Model Aviation Magazine

I just received my copy of Model Aviation; and, although it was great
to see Mr. Moon as the cover art, and it had a good article about
Dennis Slater's scale F-4, there seemed to be a lot less C/L than
usual.

There are no qualms with me about paying my annual dues or subscribing
to Model Aviation, but it doesn't seem to be the kind of magazine that
I look forward to reading anymore.

Perhaps, I've just become jaded from my fix from PAMPA with Stunt News and the relative wealth of information from SSW, but Model Aviation
just doesn't bring out the anxious sweat of anticipation as it once
did.

Good heavens, no stunt nor combat.

,I am getting pretty disappointed with MA also. Until this new policy of appealing to the great unwashed masses , I actually would read the magazine. There was a lot of interesting stuff in the specialty columns of CL and FF, and occasionally RC. I MISS THAT STUFF! Now it only comes around every three months.

The net result I bet is that the ARFER's still could care less about MA, but those who at least use to enjoy it give up on it.

My 2 cents.

> ,I am getting pretty disappointed with MA also. Until this
>new policy of appealing to the great unwashed masses , I
>actually would read the magazine. There was a lot of
>interesting stuff in the specialty columns of CL and FF, and
>occasionally RC. I MISS THAT STUFF! Now it only comes around
>every three months.
>
>The net result I bet is that the ARFER's still could care
>less about MA, but those who at least use to enjoy it give
>up on it.
>
>My 2 cents.
>
>alan

I looked at a sample issue from my little collection from back in '89. There were two C/L construction articles, plus the usual columns. It's a shame, but not surprising. The 'hos goes where the $s is.

jake

Richard. You should look at the April issue of M.A. for coverage of our particular sport. Also, our friend at M.A., Bob Hunt, wrote very nice words in support of C/L stunt in this same issue.

When you think of all the dozens of ways that modelers design/build/compete, it is amazing that one magazine could hope to cover everything in a monthly magazine. I think that M.A. does a wonderful job, considering that they have so many diverse groups with which to respond.

I enjoy reading every word in M.A. I just MIGHT learn something!

>Richard. You should look at the April issue of M.A. for
>coverage of our particular sport. Also, our friend at M.A.,
>Bob Hunt, wrote very nice words in support of C/L stunt in
>this same issue.
>
>When you think of all the dozens of ways that modelers
>design/build/compete, it is amazing that one magazine could
>hope to cover everything in a monthly magazine. I think
>that M.A. does a wonderful job, considering that they have
>so many diverse groups with which to respond.
>
>I enjoy reading every word in M.A. I just MIGHT learn
>something!
>
>Floyd

Yes, but they once did a much better job and that's the rub. The decline is very evident just by looking at magazines from the past vs today.

Even if there aren't many CL articles in any given issue, try reading it anyway. You might be surprised at what you find. I find interesting nuggets of information in a lot of the RC columns, even. The giant scale pattern plane series they've been running has lots of info that'd be of interest to us. In the last issue, they covered tramelling (i.e. aligning everything on the plane so that it's straight).

And even if you don't find something you can use immediately, it's still interesting to read about what other people do in their part of the hobby. I find the stuff about electrics and electronics fascinating, even if I don't fly electrics (I might get into indoor flying in the future, though).

I used to argue with RC sport fliers that they were being too parochial. They'd say, hey, how many people fly CL Stunt? A couple thousand? Why even bother covering it in the magazine? There are 50 times more of us than there are of you. I'd say, read the columns anyway - you might find neat stuff to use on your own projects. And now I'm finding that CL Stunt fliers can be just as parochial.

LAST EDITED ON Mar-29-03 AT 05:34 PM (CDT)
 
>and it had a good article about Dennis Slater's scale F-4...

I have seen that one fly.

I can sum up the latest issue in one word: boring.

(Added on edit)
I didn't sign in when I made the original post,
I signed in to edit it but am still listed
as an "unregistered user." Software glitch?

Worse, you are trapped into getting that magazine whether you want it or not. I still say a goodly amount of your dues subsidizes that magazine. Wonder what F.M would be like with a guarenteed subscription rate of say 100,00 or so. No wonder the other magazines cried foul years ago when MA started. I think the argument is still valid,however, I'm not going to engage in rehashing it here. Dennis

Have any of you submitted an article to MA? They can only publish what is submitted. I don't think they are down on C/L, they just haven't gotten any material!
Bare

>Have any of you submitted an article to MA? They can only
>publish what is submitted. I don't think they are down on
>C/L, they just haven't gotten any material!
>Bare

I are a'tryin' to rite them wun un my flyin' saucer projekt, but I cain't hardly spel tu guud, an they keeps on rejktun it, them varmits!

