LAA first impression
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
-
Nick Allen
- Posts: 456
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
- Location: Oxford
- Contact:
Errr, Gerry, the main reason for name change was to spread the appeal of the Association beyond its traditional owner/builder community base, and thereby to attract new members. (I seem to remember some article in which the stated aim was to become the association for anyone with an interest in light aircraft and aviation.) Hence the importance of the new site looking good. And working.
033719
Nick is spot on. We have just launched an “aircrew card” extremely similar to the one AOPA have had for years. We changed our name to become the one stop solution for GA, not just homebuilders. The irony is we do more lobbying than AOPA , charge less for membership than AOPA but if you ask the average pilot who represents his interests who do you think he will name. This is why you are now a member of the LAA and why the launch was important.
Rod1
Rod1
021864
I don't know what the intention is but I now get a page with an "0" from this URL
http://www.laa.uk.com/
But I can get to the LAA website from here
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co.uk
and from there to this BB.
I managed to log in yesterday after several attempts.
Just a few points on software engineering:
If the LAA site is down on purpose, OK but its best to put up a notice saying it's under construction and to take down all routes to it.
I am sure there are a lot of us who would volunteer to create and run a proper User Acceptance Test plan before going live on the next version of the new website, if asked. It's just like test planning for a new aircraft. What we have done is akin to having no flight test program before going into volume production.
Normal software testing consists of unit testing small parts of the functionality and system testing the whole system done by techies and then turning it loose on a nominated subgroup of keen users who run specific functionality and document bugs against a written checklist drawn from the functional specification; e.g. register, join, leave, pay, load document, find document, print, delete post, edit post, locate broken links, fix links, etc.
That written feedback then leads to bug fixes. Those are retested as above and when the rate of discovery of new bugs is acceptable, the client signs off the software and goes live to the outside world. If you don't go through this process it simply is not going to work and every bug will be discovered by Joe Public and they will form their own opinion regarding the degree of professionalism involved.
This kind of testing can easily take longer than the creation of the software. Spread out over the project life cycle, depending on the language used one can only expect to get about 20 to 70 lines of code a day perfected per programmer, who cannot test software. That is like the author editing the book. Unfortunately there are many software houses that simply get their clients to do the system testing for them in the live environment otherwise their quote is deemed uncompetitive.
http://www.laa.uk.com/
But I can get to the LAA website from here
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co.uk
and from there to this BB.
I managed to log in yesterday after several attempts.
Just a few points on software engineering:
If the LAA site is down on purpose, OK but its best to put up a notice saying it's under construction and to take down all routes to it.
I am sure there are a lot of us who would volunteer to create and run a proper User Acceptance Test plan before going live on the next version of the new website, if asked. It's just like test planning for a new aircraft. What we have done is akin to having no flight test program before going into volume production.
Normal software testing consists of unit testing small parts of the functionality and system testing the whole system done by techies and then turning it loose on a nominated subgroup of keen users who run specific functionality and document bugs against a written checklist drawn from the functional specification; e.g. register, join, leave, pay, load document, find document, print, delete post, edit post, locate broken links, fix links, etc.
That written feedback then leads to bug fixes. Those are retested as above and when the rate of discovery of new bugs is acceptable, the client signs off the software and goes live to the outside world. If you don't go through this process it simply is not going to work and every bug will be discovered by Joe Public and they will form their own opinion regarding the degree of professionalism involved.
This kind of testing can easily take longer than the creation of the software. Spread out over the project life cycle, depending on the language used one can only expect to get about 20 to 70 lines of code a day perfected per programmer, who cannot test software. That is like the author editing the book. Unfortunately there are many software houses that simply get their clients to do the system testing for them in the live environment otherwise their quote is deemed uncompetitive.
Yes Gary, very good advice when it comes to mission critical or financial software.
But not really so important for a enthusiasts BB.
I for one can live with a few hiccups, it's not as if planes will crash cos the site is in flux.
I doubt if the WWW would even exist yet if EDS or their ilk had been in charge
But not really so important for a enthusiasts BB.
