What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Divorce averted

Mike S

Senior Curmudgeon
So, considering how much bashing was heaped on EAA's Sport Aviation magazine recently, I figure it may be a good time to give them a bit of praise for the latest issue.

Cover??????

RV 10:D

Nice writeup on the ten by Budd Davidson, also a 25 year ago tribute to Voyager.

Four feature articles, and none of them on modern production aircraft that so enraged folks in the last issue.

Good job, EAA.
 
Agreed, Mike

My wife said to be sure and let her read about Voyager's rounder flight when I'm done.

A very good issue!

Thanks, EAA,
 
Yes, and another interesting note from the latest edition.

Other than his regular blog post, not one article written by Mr. McClellan. Hmmmm
 
I noticed the same thing, Mike, and I was wondering if anyone would post an "attaboy." Thanks, Mike, for taking the time to post it. :)
 
I noticed the same thing, Mike, and I was wondering if anyone would post an "attaboy." Thanks, Mike, for taking the time to post it. :)

Figured it was the right thing to do, considering the last round of comments on SA.
 
Yeah, well, let's see two in a row before I send in my renewal for January. Not holding my breath.

Joe
 
I was wondering how long before somebody praised SA. Also saw a good article by our own Chad Jensen about portable wheel chocks. Like Joe said, lets see two in a row.
 
We were in the Air and Space museum this past June. Voyager is on display and close enough to touch. I explained to my father and son why the wing tips were so scraped up exposing the carbon fibers and a winglet was missing. I am glad it wasn't cleaned up for display. Looks like it was put in the museum "as is". :)
 
It is good to hear SA is heading back to its roots. Thanks Chad!

My copy still hasn't arrived yet, it might be a conspiracy! ;)
 
Last edited:
Blast from the past

It is good to hear SA is heading back to its roots. Thanks Chad!

;)

Boy I agree! This is the first addition I've read cover to cover in a long time.:)
I guess their listening in the ivory tower after all.:D
 
I thought it was another weak issue. The "worthy" items were the Duck article, the Voyager article, the how-to articles, and the what our members are building section.

The RV-10 article is a near duplicate of one Ed Kolano wrote for Sport Aviation about 7 years ago. It seems awfully soon to spend another 7 pages on duplicate content.

Mac also did another advertorial. This one was for Sennheiser headsets. I suspect there is/was a strong correlation to Sennheiser's full page ad about 20 pages farther into the magazine.

Beyond that, I counted at least 7 safety related articles, columns, or whatever. Safety articles are fine, but 7 multi-page safety articles in one issue? That's a bit much.

Once again, it was an edition of SA that had way too much of a "Flying" or "AOPA" or "Aviation Safety" vibe. I want interesting airplanes and the people who build them, restore them, and fly them.
 
I haven't had a chance to look at that issue yet. My wife grabbed it and read the RV-10 article. Took it with her on our vacation. I overheard her saying we have the sports car, now we also need a sedan.
 
I thought it was a good issue too. But as everyone has said, there is to much of "Flying" magazine creeping into Sport Aviation. I see ad's for aircraft that are priced in the low millions (TBM-Socata)in Sport Aviation now. I quit reading flying because none of it pertained to the type of aviating I do. Affordable, do it yourself aircraft. Not overpriced, Jet A burning, section 179 tax deducting, flight level flying, corporate cruisers. I understand the need to appeal to a broader audience. Unfortunately, the broader audience is not what EAA WAS about. It seems another wonderful, homespun organization has fallen prey to the bigger and better mentality.
Sport Aviation...you need articles EVERY MONTH on more than one homebuilt project/restoration. We want multiple pages, builder bio's, lots of pictures and the full story! With experimental aircraft getting completed at the rate they are it shouldn't be a problem to do detailed spreads on 3 aircraft projects per month. I don't want to see turbo props or jets in Sport Aviation unless someone built/rebuilt it in his/her hanger!:D
 
Last edited:
I don't want to see turbo props or jets in Sport Aviation unless someone built it in his/her hanger!:D

So.............what about a Douglas A-36 Invader restoration. Not exactly a little kitplane, but it's being rebuilt by some people who have built several experimental kitplanes.

But............I still have a complaint. I like "Flying" magazine. The views regarding SA in this thread are not mine. In fact, I find this thread terribly boring...............but I won't start a thread to dump this forum. :(

L.Adamson
 
So.............what about a Douglas A-36 Invader restoration. Not exactly a little kitplane, but it's being rebuilt by some people who have built several experimental kitplanes.

