Hi All

When Sam and I took over the administrating of Aeroscale campaigns a couple of years ago they where in disarray to say the least. We decided due to the small number of campaign proposals that we would start one a month (unless there was a special campaign that needed to end at a certain time), which meant we would only have 5 campaigns running at any time.

Now two years on we are getting more proposals than ever to the point of starting one a month means we now have campaigns starting up until July 2014 of which some people are itching to start

I would like to propose that starting maybe October 2013 or January 2014 that we start 2 campaigns a month. I feel that the system that we have with campaigns starting at the beginning of a month and finish at the end of a month has helped keep a track of and starting 2 a month should be a problem from an admin perspective.

So my question is how does the membership feel? Would you prefer to start 2 campaigns a month or continue with the system of one a month?

Personally, I think things are fine as they are. Speaking as someone who has quite a lot of time on my hands for modelling, I currently have 3 campaign projects on the go, with a big one due to start in September. I feel that is quite enough for me to be going on with. If there were two campaigns starting every month, I would predict that average participation numbers would drop by at least half.

Two campaigns a month will work.
Adjust number of entrants down from 10 to 7?

I joined this forum two years ago because of the campaigns. Its a very appealing activity.
Congratulations on the success of your efforts.

There are certainly lots of proposals, and pretty much every proposal meets with plenty of interest. it does seem that the membership could support more campaigns than one a month.

I'm finding it hard keeping myself from joining every campaign that comes along

I think it would be an interesting exercise to go back over the past 3 or 4 years and tabulate the completion rates for the campaigns against how many we're running. I think that you might find that having more campaigns running simultaneously won't reduce enlistment rates, but might well reduce completion rates.

We all suffer from that rush of enthusiasm when another great campaign idea gets put forward, but translating it into sufficient bench time to get things finished can be really difficult at times.

That said, there are some really great campaigns enlisting right now, all of which I would love to join, and I personally find the campaign threads one of the best aspects of this great site.

Perhaps it is worth considering a middle ground, 1 campaign start in odd months (Jan, Mar etc), 2 in even months (Feb, Apr etc).

My 2 cents duly submitted.

Cheers, D

Jonathan exactly matched my thoughts. Although Damian's middle ground is a good idea too. I have to exercise great restraint not to join every campaign, and I myself have slipped on some and not completed builds-- or turned in something that was rushed at the end.
An increase in campaigns could theoretically appeal to more modelers, even if slightly fewer join each particular campaign.
Okay, all that said, put me down for "D's alternating months" or barring that, keeping it the same.
-Sean H.

For myself, I very much enjoy the campaigns here, and already over-enlist to an impossible workload. So my failure rate in campaigns becomes greater than the successes. I suppose thats lack of discipline, and it leads to a quantity of hanger queens. The only known cure for this malady is to remove my computer, so I'm forbidden to become entranced by all these wonderful campaign ideas.

None-the-less, I would like to see the start of 2 campaigns per month, as its darn tough to wait a year for campaign starts. On the down side, I believe 2 per month for now, will only be a temporary reprieve from the frustration of waiting to start a desireable kit. There are just too many good campaigns coming about, and sooner or later we will be waiting a year anyway. Just with double the number of campaigns.

As has been said by others; I agree it will not affect enlistment rates, but, will affect success rates.

Perhaps I'm suicidal; my vote is for increasing the campaign rate anyway.

A couple of good ideas, I personally have to choose which campaigns I join and still don't complete all of them. I think the campaigns are the glue that holds the site together, if I come on the site and don't have much time I always check the campaigns. I tend to make better progress in the winter so would double the campaigns in the winter, but that wouldn't work for Damian and his mates. I think in the end you'll have to suck it and see, I know that although you will increase the campaigns by 50% I won't finish any more models so I won't complete or join any more campaigns than I do now. If everybody does this and no more people join the campaigns we will just reduce the entrants and completions in each campaign. Some could stand it but many could not. We could look at shortening campaigns to 4 months (probably means fewer would finish) or inserting quickie campaigns, say, 6 weeks in now and again. I can pretty well plan my builds by campaign currently and acquire kits well before I need them, I just bought a Moth for the De Havilland campaign last week stating in September, I plan to start it in December after the Lottery and KoTS campaigns finish. I don't think there is a right answer to this, maybe try something for a year and see

Frankly I rather like having a couple of kits, at different stages of construction, going at a time. I can pick up one or the other depending on the mood I'm in when I actually get modelling time. I know there are a lot of interesting campaigns out there, but I'm not always interested in joining all of them, but waiting so long for a favorite to start can be a drag. I'll vote for 2 a month to see what happens with the completion rate. Nothing's written in stone and experimenting is a good idea.

