ADMIN NOTE:  This topic was started as a continuation of http://www.rcindia.org/chatter-zone/double-or-triple-fun-with-just-packing-tape


 

Fantastic , Why is it that such innovative ideas are only for us to admire and clap for ?

Looking forward to the day when we will have our own desi innovators and unusual thinkers .

Wondering  we always write , talk about new RC exploits from the Info abroad .
We also build great planes to plans down loaded from abroad ?

Any reason we don't  do it ourselves with our own ideas , are we just great followers ?
Is it that we can improve and do the best we can what others have already done ?

What would it take for us to innovate and try on our own ?

These are just thoughts I am sharing as in all these 5or 6 K posts I don't remember seeing even a single Original design , concept OR trial  ( I hope  I am wrong ) .
We have  done many things in this short life  of this forum but I feel original innovation is one that is not very evident .

It is the same thing always a whole lot  is written about  quoting  from various on line resources  extensively , arguing points and counter points etc BUT THINK  WHAT PERCENTAGE OF ALL THESE MANY POSTS IS ORIGINAL  

What is the major difference between RCG , RCUNIVERSE , Wattflyer  and such forum's and RC India ?

I have been thinking of this for the past few days  and my opinion is those forums are resources of originality while we are a resources of collection of information of those resources WE ARE MIRROR FORUM .

This is my opinion , I took a break from here for a few days  to get away from all our arguments and points of view and  was looking at it as an outsider  and frankly   did not find anything  very interesting in the past three days  from the originality point of view ,

THE SAME OLD RADIO ARGUMENTS INVOLVING 2.4 , SALES OF PRODUCTS , HOBBY CITY AND OTHER  HOBBY SHOPS TALK , SOME ARTICLES ON OTHER TOPICS AGAIN QUOTING ON LINE SOURCES ETC   .
EG .
IN 6426 POSTS PLEASE POINT ME OUT TO ONE PLAN FOR A PLANE

Guys don't get me wrong as is normally the case  but I thought to make the forum more meaningful and raise it  from its present  gathering which is more like a group friends  sitting around at a coffee shop we need to  make an effort to move it to a higher level  and make it  on the lines of RCG  , RCU etc we all need to think differently from what we are doing now.

I CHOSE THIS THREAD TO VOICE THIS BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT OUR ACHIEVEMENT THIS IS THE ONLY THREAD THAT SHOWED  INNOVATION IN the past week  .

ANWAR HAS BEEN PUTTING UP THESE VIDEOS I ASSUME TO SHOW CASE INNOVATIONS IN RC .

I am sorry if I upset  some people with this observation  and I hope it will be taken in the right spirit

Sai

That is a good question, and something worth pondering by everyone 

I have no clue about others, but I know my answer is that I have no time to get in that deep.  There are times when I even  handover an ARF foamy kit to be assembled by the guys at the local hobby shop.  At the very least, I want to keep flying.  I would be more than satisfied if I can go to the field once a week and just get a few flights in (and spend part of the time helping others with their stuff). There might as well be times in the future where I can pursue more of the building/design aspects of this hobby; but for now, just flying is more than enough for me !

It is a lame excuse, but it is also the absolute reality (for now).

Anwar ,
Most will have the same reply I am sure  , but it is not that those guys in Europe and US are sitting around with time hanging around , they find time to do these things .
If you look beyond RC you will find a similar scenario as far as we are concerned .
EG
Take the case of say the IT sector with which you are associated  who are the major clients for our IT sector : US and Europe right : we systematize their ideas and convert their ideas into codes and software , but the basic innovative idea is theirs which we put into a systematic form , again I might be wrong but this is my understanding  

I wonder if we can do this  for a living then why don't we attempt to innovate and create  as a hobby like how those guys do ?

I am saying this as I find even youngsters don't try anything  that is not tried before . We replicate what others have done elsewhere .

I am discussing this as I feel aero modeling  allows you to try new ideas and concepts but I don't find it being used here to do that .