...Wonder what F.M would be like with a guarenteed subscription rate of say 100,00 or so. No wonder the other magazines cried foul years ago when MA started. I think the argument is still valid,however, I'm
not going to engage in rehashing it here. Dennis

Actually, I used to wonder why FM had a boat section at one time. Wonder what the boat enthusiasts thought?

My understanding on the boating section in FM is that it died for lack of interest.

I wouldn't doubt it. Probably too much airplane info for the boating guys. They probably have their own mag now.

Ah.. but the boat section gave us some of the most interesting painting articles ever. Written by an ex stunt flier (Vic Macaluso).

I'd bet that there are more RC boaters than CL flyers. And they spend lots of money. The race boats run 50-60%nitro, have GPS senders for real speed figures and the guys just love to go fast.
Send in your stories and construction articles to MA.
Smell checker.... MM:'(

It seems every magazine goes through this cycle. Even Playboy has center folds I'm not excited about, at least once a year . The NMRA also has a house organ and gets lots of complaints, yet at least seven out of 12 issues have someting of use for me. I have favorite authors and yet once in a while they put out a book that bores me. We can all do like Bradley did, write sumtin and submit it. Think of the fame and wealth. Well, death threats then.

If you don't speak your piece, don't expect to see coverage of your favorite activity. Bob Hunt is way too busy to drive out and ask every modeler what he wants to read about. Write letters, send photos, and write articles.

I think that you hit upon it: they were just having an off month
from the usual standard.

However, to keep from being disappointed in the future, I'll just
lower my expectations a couple of notches.

After all, it is just a magazine, though a five bucks per copy magazine.

I was reading MA for 15 minutes last month before I realized I picked up the Hobby Shack sale flyer by mistake. Couldn't tell the difference.
John

Yes, but what great sales. Did you see the cl OS .46 LA for sale??

Iskandar's correct, post N.13. There might not be near as much interesting CL material as we would like in each issue of Model Aviation--I'm certainly not impressed--but the 5- or 6- or 18-part construction article on that scale-like RC aerobatics model has lots of real good information for virtually anyone interested in CL Stunt.

I mean, the sucker is nothing more than the Mother of All Stunt Models, built much the same way we build. Don't let the scale of things cloud your vision, this is one of the premier construction articles of the last 20 years.

I hope no one takes this as an indication that I support the path down which Mr. Hunt is now taking the AMA magazine. I continue to think he is tilting at windmills, doing it with a good bit of our money, and will not see much success from the efforts put forth.

I hope for success, Bob's vision is an honorable one. I just don't agree with him, do not see MA being able to convert people whose real hobby is going through a series of hobbies one after the other into "real" modelers, however you may wish to define the term. (And yes, he and I talked about this and a great many other subjects a couple months ago.)

Mr. Dirt. Bob Hunt is, in my opinion, treading a fine line. While his interest is surely with C/L, he must also cater to those who fly R/C, FF, indoor and etc., etc. The magazine runs nearly 200 pages and is quite comprehensive each month.

I simply don't understand how M.A. can hope to please everyone, and I guess they understand that.

This is a general-purpose publication which tries to cater to every taste.

I usually find something interesting in each issue.

>Iskandar's correct, post N.13. There might not be near as
>much interesting CL material as we would like in each issue
>of Model Aviation--I'm certainly not impressed--but the 5-
>or 6- or 18-part construction article on that scale-like RC
>aerobatics model has lots of real good information for
>virtually anyone interested in CL Stunt.
>
>I mean, the sucker is nothing more than the Mother of All
>Stunt Models, built much the same way we build. Don't let
>the scale of things cloud your vision, this is one of the
>premier construction articles of the last 20 years.
>
>I hope no one takes this as an indication that I support the
>path down which Mr. Hunt is now taking the AMA magazine. I
>continue to think he is tilting at windmills, doing it with
>a good bit of our money, and will not see much success from
>the efforts put forth.
>
>I hope for success, Bob's vision is an honorable one. I just
>don't agree with him, do not see MA being able to convert
>people whose real hobby is going through a series of hobbies
>one after the other into "real" modelers, however you may
>wish to define the term. (And yes, he and I talked about
>this and a great many other subjects a couple months ago.)
>
>Danny Dirt

I read enough of the Giant Stunter article this month to see that they recommended not (repeat, NOT) sanding the wing skins very much. Hey, I just learned how to ruin my foam wing stunter kit in one paragraph. Be careful what you learn from the R~C boys...two different animals. Steve

Steve,

I am totally mystified. What are you talking about? I read that article last night, including the piece you plugged in. There is no good reason to sand wing skins much at all when covering with MonoKote. And in their case there might be a structural concern, as in 1/32" skins would not be advised.

Incidentally, in exchange for the fuel pump I sent you I am in dire need of pithy comments and insults to direct toward Mr. Cunningham. Please do not be tardy in your response.