RCPAUL

My Feedback: (1)

My subscription to MAN expired with the August issue just received - I will not resubscribe. Personally, I don't care for the magazine as it is mostly advertising and little content (my opinion). But, there must be many others who like it for some reason or the magazine would change or go out of business. Can you tell me why you like it?

Paul

mikegordon10

Well I guess it's a matter of having something to read and since RC Report folded we ain't left with much to pick from. On the whole I agree with you as to their content or lack thereof.

carrellh

I subscribed when I got my first plane, about 10 years ago. I did not renew. I discovered RCU in 2003. If you learn to filter the "stuff," you can get more info here than from a magazine. I've learned more from the guys in the club than anywhere else.

vicman

My Feedback: (10)

I get it as a gift from family members. On my own I wouldn't subscribe to it. However I pay 4x what MAN cost for RCModel World to come from the UK.

Stickbuilder

I used to subscribe to MAN (back in the 50's). I really enjoyed the building articles and tests way back then, when about everything that I flew came from America's Hobby Center (in New York City). Living on a farm in Tennessee didn't allow for much in the way of a hobby shop withing a reasonable distance.

While I consider Gerry Yarrish to be a good friend, I don't subscribe nor read the magazine any longer. I have several Hobby Shops within reasonable driving distance, and I have the Internet with which to research the best places to buy what I need.

Having said all that, I don't wish to purchase any catalog. If the manufacturer or distributor of a line of products wants my business, they will provide me with their catalog, gratis.

Virtually all the magazines (including Model Aviation) are nothing more than catalogs for the various distributors. Have you ever seen MAN, Fly RC or MA do a test report on a model that they thought was a POS? Me neither.

Bill, AMA 4720

donnyman

Let's face it guy's It is all about the money.

I agree with just about everything said so far but every so often the MAG hits the spot with me. As long as the price doesn't get too high I will continue my subscription. The ads. are increasing and the tech. data is shrinking, but most of all I am fed up with the lack of building skills brought on by the ARF craze But then again I am of the "old school" of build, fly, crash, and rebuild. Hey the gives me an idea to start another thread!

STUKA BARRY

I agree with that. Gerry is a good friend of mine, but I only get to see him once a year at Warbirds Over Delaware, and thats when he sometimes puts my picture in the mag. See you in a month Gerry. FYI: RC Report did'nt fold, they are online now. So you still have a chance to see Dick Petit's mug. Sorry Dick. If your complaining about advertisements in a mag, you've never seen RC Modeler. That mag was damn near a telephone book with 90% ads.

mikegordon10

Yah, I know about RC Online, and I tried it for the first year. The problem is I don't sit here and read a mag at the computer. The reading room is upstairs, if you know what I mean. I was printing out the pdf to read in the reading room but the price of ink made it unrealistic. Also when Gordo got canned I got pissed. So I'm back to MAN and MA. Sorry state of affairs to be sure but it's like Obama I don't like it but what can be done?

Tarasdad

I read it for the articles, I swear!

Seriously, though, I really do enjoy reading it. Enouth so that I finally subscribed. I spent enough buying it off the magazine rack at Wallymart and Barnes & Noble to make sure it's something I wanted to do first, though. When you live on a fixed income you have to make sure you spend money wisely - or so the theory goes.

pettit

My Feedback: (23)

Hey Guys! Thanks for the kind words (Stuka Barry included)

Not only has Gordon left the operation, several others have made plans to do so and one more may be on the way out the door, if you get my drift.

Strange happenings going on down in Huntsville these days.

Maybe it's time......

thailazer

Interesting to see this post on MAN as I hadn't bought one or read one for a decade until just yesterday. (I just got back into the hobby in the last year or so.) I was surprised to see that the magazine now looks a lot like an electronics catalog with all the battery chargers, simulators, profilers, etc. All interesting stuff if you are into electrics, but for a retro-grouch like me it is stuff I am not really interested in. I always like the hints and kinks they included in the magazine in the old days.

Interesting to note that the June issue I bought at the Bangkok airport cost me $12.60 US. I used to subscribe for a whole year for that much back in the USA! I walked past the rack about three times until I convinced myself I have to see what it is like these days.

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

The major problem with the glossy's is that the authors have a word count limit and can't go into more detail on one topic and still cover the entire plane. Online reviews are much better for that reason (IMHO)....Dick, I didn't think Gordon had anything to do with the Online version - can you bring me up to speed on that?

Jerry

pettit

My Feedback: (23)

Gordon started out editing much of the submitted text for the online version. After several months, conditions deteriorated and he is no longer associated with the online version and is trying to recoup some of the $$$ owed to him for various services he had provided.

donnyman

Ive been lurking on the side lines reading your comments.... and my fears are founded. M.A.N. is on a slow dive into the trash bin.

Notice the cover, a cute model holding something they want to sell you, minimum tech. data, they don't want to spend money paying writers. cover to cover eye candy that quite frankly is boring.

it is as if the MAG. is run by a certified public accountant that really doesn't know modeling but is familiar with it.

It is obvious those in charge are primarily profit driven, As most things in this nation. it has become common and getting worse. The model reviews are geared to sell, not inform the buyers of the truth. they are not about to bite the hand that pays the bills.

