50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

Well, I just got it and I've spent plenty of time reading it. The only things that I can complain about are:

in the Joe Nall coverage, #1 it's Allen Reynolds flying the 40% Carden Cap232, and #2 Elie Houayes' CompARF Yak55 is much more photogenic from the underside......(just sayin )
Other minor problems are that the columns are, as usual, bland and lackluster.(but they are somewhat informative)
I liked most of the AMA columns as they gave some insight. However, Dave's column was just a waste of space and Joyce obviously didn't see the need to move the NATS from Muncie.(my opinion there)
Another thing that I would like to see is some more .40-.60 size glow sport/aerobatic(non-3D) planes that are designed for the majority of the membership.(over 60 years old) These electric and 3D planes can be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Overall, I give this issue a 7.39 out of a possible 10.


Those are my thoughts, what are yours?


50%

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

Have you ever submitted an article that is not bland or lackluster? Or anything for that matter?

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

no. I just like complaining about something from behind my comfortable keyboard.

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

You really didn't have to tell us that. Most could figure it out from the get go. [:'(]

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

Honestly, since I'm 19, I really am not able to communicate with most of the older folks that I've flown with. Most of them just shrug me off. I have been able to talk with many of them that show up where I currently fly, but in general, most of them shy away from me.

MA is obviously aimed at the 60+year old modeler and I can't identify with the way that they want to read an article.(sometimes bland and lackluster, IMO)I guess I don't feel that I can get my point across to the majority of the AMA membership .Also, I don't really have the time to waste when it comes to writing. If I knew that MA would want to use my piece, I might consider it, but due to the aforementioned reasons, I'm just not wanting to potentially waste my time.

Maybe in a few years, but my interest really aren't in line with the average AMA member.


50%

AERORICH73

Well, I just got my issue today, and have reviewed all pages. Dave's column indirectly said to
me that something has to be done to increase income somehow by creative thinking. The Joe
Nall Fly-in, and Top Gun 2006 just emphasizes how little money I have to keep up with the cost
of these prop powered models besides even thinking about the jets. The photo's are great to
view though. It was nice to revisit the Trimming from gound up by Dean Pappas. Because I
found in District XI column a photo of Hal Norrish and his AN2 model, this issure rates a score of
5 out of 10. Since I have the plans for an AN2 without any instructions, it is great to find someone who has built the model that I can talk to.

This magazine is the only one that comes to my home now as I am fed up with all the manufacturing rep publications disguised as Model Airplane magazines, and my letters to them
has as blunt as possible. At the age of 72, I do not need advertising to tell me what I need,
or the type of planes and flight power to use. I can decide that for myself. I suspect everyone
reading this can also think for themselves without high powered, brainwashing advertising, and
articles making decisions for them.

Have not been inclined to go into scratch building, as kits, and reconstruction projects have
kept me happy in the workbench. The future does not look very good for purchasing kits
which leaves building from plans, or self designed planes.

I just read that the main thing in the sport of football is not the sport, but the money. Can this
same thought be transferred to AMA?

Jim Thomerson

I think people of our age (I am 71) are required to subscribe to Flying Models, which is, in my opinion, the best of the model airplane magazines for broad coverage.

If one has something to say, I think you can go on line and find the instructions to authors for MA. I haven't done any publishing there in a while but it used to be that you sent a short prospectus which was reviewed by an editorial board and you were encouraged to submit, or not. So it is not a matter of spending a huge amount of effort to achieve rejection.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

I would rather see a guy with diminishing skills fly a light weight 3D plane with the controls turned down, then what I usually see, which is some guy with an overweight .60 sized "scale-like thing" that lands at 30 MPH.

