RCPAUL

My Feedback: (1)

I've noticed over the past couple of years the high frequency of U-Control construction articles in Model Aviation. I thought that Model Aviation was supposed to reflect more the general membership interests. I guess what Bob Hunt meant, it would reflect HIS interests. Surely, sport RC designs are more in tune with the AMA membership than the very few UC members.

How many people really want to build a spark ignition UC plane? Four? Yet, a design was published.

Maybe Hunt deserves a wakeup call! He should be reminded of his objectivesand reponsibilities.

Paul

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

I would guess it is only natural for Hunt to follow his first love - in spite of what he said the AMA readership is! But I like U-C articles - they sure know how to finish a plane LIGHTLY.....ever notice the weights of the finished products?

Jerry

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

HI RC PAUL! I know what you are saying, but sometimes there are tips and techniques in other facets of the hobby that you can learn from if you are a builder. The rank and file in this hobby aren't modelers anymore, just airplane operators. To a large degree the "driveup-window-microwave-burrito-generation" don't have the patience or interest to make having ANY construction articles relevent to the average flyer anymore.

abel_pranger

Besides the useful techniques us RC flyers can learn from the ukie fliers, lets not forget that they like their chosen niche in the world of aeromodeling, and want to have their fair share of notice in AMA's publication too. There isn't much coverage of UC in the plethora of other rags these days, and many more than I care to subscribe to that cover sport R/C, which is where my interest is.
As for 'airplane operators,' I guess Patty Wagstaff fits in that category. I don't fly competitively, but I know several that do, and the top dogs do a heck of lot more flying than building. Scuttlebutt has it that Merle Hyde builds, Chip Hyde flys. They both get their share of jollies from the hobby. I'd like to have more time to build as I enjoy that part of it, but I like flying more, and that part has taken precedence in the time available to me for model airplanes for the past several years. For now, I'm not feeling terribly inadequate when I show up at the field on occasion to fly a microwave burrito.

Abel

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

The most incredible model magazine I have ever laid eyes on is the STUNT NEWS. It is devoted to C/L stunt, and every issue that I have seen is a knockout! They publish 2 or 3 construction articles in each issue that I've seen, and even though I don't fly stunt, I buy the magazine so I can "borrow" from the styling ideas and learn about the light weight finishing techniques. The AMA magazine could learn a lot about layout, format and content from these guys.

Ed Smith

Beware of this type of AMA member. We have a clique of like minded people in our National Association. They banded together and attempted to completely ban a facet of this hobby that they did not like. Fortunately they failed. There were enough decent, fair minded people around to reject their effort.

Ed S

Jim Thomerson

Actually, if you check your facts, you will find that the amount of CL coverage in Model Aviation is considerably less than it was 4 or 5 years ago. This is in line with a change in editorial policy to be more relective of membership composition and to make the magazine more useful to the the RC beginner.

Jim

JohnBuckner

My Feedback: (1)

The recent quote above by this thread starter here in the controlline forum would seem to indicate that he has an axe to grind that goes just a bit further than than simple dissatisfaction with Model Aviation and its diversity of subjects.

John

Sport_Pilot

IMO ~ The AMA should promote our hobby, C/L was dying and is alive and now growing in part because Model Aviation countuned to run articles. There for the policy of running an inordinate amount of articles on one of the least fovorite facits of our hobby works!

vinnie

My Feedback: (1)

Lest we forget, there is something to be said for being PHYSICALLY connected to your airplane.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

RC PAUL has obviously never flown C/L combat. As far as I'm concerned there aren't any categories of model aviation that DON"T get dull if you do them too much, that's why I like a variety. To fly with a goal or a purpose is how I keep it interesting. I too think that C/L stunt is pretty boring, but for some reason don't feel the need to go over to the C/L forum and blurt that out [like someone who just ate a whole box of EXLAX]!

Matt Kirsch

My Feedback: (21)

Did it ever occurr to you that they're trying to PROMOTE and GROW U/C? The purpose of the AMA is to PROMOTE MODEL AVIATION, not just R/C. R/C is doing just fine on its own. The other facets of the hobby need help.

Open your mind a little. I bet that article in and of itself encouraged several people to take up U/C, and caused hundreds, if not thousands of others to think to themselves, "This might be something I want to try someday." Not only does the article have useful information that applies to other facets of the hobby, it's there to promote an area of the hobby that needs promotion.

airega1

My Feedback: (204)

Hey paul nice post, it really shows your ignorance. I fly R/C but started out flying CL some 40+ years ago and I welcome any CL article written. It's not taking anything away from R/C and it's been a long time since MA showed interest in CL. Think if you were solely into CL, how would you view MA. Open your mind to other areas of the hobby, even today when I see an article on CL it brings back memories and urges me to once more build a CL stunt ship.THAT IS WHAT MAKES THIS HOBBY A GREAT ONE!

EJN

That hits the nail on the head. I don't post here often because I
fly only C/L; I primarily read the Stuka Stunt Works forum.
Model Aviation and Flying Models are the only general-interest
magazines which are not entirely RC. If you don't like non-RC
articles, don't read them.

quint-rcu

My Feedback: (24)

Let's not kill the guy for posting. I too have been 'playing' at this hobby for over 50 years, from gliders, to free flight, to u-control, etc. Now I only fly RC. Perhaps what was intended was that as AMA members we have no choice of magazines with our membership and covering all the facets of our hobby does yield a publication that is not proportional to membership interest percentages. It's not a bad compromise and I can subscribe to RC mags on the side. Let the other guys have some space too, and pass the articles by if not interested.