Frankly it did not take  much to try the MOSS concept and turn it into a winning glider , neither did it take too much time or effort for Venkat to create the pipe dream and turn it into a fast plane  
http://www.rcindia.org/self-designed-diy-and-college-projects/pipe-dream-pylon-racer(very-fast)/msg1009/#msg1009

Had our share of  failures like the Micro wave Coanda , a Pusher jet called Geometrics etc  but the the time and effort in all these cases was nothing  compared to the lessons learnt .

Nor did it take too much to buy a Computer SMPS and convert it into a power supply for a 200 W charger ( not original ) .

The will to try is more important than the result out of many ideas only a few will succeed that is a fact of life .

Are we held back by the fear of failure  and admitting it  

Just a few further thoughts .
Sai

The question is "original" ideas. None of the things you described are original (the Moss etc), they have all been done by others before (whether we have seen the references or not).  And this is true of whatever field you are in.

Coming up original ideas ideas take dedication.  If you do it as a part of earning your bread, well that is great.  But doing that as a part of a hobby that takes you away from earning your livelihood, is a whole another story (and probably one with not a very happy ending).

May be there are some who also think that innovation need not be some grand discovery small steps  are also innovation , mods are also innovation etc .
I am  not talking of Grand discoveries , I am talking of even small original ideas which add value to the existing .

As for MOSS I don't claim it is original either the platform for it was 24" x 24" 2 channel slope glider without motor etc  , the originality  was only in  developing  it into a 46" x 30" Motorized Glider with polyhydrals  .

Edwin building a pusher plane like an easy star might not be an innovation but using the bottom of a sprite can for a canopy and  using a  PVC conduit for a fuse  is innovation  

Like in this Video the Slow Stick is not the innovation the Idea of flying 2 or three together is  

I  am not a grand thinker like you Anwar I prefer small steps  
sai

Purely a point of view  quite possible with buy and fly types but might not find many takers among  the scratch build hobbyists we find pleasure in small mods and achievements which work out .

This Video shows that the guys have had a great time doing something no one else has  and  they are not doing it for a living

Sai

My point is, they had an original idea for putting two planes together and flying them together. The point being "original", whether they do it for a living or not.

But using alternate material is hardly any innovation, and sure as hell there must be others who have done similar things in the past. 

BTW, it was your post that was crying for lack on innovation and original ideas.  Yet everything you point out as samples of "innovation" barely qualify (if at all).  Someone uses plastic cups for canopy, someone else uses sprite can.  Not much of an original idea.  People have built foamies that are as tall as some of us, and I would consider that as some innovation. 

So you extended a hybrid of a  slowstick and some other planes into a slightly bigger size.  Big deal


Isn't it obvious that pleasure and innovation are two different things ?

And "buy and fly" is not exactly what some people think it is.  Try assembling a 50 size (or higher) CCPM heli from a kit and setting it up properly, and tell me how easy it is compared to cutting a foamie

Well, for me, any sort of creativity will pave a way for innovation. Be it using a soda can or using a bowl for the cowl or just sticking two wings together... Anything thats just out of the ordinary is creativity and the thought process that go with it is very important.

I go with Sai on this as most of the RC flyers that I know are just "buyer and flyers"... No harm in their part, its just the way they like it. As long as everyone is happy with what they do, everything is fine.

To assemble a kit, I am sure you need some brains.. Its sort of like a jig-saw puzzle. (Yes there is tuning and other fine adjustments required). However, I would not compare that skill to build something original from the scratch. If you could make your own jig-saw puzzle and show how to assemble it, then that the sort of thing I say is real creativity that would lead to innovation.

Surely, the first foamie was an innovation, using a CF rod/tube to strengthen an airframe and lighten it too was also an innovation. Have to agree here that even a slightly different way of doing things is innovation. I mean you don't have to invent something altogether new all the time.

hello,
Not at all to claim any credit but just thought of this when i read this post.
This bird cage is part of a small tree stucture having a small swing with birs and also  other birds etc. The cuckoo beaks are reynold pen caps. The movning part is the CDROM opt drive salvaged. Acutators are hand wound. The cuckoo sound is from the wav file downloaded from internet and programmed in to a sound chip. The whole thing is controlled through a PIC micro.


pls comment
ashta

Astha   ,
This  is a great bit of ingenuity and innovation. We need more and many more of such projects
Precisely  this is the kind of thing I was talking about .
The Idea is what is important and  applying yourself to converting the Idea to reality is what I was trying to get like minds thinking on .