AERORICH73

Well Jim, have to tell you that I am not interested in such a broad coverage. While working
at the Portland, Oregon passenger terminal, I never saw an electric powered aircraft taxi into
the gate and off load passengers. Therefore, I do not want to see any electric powered models
discussed in a magazine for fuel powered model airplanes. Just as railroad modelers do not want to find their magazine infiltrated by discussions on glow powered RC race cars. I have
discussed this topic with the AMA more than once. The issue is simple. Publish issues that
cover each modeling area in separate form, and let the membership decide which issue they
want to receive. When trying to satisfy a broad base membership with a broad coverage publication, you wind up satisfying no one. This is the case for me when I view the MA monthly
magazine. As a retired aircraft mechanic, I want to see specific articles that will improve
my construction skills, engine operation, field safety, and kit reviews.

I hope Jim that you do enjoy the MA monthly publication in its broad scope. It is not my
intent to change your enjoyment of reading the magazine. I am only expressing how I
feel about this magazine.

Hope your weather is such that it is a good day to put up a flight or two. We have been
having some gusty wind here, and I am not interested in making a pile of balsa dust to
pick up after spending 6 weeks rebuilding a crashed trainer given to me in pieces.

Rich S.

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

Well Aerorich, what issue of MA would I recieve if that were the case? I'm interested in micro electric planes. Large scale electric planes. small glow powered planes, large glow powered planes, turbine powered planes, and gas powered planes.(40cc-600cc) Also, electric helis, glow helis, turbine helis. Then we get into types of planes, I love designing my own planes, I also like building from plans, building kits, flying ARF's. ALso, I like 3D planes of all sizes, aerobatic planes of all sizes, sport planes of all sizes, vintage planes of all sizes, etc. However, what rocks my boat the most is that I like helping other folks with all that they fly.

We all seek our own interest in MA, but take a step back to look at the year in review? I see plenty for everyone.


50%


p.s. MA's reviewed about every kit that's been released in the past four years except for those that fly 3D, are very aerobatic, and are large scale gasser aerobatic planes. Are you sure you want that?

Hossfly

Well, I am interested in any form of model aviation, so I do like the contents of the magazine, Model Aviation. I certainly detest the methods used for its production. It could easily be a profitable item (IRC -- Non Related Business) for AMA.

Still, the magazine covers a lot more than I care to even try to understand especially in the electric field. I never was worth a darn with rubber power, even though an old friend, John Valls, tried his best to teach me. John was the master of masters with balsa wood, tissue, sandpaper, and dope. Back to topic sentence, the magazine has eons of information from some really informed people. (Not always but I estimate 80% really know their stuff.)



Seems to be a contradiction of terms here. [sm=75_75.gif] Big Bad troll under that bridge??? [sm=52_52.gif]

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Even though Hoss is trying his best to belittle someone else, as is his SOP, it seemed exceedingly clear that AeroRich doesn't need/desire useless redundant type advertisements or gratuitous reviews to sway his decisions about what he needs to fulfill his interests in the hobby. I agree.

Jim Thomerson

Well, there are SIG's; PAMPA for example, which put out newsletters/magazines/websites which focus on a fairly narrow area of model aviation. I see the AMA as an umbrella organization devoted to bringing us all together in peace and harmony supporting and cheering each other on in our diverse model aviation interests. [8D]

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

Besides raising the ad rates to reduce the amount of advertisers, how could this magazine be profitable? I always wondered about that each time you say it.

Hossfly

STL, your post states "in reply to Jim Thomerson" however you quoted MY statement. Your "wonder" subject has been explained, examined, and blasted in this forum many times.

As the Marines say about Semper Fi: ("Semper Fidelis" / "Ever faithful.") If you know, then no explanation is needed. If you don't know, then all the explanations possible will not help you.

You claim to be a business man. If any business person cannot profit from having a conscripted customer base twice that of the nearest free-market competitor, then that "business person" must only work for the government where being grossly overly paid for producing near nothing is the natural standard. Otherwise that "business person" will not make it in a competitive environment.

My parents provided two good things about basic economics that I do live by. They are not popular with those that just must keep up with the Joneses. [sm=omg_smile.gif] Dad said that one could go broke buying "good deals". Mom said that one could not spend himself rich. Probably the best friend I ever had told me that I could never be rich because every time I did well, I would give it all away. He was right and he was wrong. I rather liked giving away as much as I could and sometimes could not.
However I have tightened up on that a bit. [sm=47_47.gif]

OTOH, I have never really lost money big time with one exception and that was within a family deal that I was prepared for.