I for one can live with a few hiccups, it's not as if planes will crash cos the site is in flux.
I doubt if the WWW would even exist yet if EDS or their ilk had been in charge
Peter Diffey
029340
029340
-
MikeGodsell
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:32 pm
- Location: West Wales
We are now infamous;
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=547745#547745
You may like to post that things are getting better
Rod1
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=547745#547745
You may like to post that things are getting better
Rod1
021864
cost/benefit analysis
The website stutters into life, the mag wobbles - Not too good from a PR point of view but how is the change winning in other perhaps less visible areas ?
-
Brian Hope
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:28 pm
- Location: Sheerness Kent
The name change has been very positively received by those involved in the legislative and regulatory organisations with which we are involved at home and in Europe. The name says not only who we are but also what we are, no need to have to explain what 'Popular' flying stands for.
Have to say I wonder just how catastrophic the website having a few quickly fixed glitches and the mag being a few days late (because an outside contractor has screwed up) really is. Not an iota I would suggest, other than in the minds of a few who think the world and his wife is as quick to judge on such trivial isues as they are.
The value of an association is in what it achieves for its membership, and how it fits into the environment into which it operates. LAA IS now understood by those needing to discuss GA issues - government ministries, CAA etc - to be THE organisation to talk to. It is held in high esteem because of the professional manner in which it deals with the aircraft under its control, and the high calibre of debate it brings to the table. Which organisation did the Treasury seek out to discuss the issue of the Take off tax - LAA, and which was the ONLY light GA organisation to represent us on that issue and and get a satisfactory result - LAA. Just one small example of many. Me, I can forgive the odd trivial hiccup, it means absolutely zilch in the real world in which most of us live. People actually die of starvation in Africa you know.
Have to say I wonder just how catastrophic the website having a few quickly fixed glitches and the mag being a few days late (because an outside contractor has screwed up) really is. Not an iota I would suggest, other than in the minds of a few who think the world and his wife is as quick to judge on such trivial isues as they are.
The value of an association is in what it achieves for its membership, and how it fits into the environment into which it operates. LAA IS now understood by those needing to discuss GA issues - government ministries, CAA etc - to be THE organisation to talk to. It is held in high esteem because of the professional manner in which it deals with the aircraft under its control, and the high calibre of debate it brings to the table. Which organisation did the Treasury seek out to discuss the issue of the Take off tax - LAA, and which was the ONLY light GA organisation to represent us on that issue and and get a satisfactory result - LAA. Just one small example of many. Me, I can forgive the odd trivial hiccup, it means absolutely zilch in the real world in which most of us live. People actually die of starvation in Africa you know.
Brian,
“Not an iota I would suggest, other than in the minds of a few who think the world and his wife is as quick to judge on such trivial isues as they are.”
I realize you are not a qualified marketing guy with 25 years experience, but even you must have come across the rule that “first impressions count”. This is very true when rebranding an old and tiered product…
You are extremely loyal to the LAA and defend it at every turn, but to get better we have to accept that we get things wrong. PR is something which we have been very bad at for a very long time and brushing the failures under the carpet and papering over the cracks is not solving the problem. We just do not give sufficient attention to how the association appears to the wider flying community, and we consistently under assess the impact of our decisions on this relationship. The Association needs to be much more professional in this area.
Rod1
“Not an iota I would suggest, other than in the minds of a few who think the world and his wife is as quick to judge on such trivial isues as they are.”
I realize you are not a qualified marketing guy with 25 years experience, but even you must have come across the rule that “first impressions count”. This is very true when rebranding an old and tiered product…
You are extremely loyal to the LAA and defend it at every turn, but to get better we have to accept that we get things wrong. PR is something which we have been very bad at for a very long time and brushing the failures under the carpet and papering over the cracks is not solving the problem. We just do not give sufficient attention to how the association appears to the wider flying community, and we consistently under assess the impact of our decisions on this relationship. The Association needs to be much more professional in this area.
Rod1
021864