If some one cannot do do something due to various compulsions it does not mean no one else can .

My posts was  an appeal to those who can and are willing to try , it was meant to  awaken those who can and are willing to try in any small which way they can .

Those who can't so be it they can continue to be spectators and benefit from the experiences of those who can.

Sai

sai

I agree with you totally that the first foamie etc are innovations.  And I also believe that  making a foamie with a 2m wingspan is also an innovation.  But building a foamie that has 48inch wingspan when others had only 38inches or using coro instead of foam, I would never put it in the same class. 

Neither would using bamboo sticks instead of CF rods.  If someone made a plane completely out of bamboo, that would be borderline. In general substituting locally available material is not something I would call innovation. Again, these are all just one person's opinions.

These are baby steps to innovation (as Ismail pointed out), but not the passionate level of innovation that I felt in the initial post by Sai. 

And the vast majority wants to fly much more than they want to build.

Now let me go innovate by coming up with a cool new heli flying maneuver (instead of suffering through any more of this trash talk  on how "only builders are innovators"   )

PS: Atul - I tried to get Sai into a verbal dual on something other than radios, and he chickened out using the lame excuse of sensitivity.  I have got him to participate in this one !  Anybody who wants to gang up with me ?  I see Ismail already joined the other team, so I am looking for some talented team mates !

hahaha.. man anwar you can really strike a conversation and how i must say...

About the talented lot am not sure about that but yes i will try my level best...

Regarding this "discussion" i agree with you anwar, majority of people want to fly and not build.. But every person I believe in this hobby builds a spad sooner or later..

Cannot sum up the entire discussion in some words but doing something different or never tried before would be an innovation but needs a creative mind for sure..

Would be real good to see some nice innovations from our friends here..

tats my two cents..

cheers

atul g.

Izmile,

Your statement that any sort of creativity will pave a way for innovation is partly true. We all tend to be creative when we do not get the exact material we are looking for. We are purely looking at alternative to reach a pre-defined goal - maybe from a different route.

However, personally, I would define innovation at a more conceptual level when we begin to challenge the established concepts itself. Like for example someone thought about bird like flapping wings - its called Ornithopter or something. Challenging the established concepts require an elaborate knowledge about the subject itself. Case in point, the transition to VTOL from 'normal' aircraft or the orithopter could not have come with just and passion and no knowledge physics.

I would not think many of us have that in us or know the subject well enough to begin to think in a different direction. Some/most might be top end IIT engineers but not all (like self). Hence folks like us - we tend to follow someone else and are quite happy to do so...

Pankaj

The first steps of Innovation start with small mods or alternatives it is from these small steps that larger concepts evolve . You start thinking differently on small matters like material etc.

By the Way I know Nandakumar who is the first person  in India to make the ornithopter :



Nither is he an engineer nor an IIT graduate , but today he is a resource person for IIT's as far as Ornithopter and Quad rotors are concerned , if you ask him he also says the habit of trying out new ideas is cultivated  .


sai

Wow, thats indeed an achievement.... .

Kudos Mr.Nandakumar ..  Considering the lack of resources in india BUT the will to achieve drives people to cross many boundaries..

Check this guy out he has installed a camera on front of an easy star and actually sees where he is going in the air..

http://www.flickr.com/photos/erbalite/

As much as we are appreciative of this effort, it does go back to the basic question you raised.  How much of this was indigenous ?  What were Mr Nandakumar's resources in building this ?  How much reliance was there on outside references ? I hope it is NONE, and it is 100% his design.

I am just trying to illustrate the point that having something uncommon may not immediately translate into "innovation".

