model avaition nats coverage.

[Rocket]

is it the worst coverage ever in model avaition of the NATS, or did i miss where there will be more coverage in the next edition.

[readyturn]

Well, it certainly was not a stellar publication....... []

Rick

[iamtom]

Let them know how you feel about the very slight coverage in the National magazine. Contact Jay Smith at jays@modelaircraft.org. He is editor in chief. If we do not let them know then nothing will be done.
T

[HighPlains]

Think back to the last time they published existing records and newly established record updates in Model Aviation. If it's not a ARF or wimpy powered RC electric model, you need not apply.

[vicman]

I enjoy the people profiles. The ones on Goldberg and Kaz are the best so far.

The nats coverage was done electronicly in Nats News.

[vertical grimmace]

ORIGINAL: vicman

I enjoy the people profiles. The ones on Goldberg and Kaz are the best so far.

The nats coverage was done electronicly in Nats News.

I thought it was great they had an article about CG, but it ended very poorly. I like MA, but at this point it is starting to look like an NRA magazine. Trying to protect our right to fly. What I miss the most are the construction articles of original designs.

[vicman]

I like MA, but at this point it is starting to look like an NRA magazine. Trying to protect our right to fly. What I miss the most are the construction articles of original designs.

I agree that the tone of the mag has changed over the last three years and think it is pretty appropriate considering the issue at hand. Without getting all AMA in this thread I feel we are facing strange times in our hobby with big brother looking at us closely.

If you go back to the early 90s MA you will see a similar tone over the frequency issues.