Despite only 21 members voting, it seems clear I need to focus my attention on the air forces and aircraft sections.
The aircraft sections haven't received as much time as I would have liked. Despite what Ramon is thinking, there are lots of sites offering aircraft information. So I had set myself the task of providing better quality sections, this means that they also take a lot more work/time. That's why I wanted to know whether there's still interest in them. They'll also have photo galleries, I was just checking if there was a desire for more "stand-alone" photo galleries. Despite the many "photography" and picture sites on the web, pictures are the most popular content. A small/poor/basic report with "superb" photos receives more visitors than the in-depth/excellent reports with just "good" photos, although my view on that might be slightly wrong because of the way stats are measured and the way people browse the web. Anyway, I'll try to refocus on the aircraft section (and I have some other plans regarding aircraft info).
The air forces section was the result of a long-time ambition of mine, but I didn't even quite get to finishing the RNLAF one. I also hoped for more contributions, but apart from the fine piece put together by Leandro and the photos by Ivan, it remained silent. I have big plans to make this section more useful. The thing I have in mind is basically a database-driven air forces directory with inventories and orders of battle. Since a year or so, I'm actually capable of programming it. It's the kind of thing Jane's and since not too long ago Key Publishing are offering (for 1000-1500 British Pounds per year/license), although they're be a bit more extensive. Of course it can never be of the same quality, but as long as it's better, more reliable and more user-friendly than Wikipedia, plus more extensive and user-friendly than Scramble, plus more complete, accurate and user-friendly than GlobalSecurity plus more up-to-date as some of the others, then I'd be happy. The thing holding me back is that it takes (even after programming) considerable time to fill the database with data, which also needs to be constantly updated. I'd need volunteers to help me with that who know what they're doing, but even then it puts more demands on the programming of the back-end. I guess I still need to make my mind up whether to take this route or just start adding more reports (or summaries). Anyway, in the mean time there's the air force resources guide, which has relevant official and quality unofficial links listed per country, as well as direct links to the related Wikipedia page(s). I've basically created this for my own needs (as Google results start to get more useless every day?!) and for convenience, so it should be pretty useful for those of you seeking information on air forces.
Regarding the forum, it wasn't listed because this poll was about content. Forum content is what you (the community) put into it. I'm already spending more time here than updating the site! If I would need to focus more on the forum, I might as well drop the site and keep the forum on its own. Getting more members is constantly being brought to my attention, but I can't force people to sign up. Getting more activity from members also depends on you, in-depth topics and interesting discussions will trigger people to sign up and actually post. Again, like with all the other aviation things, there are a lot of aviation forums! Anyway the new homepage design I am working on will have stronger links to the forums than currently the case. Also other pages of the site will be coupled with the forum or have links to the forum. It's all a matter of coding, and that's not one of my strong points, at the same time it's at such a level that I can't resort to off-the-shelf "have-it-all" packages. I won't be happy with it. Not only will the structure be fixed and looking like a standard site (like f-16.net or wikipedia for example), I would have to convert everything!
Back to Index
Move to Top 