But............I still have a complaint. I like "Flying" magazine. The views regarding SA in this thread are not mine. In fact, I find this thread terribly boring...............but I won't start a thread to dump this forum. :(

L.Adamson

Douglas A-36?

Germans at Pearl Harbor? ;-)

Seriously, Flying is a fine publication. But it and AOPA Pilot have always been skewed towards GA as a form of transportation. Sport Aviation filled an entirely different niche, promoting the fun of building, restoring, and flying interesting aircraft. Today, Sport Aviation appears to be making a big shift towards being another transportation magazine.
 
I suspect there is/was a strong correlation to Sennheiser's full page ad about 20 pages farther into the magazine.

Speaking of ads... is it just me, or was it a bit jarring to see the tanzanite ad on page 79? I understand the "bills need to be paid," but I've always felt there was at least some member-benefit or aviation-related link (even thin or strained) for the ads I'm used to seeing. That one just smacked of selling out to the highest bidder because of the subject and ad copy style.
 
Last edited:
Lane Wallace snoozers

I've got a bet going with my brother about how many articles Lane Wallace is going to milk out of that stupid cross country trip she took with her boyfriend's step-nephew. Come on Lane, just few more and I'll have a nice steak dinner!

Seriously, where's the editorial oversight to cut her off????
 
Last edited:
I've got a bet going with my brother about how many articles Lane Wallace is going to milk out of that stupid cross country trip she took with her boyfriend's step-nephew. Come on Lane, just few more and I'll have a nice steak dinner!

Seriously, where's the editorial oversight to cut her off????




Come on, man. I know you're just jealous because she said she's getting married.:D:D

Marshall Alexander
 
... I like "Flying" magazine. The views regarding SA in this thread are not mine. In fact, I find this thread terribly boring...............but I won't start a thread to dump this forum. :(

L.Adamson
Then subscribe to FLYING and don't force those of us who don't to read about things that are outside of the EAA's mission.

Most of us have subscriptions to multiple magazines, each with their own unique focus; EAA Sport Aviation, AOPA Pilot, Flying, KitPlanes, Plane & Pilot, WarBirds, etc.

Don't try to turn SA into another FLYING! Like many of the others, I dropped FLYING 20+ years ago because I realized that I have no interest in business jets, light twins, or pressurized singles. Heck, even if I could afford one, it would be a mode of transportation/business tool, not a passion.
 
Last edited:
Folks, thanks for the kudos...it's not just me though. You all spoke up, and the voice was heard, trust me. I don't have any control over content or direction, all I can do is push homebuilding to SA, and see where it ends up.

I saw the cover for January yesterday and the feature stories, and I think two in a row will be achieved. :cool: It's not all homebuilding, but it's sport aviation. :)
 
So.............what about a Douglas A-36 Invader restoration. Not exactly a little kitplane, but it's being rebuilt by some people who have built several experimental kitplanes.

But............I still have a complaint. I like "Flying" magazine. The views regarding SA in this thread are not mine. In fact, I find this thread terribly boring...............but I won't start a thread to dump this forum. :(

L.Adamson

Like you copied in my quote...I don't want to see them UNLESS they were BUILT in their hanger...when I said built I meant restored as well. I am fine with turbines/turbo props just not certified ones. The EAA shouldn't be about certified aircraft unless it is a restoration/rebuild project.
 
The current SA is the first one I've looked at every page in a long time. As so many others have said, there's a reason the EAA was created in the first place, and it wasn't to sell more Harleys and Fords. I don't fault them for taking advertising money from anyone but it seems like they're taking Experimental out of the EAA.
 
Letter to Poberezny

See page 128 of December, 2011 Sport Aviation.

Letter to Paul Poberezny
December 15, 1961

Dear Mr. Poberezny,
I just read the December, 1961, issue of Sport Aviation and am very disappointed that you would devote three pages to an article about the design of the Beech Staggerwing. Don't you know we are experimental airplane builders and we don't want to read about production airplanes in our magazine? If we want to read about production airplanes, we'll read Flying magazine.
Sincerely,
Buzz Lightyear
EAA 842

[Fifty years later...sound familiar??? -DCH]
 
Don't try to turn SA into another FLYING! Like many of the others, I dropped FLYING 20+ years ago because I realized that I have no interest in business jets, light twins, or pressurized singles. Heck, even if I could afford one, it would be a mode of transportation/business tool, not a passion.