Michael

it so happens I was interested in this question too.
year enlisted completed completion campaign title
2010 49 23 47% Aces high 2
2010 45 19 42% Anti Shipping
2010 71 13 18% Bf-109
2010 69 18 26% Big Beautiful Bombers
2010 42 12 29% Boom Boom twin boom
2010 23 9 39% Civilian Planes Only
2010 48 14 29% Close Air Support
2010 25 7 28% Origami
2010 45 17 38% P51 Mustangs Heaven
2010 43 18 42% Pin ups
2010 59 11 19% Sea Planes and Flying Boats
2010 18 4 22% Summer 1940
2010 19 4 21% Winter Wonderland
2010 32 12 38% WNW 1/32 WW1
2011 38 16 42% Aerial Screw Helicopter
2011 19 7 37% Afterburner Decals campaign
2011 27 11 41% Camm-paign. The Sir Sydney Camm
2011 39 11 28% Cold War Jet Campaign
2011 42 20 48% Corsairs Sky Pirates
2011 35 7 20% fighting falcon
2011 13 4 31% Flight of the Intruder
2011 39 31 79% Knights of the Sky
2011 43 18 42% Mischievous MiGs
2011 38 23 61% P-40 the Work Horse of WW ll
2011 44 20 45% Spitfire/Seafire
2011 23 8 35% the cats out of the bag.
2011 30 15 50% The Century Series
2011 12 4 33% VAC ATTACK
2011 33 20 61% What IF?
2011 47 21 45% Zerstorer heavy fighters
2012 27 11 41% Air Pioneers record breakers
2012 33 11 33% Bae British Aerospace
2012 36 12 33% Delta Dawn
2012 11 5 45% Egg Planes
2012 77 28 36% Fighters
2012 47 20 43% Fw 190 Wurger
2012 19 13 68% Knights of the Sky 2
2012 34 11 32% Looney Toons
2012 32 12 38% Matchbox nostalgia
2012 36 12 33% Pin ups 2
2012 16 5 31% Porco Rosso
2012 43 18 42% Small is Beautiful
2012 23 8 35% Super Sukhois
2012 28 12 43% Support Aircraft
2012 19 4 21% VP International

year avg. enlisted/completed/completion
2010 42.0 12.9 31%
2011 32.6 14.8 44%
2012 32.1 12.1 38%

yeah, Im a math geek.
PM me if anyone wants an excel sheet

and for the record I am enlisted in eleven campaigns at the moment.

Nicely done, Jonathan! Some good-looking math there!
From the perspective of percent completion, there is little change: 30 to 40% consistently over those 3 years sampled.
Also note that KOS had a very high completion rate, and something makes me laugh about the tiny campaigns-- VAC ATTACK and Egg Planes-- with low enrollment and low completion, but the percent matches anyway.
That's an interesting point by Andrew about occasional quickie campaigns. Those could be thrown in with less disruption to the other campaigns and wiht higher energy.
Cheers!
-Sean H.

I say bring on the campaigns! If we sticky that chart campaign leaders can cajole participants into trying to set a new completion percentage. Adds another element of urgency.

careful - cheerleading is one thing, but pressure to complete might make model building resemble work, which we definately want to avoid. I am escaping work when Im here. like right now...

Hear, hear, as soon as it isn't fun I'm out of here. I'm enrolled in 10 campaigns right now and will probably have to withdraw from at least one, but will probably do 2 models in another. I quite like an interval between proposal (and sign up) and start of campaign as I often need to find a kit to build and that is part of the fun.

My opinion? The current format gives a nice orderliness to things. We can endlessly come up with neat ideas for the next campaign, and as Damian noted, there is ample enthusiasm for 'the next project' in the beginning.

