forum users and thats the bacis idea of a forum.