Atul ,
That is what is FPV about 
Sai

This was achieved at a time when Brushless Motors were not available in India  and resources at that time were difficult to come by.

The best I liked was the use of a cloth line to test the trust 

It is only when you develop the habit of thinking of various things around you that can be converted to flying objects do you learn to innovate one step at a time  you got to learn to walk before you run.

Sai

I am completely aware of what an fpv means mr.sai  . I was just sharing that guy's interest towards different technologies..

In Btwn saw some weird innovations on youtube..chk it out..

  .

If that was your intention Atul that is great 

BTW, if anyone feels that this thread is just a fun thread because I am inciting Sai, let me make it clear that I am dead serious about the issue being discussed.  

For one, I do not agree at all that building is the only form where one can show case innovation. There can be lots of innovation in flying itself.  

I also find it hard to digest when it is said (or implied) that scratch building or building in general is the gist of aeromodeling, and flying abilities do not really matter.  I feel 75% of RC enthusiasts are in it just for flying. The ones who go the extra mile by scratch building deserve extra kudos for their efforts, but that is not reason enough to look down on others who do not.

Comments ?

Great finds Atul   

The guy has a middle-eastern accent.

No One said so those who are great flyers go ahead and innovate new routines , improve on an existing routine or style , who know discover 5 D in flying etc , but remember even a small original change by you is an innovation  

All I am saying is don't be limited by what has been done till date any where else in the world keep an open mind and try to improve on what is done in your own small way

Anwar ,
Don't be complexed by us builders we normally are not great flyers .
Sai

Have a look at the guy's site  this is innovation  
His tagline says it all
Great Ideas to use as platforms
http://www.haddadrc.com/

Seems to be a Jordanian or Palestinian .



Sai

Sai,

First Indian Ornithopter creator may not have been IIT grad. Personally, without taking away any credit from Mr. Nandkumar, I would not like to call this as innovation. The concept of Ornithopter existed in 2003. In fact it was first demonstrated in 1929 by Alexander Lippisch who was a pioneer in aerodynamics.

All I am saying is that hobbyist like us are in this for flying, yes we tend to be creative to a very limited extent, but this is in line with the existing laws and designs. We may not have enough knowledge to innovate.

Pankaj

As the subject says lack of rc innovation in india.. I see some reasons for that I maybe wrong..

Money, Time, Lack of Resources, Knowledge, and as anwar says lot of people are just not bothered to make spads or innovate different things and are completely satisfied with buying & flying..

To take my example i wanted to make ailerons for my easy star and i was going to do it no matter what, but i guess time and work took toll on me..

Pankaj - I agree that he didnt innovate it but the efforts & the steps he took to make it successful is in itself a huge innovation , rite ?

As Ismail says anything can fly and spads just prove it 

Considering the comments till now, we are mixing innovation and some one's effort to make something without proper materials, tools and just plain great effort. The latter is great effort but surely not something from which we can take away a technique or approach that can be re-used.

Innovation must lead to something that is a takeaway for more folks - for example a building material that is better (measurable) than what we use today - cheaper (that would be the best innovation).

Before the first flight from Kittyhawk so many ppl tried out wings, gliders and what else, only to learn or simply to perish in a failed attempt. Does that mean that the Wright brothers were not innovative in what they successfully completed??? Can it be said that winged aircraft were already invented before them and they just happened to be the successful ones??

Absolutely not, they did something different, a differential that made them immortal.

Builders aren't the only ones that are innovative, but its going to be real tough for a pure-flyer to claim innovation 

One sure fire killer of innovation it the tendency to trivialize and go back deep into history and claim that some one some where has already done something and so its no point or no use doing it!! Thats the worst attitude to innovation. Try doing the same thing and you will do it differently and you may uncover what that individual in history did not or overlooked or could not.

Else, all planes even today would look like the Flyer!!

Totally agree.  It is much harder to come up with newer moves/maneuvers; so who ever does, that is pure gold !  One fairly recent (yet some years old) example would be VPP aka 4D flight.