We have a pretty large selection as it stands. I am enrolled in more than a half dozen campaigns, could easily add another 3 or 4, but know I will likely only complete about half of them by deadline.

Cheers,
Fred

Campaigns are important, let's not kill them by having too many ��

Strictly one a month, considering the enthusiasm for campaigns may be too restrictive. However, there are now already campaigns forming for 2014. Isn't this a signal that the enthusiasts enlist, but also have to admit that more campaigns at any moment would be too much?

In my humble opinion one should not look at how many campaigns are started, but at how many are running in parallel. I have no problem enlisting for a 2014 campaign because it does not overlap with the campaigns I am working on right now'

Hmmmm some very good and interesting points here ... For me its the more the merrier im relatively new to the campaign scene and have only just got my second award but i have to say im hooked and cant wait to get started on the other ones iv enlisted in however a few of them dont start until next year including one of my own and it just seems soooo far away so 2 a month would be a welcome thing for me .....

Just sign up for another, the Lottery will get you out of your comfort zone and is running now, Douglas parade could have you building a Sandy or would an F3F fit KoTS? I can always find a campaign to build, don't wait, dive in

Hi everyone,

Campaigns must surely be the main fuel of Aeroscale. If this site was all about product reviews or/and just sharing some info regarding models or their history it' would have far less appeal to me than it actually has. Campaign threads are the culprit for my addiction here

Despite the fact that many may never get to end a model during each campaign (I know that feeling all to well) I say 2 campaings per month might keep new ideas within reasonable schedule to begin. Waiting for 2014 ( as already pointed by several people) can be a pain and kill the initial enthusiasm, and it might not decrease the completion percentage described by Jonathan.

Pedro

I am a bit surprised with the importance people put in campaigns. A term like "Campaigns must surely be the main fuel of Aeroscale" say a lot.

Maybe campaigns could get some technical support:

would it be possible to make the campaing forum thread (or threads) and the campaing photo gallery availabel from the campaign operations page?

It would ùmake it much easier to browse through the results of previous campaigns.

Howdy Y'all
I've never been able to complete an airplane model for a campaign. I like the campaigns and the schedule doesn't seem broken for now but if folks want 2 campaigns per month then I would suggest trying it. I think you could improve completion rates by considering two elements:
1. The length of the campaign might be made longer.
2. Allow models that have been started but are not substantially complete.
I enjoy seeing other completed models as much as I like seeing the build process in the treads. I hope to complete a model airplane this year even if it's a hanger queen.
Just my 2 cents.
Thanks,
Don "Lakota"

I agree with everything Damien said, and think 2 per month might be too much.

Perhaps a way round it would be to have 2 or 3 shorter campaigns each year? For example, campaigns like Ancient Airfix or Matchbox Madness are using older simpler kits that could maybe done in a 3 month campaign. Conversely we could have one long campaign per year (9 or 12 months) for a diorama or super-detail or large scale campaign for example.

Don't forget there are also a lot of aircraft eligable kitmaker-wide campaigns that are hosted in the armorama section. In fact my last 2 completed aircraft were both for Armorama campaigns!

the campaigns seem to be an integral part of this site.

while you don't have to enter lots of campaigns it could reduce the number of people in campaigns running at the same time,
maybe reducing the number of people to 8 before its approved might help to get some of the more specialist campaigns off the ground.

i really liked some of the weekend builds we had, they seemed to really keep peoples interest.

just my tuppence worth...

paul

I must disagree with you. Perhaps less of a parts count, but, certainly not simpler. You may well require a hugh amount of filler and sanding in these, and any kind of detailing will keep one busy for awhile.

The example given may not be the best but the point made still holds ground.

Some subjects can be finished in a reasonably short period of time, while others take much longer (like a diorama).

This could be accomodated by deciding beforehand on a shorter, or longer, period.

Sytill, I fear that having too many campaigns will "delute" this valuable part of Aeroscale with attention spread over too many subjects.

It is true that we can come up wiht a zillion faboulous idea's but what really counts is how many kits are finished under the campaigns and how much exchange there is on the forum thread.