You have no interest in constant speed props either.

I had little interest in taildragger RV6s. They reminded me of a squatting dog. But I was nearly forced to read about them on this forum. This forum IS pro taildragger! But non the less, I have now stuck a tailwheel on the 6. So you never know........someday, you may be wishing for a constant speed, and possibly a more spendy aircraft. Our thought patterns sometimes change, when we read about something new... , and realize there is something besides converted VW engines. :p

L.Adamson
 
...
So you never know........someday, you may be wishing for a constant speed, and possibly a more spendy aircraft. Our thought patterns sometimes change, when we read about something new... , and realize there is something besides converted VW engines. :p

L.Adamson
True, and when that day comes, I'll subscribe to FLYING.
 
True, and when that day comes, I'll subscribe to FLYING.

Bingo. If you want that information, the publications are already out there.

Sport Aviation was the only magazine which played to the whole range of enthusiast aircraft - experimentals, warbirds, and antiques. Everything I see and hear says a decision has been made to move away from Sport Aviation's unique place in the market and make it Flying, Part Deux (with a couple of Experimental articles thrown in to ward off the pitchforks and torches).
 
Was the RV-10 article a reprint? I ask because Bud mentions the 210 hp Conti engine and I didn?t think that was available any more.
 
Based on this thread I looked for my issue of SA with anticipation... Did they finally get their act together?

Nope.

Really, how many RV-10 PIREPS do we need? AOPA, of all people just did one within the last year. And how many different publications does this silly cross country trip in a spam can (Lane Wallace) need to be in, and for how long? Enough already!

Yep, another "flip through and trash" issue.
 
Was the RV-10 article a reprint? I ask because Bud mentions the 210 hp Conti engine and I didn?t think that was available any more.

Definitely not a reprint. Budd was just there in September, I think, to write this one. I read it that he mentions the 210hp engine because it has (and can if someone wanted to) flown with it. May not be a factory supported option, but neither are Subaru's or Chevy's...

This article is about the factory demonstrator, and what you get from Van's if you built one without fancy interiors and panels. I read it as a completely different pirep than the top of the line type of RV-10's that usually get covered.
 
Yep, another "flip through and trash" issue.
Really??? This issue was full of sport aviation...

The Duck article was fantastic, as was the Voyager article and Leeward tribute.

Much better overall if you ask me...'course ya didn't. ;)
 
...
Much better overall if you ask me...'course ya didn't. ;)

I agree, it was much better but there is still some improvement to go. I really miss reading about the OSH award winners and seeing them on the cover.

Funny, but the first thing I always read is the completion section and then flip forward a page to read about the journey of one builder.

BTW, I'm still trying to figure out the Honda Jet and TBM ads but it is good to see them supporting the EAA.
 
I agree, it was much better but there is still some improvement to go. I really miss reading about the OSH award winners and seeing them on the cover.

Funny, but the first thing I always read is the completion section and then flip forward a page to read about the journey of one builder.

BTW, I'm still trying to figure out the Honda Jet and TBM ads but it is good to see them supporting the EAA.

Coverage of award winners is coming back...:cool:
 
Definitely not a reprint. Budd was just there in September, I think, to write this one.

Sept??

That is pretty fast for getting something out the door in the publishing world.

Three months is pretty much the norm as I recall.
 
Really??? This issue was full of sport aviation...

The Duck article was fantastic, as was the Voyager article and Leeward tribute.

Much better overall if you ask me...'course ya didn't. ;)

The issue is not completely without merit. The Duck article was ok, but it certainly could have covered more of the technical aspects of the restoration than where the engine and forward hull were found. As for the Voyager... pretty much old news... Hashed and rehashed.

I like seeing tech and innovation in SA (from the garage, not JPL/NASA). Significant technical content continues to be absent.

I feel that in their mad rush to appeal to everyone, they have lost their focus.

I keep hoping that someone will return to the magic formula of the 60's, 70's and early 80's SA. We'll see.
 
Last edited:
Coverage of award winners is coming back...:cool:

Thank God, or Thank You, Chad!!

Every Lindy winner has a story. There's no better place to tell those stories than Sport Aviation magazine. If your editor needs material that all EAAers care to read, that informs, inspires and educates, look no further than your own members' achievements.
 
Back
Top