It is much easier to innovate on the materials and designs side (or at least the vistas are much wider).

That is an interesting thread for sure.
I agree with Sai, to the fact that we do not innovate as much as people in the West do, and this is not limited to RC, but in our general approach and is reflected everywhere. Be it IT, or music, even Cinemas. Does Bollywood sound very creative ?

Why is this so ? In my opinion, this will deserve a long answer and i will try to address it in another post here, later today.

Lets address innovation first.

As Anwar said, I do not consider scratch building (from a downloaded or copied plan), or using alternate materials, or doing a couple of mods here and there innovation. So, if i downloaded an Extra 330S plan for then net, bought some good balsa from a retailer, then converted the plans to into AutoCad, and then searched and searched for a Laser cutting shop, and found one, got the wood cut, assembled the airframe, and substituted locally available materials in a few places
to build a flyable plane, i would not call that that innovative . It does reflect your resourcefulness and tenacity and building skills, but real innovation is doing something that has never been done before. Even if you built a jet engine, it would not be called innovation. That would awe a lot of people, but its not innovation.
Unfortunately, and with due respect to everyone, till date I have not seen any "innovative" thread in this forum. There are some very nice people here, who are dedicated and are exceptionally skilled, but nothing innovative so far.

Ok, so now that i have explained, my defination of innovation, let me come back to something else i wanted to share: About the hobby,

After reading the posts (in this thread and others), I somehow found the general tendency for people to think, and comment that those who are scratch building, or experimenting, or using alternate materials are better hobbyists than those who "buy-and-fly". I very strongly disagree with this thought.

In my opinion, there is no right or wrong way to go in this (or any) hobby. We are all here to have relieve our stresses, and relax and enjoy. If that means buying a new ARF and setting it up precisely, and then trimming it out till perfection, then that would be as good a someone who scratch built a plane. We  are not here to judge people, or their dedication to this hobby.
Why is someone who scratch builds or someone who experiments more often than others considered a better modeler ? No doubt their building skills are good, but that wouldnt put them above everyone else.

Those were some of my views. This was not intended to be pointed at anyone, and if you disagree please share your views.

Gaurav.

I think majority here are getting mixed up between invention and innovation .

eg :
You would say that is an innovative way of doing a job , would you say that it is an inventive way of doing a job

So this clearly shows innovation is a different way of doing a certain job .

I think this explains the subtle difference  .

This also implies that innovation is normally an improvement  . My experience is that this being the case it is a skill that can be developed  what is needed is the will  to try .

I agree with TG trivializing innovation is not right eg Lets take the case of  a car the fact that the car was in existence for a long time  does not mean improvements beyond the first car are pointless  

Sai  


Sai

But as Ismail pointed out earlier, scratch building does provide a good avenue for real innovation to follow, so it is right to consider these as baby steps towards something that is truly unique. Some credit is due there.

Nope, what is being discussed is more the difference between improvisation and innovation   Innovation is not in the league of improvisation at all, it is held at a much higher level of esteem.

I am sure this thread is going to be like a bottomless pit. Everyone is right about their views.

I should say this - "Opinions are like butt-holes! Everyone has got one"..

Any discussion is better than no discussion ?!?!? 

Translating to your terms, "having a butt-hole is better than not having one !" 

Anwar,
Thats one gob stopper if I have ever seen one......

Pankaj

Ya... its better to have one of those..  .. so here goes a collection of all butt-holes!

I kind of think that the long time RC flyers will never become innovative as they have their own way of doing things. The new generation RC flyers are the one to try out new things as they have more resources. (And generally, kids nowadays are more sharper than the previous gens).

-Ismail

Bang On target   Ismail  with both the Butt Hole as well as the above statement I agree with is 200 % that is my experience with customers as well.
 

Yes, but he killed the thread 

 

 

Here are some real glimpses of experimentation.

Very nice!

Yep, this guy goes on to show that almost any shape and material can fly !

http://www.haddadrc.com/

i m here to do it [complete the lack of innovation]