So STL, I could make AMA's MA profitable within 1 year or less if I were to be elected as President of the AMA. So guess those Muncie Folk can continue to play like Big Shots, and pi$$ away YOUR dues $$$$. [sm=48_48.gif] No chance of that election ever happening. [sm=71_71.gif] Or is There???? [:-]

STLPilot

My Feedback: (21)

I think I could make the AMA profitable as well in a year or less as well.

I just don't understand how you make a free magazine for membership base profitable. I'll just take what you said as a "I don't know".

Wings of Peril

You guys probably skip right over the FF content but give the Mathis Headhunter article a read. It's somewhat amusing, well writen and tries not be be lackluster. Nice to see him back and hope he stays. Generally speaking, most of MA's articles and columns are informative but the writing isn't that great. Good writing would keep the interest up, still be informative and perhaps draw people in to the hobby. As it is, only the diehards would not find MA bland and lackluster.

AERORICH73

Well fellows, we all seem to agree on having fun in this hobby. While still working, I squirreled
away at least 40 kits, some ARF's, and about that many engines. The largest engine is a .75,
and go down from there. The largest plane in the house is a BTE Flying King. Now I am not
sure how large everyone has for a work area, but this 80" WS King is a bit much. If I were to be involved into all the diffferent modeling areas as 50%Plane is, my whole house would be to
small for storage. My hat is off to those who are excited about every aspect of this hobby. I
believe the discussion started out about what we as individual members are getting out of the
magazine. As I mentioned, if different subject matter was put into separate publications, and
each member could choose which one, or all of them if they so desired. then we all would be
happy with the AMA(maybe?)while reading something that promotes education and joy for each one of us. This is not ment to down grade any aspect of the hobby, and I am sorry if something I said infers that. From the content of this thread, I am not the only one discontented. Ok,
let us take a vote. Everyone who is happy with the AMA PUBLICATION raise their right hand.

Cheers Fellows, and enjoy your section of the hobby.

Rich S.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

As with anything, improvement is possible but overall MA is alright in my book. I don't think I would buy it at the newsstand though but as its intended purpose with the resources used it is OK.

Although, it would be nice if it made a hefty profit and paid dividends back to the members... LOL Hmmm… if properly managed AMA could pay me to be a member.

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

Right hand raised!

I'm sorry if anyone took my post to be a complaint. I guess I'm trying to point out to anyone who might read this how MA is. Most folks that are die hard modelers that I've talked to just toss the magazine. I actually think that this is one of the better issues that I've read. MA has some potential. I too think that I could make MA turn a profit within a year, but all of this is just talk until the actual opportunity is given.

We all have are favorite aspects of modeling that this wonderful organization called the AMA includes, however, I think that we do need to move forward before the future makes model aviation a time capsule. I personally see electric and 3D as being the driving force in all rogue pilots thatI know. MA and the AMA really don't showcase it as much as they could. Also there are a number of ARF bashers around the AMA sanctined flying fields. With all due respect, many of them end up driving off potential new modelers. (I've seen it.) However, this is another thread......


50%

ira d

I dont have the sept issue in hand yet but over all the magazine is ok, but i think they
should reduce the coverage of free flight and control line also change the engine shop
to have a Q&A section.

I just dont see that many FF or control line flyers or here much talk about them at least
in my neck of the woods.

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

this issue is lacking in FF and CL with the exception of the monthly columns.

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Which magazine do you subscribe to that is only for fuel powered model airplanes? I know of some that cater solely to electric, but didn't know there was one that catered solely to the fuel powered ones.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

AERORICH

Do your self a favor and don't feed the troll. P-51 seems to only argue his stupid little points.

50%plane

My Feedback: (5)

Littlecrankshaf,

I don't know why you've become so close minded when it comes to other people's opinions, but for your inability to debate or converse in a reasonable manner, you will now get the red hand from me for a few days. STL has come very close to it, but you will now be the first person that I've ever used that on. Congratulations!


50%