RE: JUNE MODEL AVIATION MAGAZINE COVER.
For "Stickbuilder" etal! Please go back to my initial posting, which had nothing to do with "arf vs build, electric vs wet" or similar comments. My objections were to the use of a photo of a non-US flying toy on the cover of our national body's magazine when, I feel strongly, there are numerous real model planes built by Americans that deserve the spot.
I am aware of the commercial gain to the magazine, its personnel and reviewers, but the basic fact remains, we are Americans and should promote our own products and people as much as possible. I find it more insulting and demeaning that examples of American efforts were included inside the magazine more deserving of the cover spot.
My reference to "flying toy" will no doubt offend some of you. I strongly defend your right to do what you like, fly what you like, but you can not compare the ?? on the cover to a wood or composite model plane built from either a kit, plans, or personal design. Nor will the foam flyer ever know the degree of personal satisfaction that builders of the latter enjoy.
I was once referred to here in RCU as being full of "crapola" because I pointed out that Sanyo, Panasonic etc, definitely authorities on the subject of rechargeable batteries, do not recommend connecting them in parallel as some R/C "experts" do.
I was called a "jerk" because I wrote that "Z" bends are not all that precise and asked for examples where such are in use in any high-quality precision commercial equipment. None showed up!
So if you disagree with me that strongly, at least be original - and for crying out loud, spell it correctly. EloyM AMA 1995 (0riginal issue from the 40's).