We will have to live with the fact that PROFIT MARGINS, not modeling is the driving force of the MAG. and I am convinced it will fail.

maybe those in control will read this thread and come to their senses .....................but I doubt it.

Stickbuilder

.

Stickbuilder

I know all about RCReport Online. I co-authored one of the columns. That is past tense. Dick Watz and I are no longer affiliated with the online publication. I've been in this hobby for just a hair over 60 years now, and I've seen the mags come, and I've seen them go. Ads make the magazines profitable. I'd just like to see some honest ads, and reviews. With the passing of RC Report, we have lost that.

That's all that I have to say about this issue.

Bil, Waco Brother #1

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

Thanks for the update guys.....

dirtybird

My Feedback: (5)

I like it for the pretty pictures.
Seriously with the plug and play crowd we have now what do you write about?
We used to have builder magazines. Nobody is interested jn that anymore.

BillyGoat

To answer the OP's original question. I like that it's on the newsstand in the store and have something to read while waiting for a script to be filled. Someone here several years ago summed MAN up the best by calling it a "Home on the range publication" Where never is heard a discouraging word.

Mr. Pettit, I've always enjoyed your columns and product reviews although I'm not quite sure what to say about R/C Report Online, other than I haven't read a single issue in several months. What pushed me over the edge is the Pet of the Month column. That is just beyond ridiculous. [:'(]

dirtybird

My Feedback: (5)

What is the problem with rcreport? Are going to lose that?

50+AirYears

I used to like MAN back in the 50s and 60s. Then, they were a model airplane mag. They fit my needs and wants as a builder and flyer of all types of model airplane, control line, free flight, and radio control. I was dissapointed when they went to an all-rc format, but I kept up my subscrition. A few years ago, they seemed to abandon us builders, seeming to go to an all-ARF format. I had intended to let my subscription lapse, then they got Clarence Lee as the resident engine guru. However, since they cut out many or their plans, especially the older FF and CL, and seem to really be pushing their periodic Buyer's Guides over real content, I may just finaly let my subscription lapse next year. And I have saved some of their mags from as far back as 1948.

For me, there are currently only two true American model aircraft mags on the market-Flying Models, and Model Aviation.

As far as the amount of advertising content, that isn't too important to me, as long as there is an adequate amount of model aviation coverage. I object far more strongly to the lack of understanding of aviation in general exhibited in a couple newer publications, one of which had pictures from different sources in different sections of the mag showing a Sig Curtiss Jenny in flight with the caption (inexcuseable to me) calling the plane a Sopwith Camel, and in another, calling what to most of my flying buddies and me would be at best a caricature scale model, not even Stand-off Scale, "An extremely accurate and detailed Scale Model!"

I wish it were easier to get Aviation Modeler International locally. That was another good model aviation magazine, albeit English.

And as far as all reviews being positive, regardless of the facts, I have RCM issue #1, (I think) where Don Dewey introduced the mag and said in no uncertain terms that in the reviews, he would make sure that they would be accurate, and not inflated in any way. Then a few months later, he had another editorial pulling back from that policy. He made a statement revealing the facts of life. In essence, what he said is that any mag depends on advertising to pay the bills. Without advertising, a mag in a niche market couldn't charge a high enough cover price to stay in business. And, he found out that when the published truth about a product is less thanmildly neutral, the advertiser pulls his business. Other advertisers see this, think the mag might also pan their products, and also withdraw advertising. Soon, the mag shuts down the presses, turn out the lights, pink slips everybody, and goes home. From what I've seen over the years, a reviewed plane has to have at least 3 'Pros' to each 'Con' listed, and those 'Cons' better not be things like "This ARF's glue joints were intermittent or non-existing" or what I might have written about the first RC ARF I ever bought, "the two wing panels each had their own different, non-matched airfoils, the contact paper covering could not be reliably heat tightened to eliminate bagging, the firewall plywood was so soft, I was pulling T nuts right through it, the wire provided for forming the pushrods was so brittle that if it didn't break forming Z bends, it broke inserting it into the nylon control horns, the landing gear blocks were spot glued into the 3 mm balsa wing ribs, no ply backing, with what looked like spots of hot-melt, and an inspection of less-visible joints suggexted the same spot-gluing method!" A truthfull review like that would probably cost a mag 5 or 6 commercial customers.

papermache

My Feedback: (35)

I let my subscription lapse in 2008. The magazine deteriorated to the point of uselessness. It used to be a magazine with good articles on building and flying, with good technical information and contest coverage. Today it's a rag for the ARF industry that encourages me to buy, buy, buy every electric and 3D POS out there.

I still look through it at my local library. Usually takes about 5 minutes. Too bad for what used to be something good.

papermache

donnyman

Unfortunately, I have to agree[&o][&o][&o]

Jim Thomerson

I don't have any history of flying RC (other than two buddy box flights some years ago) so I quit MAN when they went all RC, and have not read one since. In my opinion, Flying Models is the best of the currently available magazines in terms of serving the whole of model aviation. I even read their ARF reviews, and occasionally learn something useful. I can see where a strictly RC flier might not agree.

50+AirYears

And, probably the majority of new entrants into this hobby/sport haven't any interest in articles about building, or in plans or kits. Just plug'n play. None of the heart and blood investment some of us oldsters have.