Still, it would be nice to have a choice of mags or even no magazine... (I know, I know, the old concept that it's the way AMA 'talks' to us. - Ever hear of the Internet for communicating?)

quint
ex N5RQ

Matt Kirsch

My Feedback: (21)

The AMA is required BY LAW to provide each member with a periodic newsletter to maintain its 501c3 tax status. Is email even a legal option? I don't know, but I doubt it.

About 40 pages out of your MA magazine is newsletter content, and the magazine only counts for something like $7 out of your dues every year. I am quite confident that the AMA could not publish a 40-page monthly newsletter with no advertising for $7 per member per year. It costs our club that much per member per year to publish a 4-page, bi-monthly newsletter and distribute it. It is an indisputable fact that the magazine is largely self-supporting, and that the editorial content is essentially free to the members. Complaining about how much the magazine sucks is akin to complaining about the way RCU is run. It ain't costin' you a dime, so what are you complainin' about?

One advantage to a paper magazine over an email is that more people are likely to read it. An email is just a spot in your inbox, easily overlooked and/or deleted, while the magazine sits on your coffee table, a significant physical presence. People don't get bored and start looking through their "spam" email, but they do get bored and pick up magazines...

J_R

Absolutely no one that can read your comments is against internet communications. Having said that, when the recent warning about Li batteries was sent by the AMA, those without e-mail addresses were sent a hard copy... at a cost between $25-40 thousand dollars (depending on who supplied the numbers) for the one page warning.

quint-rcu

My Feedback: (24)

Good point. How do you feel about a magazine choice? By the way, I didn't say the magazine 'sucks', I believe I said it was a good compromise. No need to come on that strong...

quint

J_R

I guess I am just pragmatic. Whatever is the most cost effective way to meet the IRS requirements for a newsletter. So far, no one has suggested a less expensive way to meet those, that I am aware of. Model Aviation has over twice the circulation of any retail modeling magazine. If the revenues generated by advertising keep the costs of our newsletter down to about $.60 a month, as Matt Kirsch pointed out, it is a hard act to beat.

quint-rcu

My Feedback: (24)

Yes, I kinda like it too. By the way I note you're a pragmatic, me, I'm just a republican from MS.

cheers,
quint

dicknadine

Whats the BEEF all about? MA is for all the MODEL Airplane Hobbist's, not just R/C, or Scale or gliders-- on and on - suggest yaall go back to building and flying, static model airplanes, ALL kinds. Quit the P&M. dick

matchlessaero

RCPaul, you obviously do not know but one aspect of the Model Aviation hobby......and you should also realize that you do not know the whole of the modeling community nor its demographics.

Note that the title of the magazine is 'Model Aviation'. It would therefor include all aspects of the hobby from freeflight to CL to RC.

I think Paul needs to spend his time reading RCModeler if he only chooses to read one magazine.(this is not meant sarcastically, but genuinely).

Personally, I have been reading Model Aviation now for over 20 years. It truly is one of the best hobby magazines written (I also have subscribed to many hunting, auto restoration and cycling magazines during that time). The magazine does not cover nearly enough CL stuff for my tastes(like it did 10 or 15 yrs ago), but at least it still does occasionally.

EJN

Well, just wait until Homeland Security turns its attention to RC.
Don't think it can happen? Search rec.models.rockets or
rocketryonline.com to see what happened to model rocketry
as of 5/24/2003 after Homeland Security was passed.

For that matter, just who thought that 40% size scale models
with engines half the size of the one in my Honda were
a good idea? Or 200+ mph turbines?

So Model Aviation is just preparing you for the C/L
future. You just don't realize it yet.

J_R

Hi Ed

First, let me say that I have flown FF and C/L.

I would ask you to ponder just a couple of things. If the changes in technology in C/L, that are accepted today, were to have taken place in today’s litigious society, might things be different? For instance, how would the use of a prop with one blade, or a speed model with about half a wing be viewed? What if the first time a counter balance came off one of those speed props, it had been banned? The largest single insurance claim the AMA has ever paid involved a C/L model.

The point here is not that C/L is dangerous; the point is that advances in technology are being watched more closely than they where in a different day and in a different attitude by society. The 40% planes and the turbines are just the march of progress in technology.

Maybe they do need to be watched more closely today than they needed to in the past. I think they are. At the same time, the technologies need to be allowed to mature, IMHO.

Although I can't say from personal experience, I would bet that, at some point, there were purists that wondered why internal combustion engines were necessary on models, and felt that rubber power was sufficient.

We are all in this together, from microfilm to turbines.

JR

scottrc

I have always felt that the magazine was dull. I've always been interested in UC and Freeflight and Pattern, but before the internet, MA was it for information for me, and they did, and still do, a lousy job of writing articles.
I am surprises how little sport RC gets in MA. It seems every month it is the same thing. Old Timers, 1/2 A, UKie, and Rubber Powered and Jets over Deland. I wouldn't mind it if they would have article on how to get started in these events, but it is just the same dull coverage with no references to the pictures to the articles. I wrote them years ago about how I wanted to get started in pattern because the magazine seemed to be dominated by pattern back then, but they never talked at the laymen level. They sent me a complex book of rules. I wrote back about having them have an article on "beggining pattern for dummies, and I never got a reply.
So I take the MAG for the news on the various districts and AMA news, but for the first 40 pages, I think it can just line the birdcage with it.

However, *** for tat, although they lost the MicroHenrys, I do like the first couple of pages of members getting to display their models. That was a great idea.