![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() What do people here think of Aviation Consumer? I was considering subscribing to help me "keep up" in the product space. But some recent articles lacked details which I view as significant, and that leads me to question the periodical. That's a very small data sample, though, so I'm eager to hear what others think. The details by the way, we 1. In a discussion of the new "standby gyro" that Sporty is selling, there was no mention that this product can tumple. Despite AC 91-75's lack of mention of this, I view that as significant: If I'm going to replace a TC with an AI, I'll want that AI to be at least as tumble-resistent as a TC. Either I'm wrong about the Sporty AI being able to tumple, or the article missed this crucial point. 2. A review of the Sporty navcom didn't mention its size in comparison to other products. That may seem silly and obvious, but not worthy of mention? Am I overreacting? Is this periodical worth the (nontrivial!) price? - Andrew |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've written a couple of articles for AC and I know that the editors have to
work with what they get from the authors. In my experience, magazines do not have huge staffs of writers who can be sent out to check facts...with the exception of those articles attributed to "staff report," the impetus usually comes from the writer..."I have 2000 words about the new Gadgetron 456, with pictures. Are you interested?" The response depends largely on how familiar the editors are with the writers work, and the pay depends on the number of pages. A couple of things may come into play...maybe the author supplied the details that you view as significant but the editor had to cut the story due to space restrictions (BTDT, or had it done to me); maybe the editor did not feel that the information was significant. Hard to tell. I think it is a good magazine for an aircraft owner or prospective purchaser, with objective advice. Bob Gardner Bob Gardner "Andrew Gideon" wrote in message online.com... What do people here think of Aviation Consumer? I was considering subscribing to help me "keep up" in the product space. But some recent articles lacked details which I view as significant, and that leads me to question the periodical. That's a very small data sample, though, so I'm eager to hear what others think. The details by the way, we 1. In a discussion of the new "standby gyro" that Sporty is selling, there was no mention that this product can tumple. Despite AC 91-75's lack of mention of this, I view that as significant: If I'm going to replace a TC with an AI, I'll want that AI to be at least as tumble-resistent as a TC. Either I'm wrong about the Sporty AI being able to tumple, or the article missed this crucial point. 2. A review of the Sporty navcom didn't mention its size in comparison to other products. That may seem silly and obvious, but not worthy of mention? Am I overreacting? Is this periodical worth the (nontrivial!) price? - Andrew |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew Gideon" wrote: What do people here think of Aviation Consumer? I subscribe to A. C. and like it. The product reviews are much more hard hitting than the timid puff pieces one finds in Pilot, Flying, Sport Aviation, etc. -- Dan C-172RG at BFM |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan Luke wrote:
I subscribe to A. C. and like it.Â*Â*TheÂ*productÂ*reviewsÂ*areÂ*muchÂ*moreÂ*har d hitting than the timid puff pieces one finds in Pilot, Flying, Sport Aviation, etc. I expect that. I didn't, for example, experience much surprise that a recent review in Pilot of the Sporty AI didn't mention tumbling. But my expectation for the review in A.C. wasn't met, which leaves me questioning. - Andrew |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew,
Well, you know any alternatives that come even close? Flying and AOPA Pilot are completely worthless with regard to product reviews - it's almost always totally obvious which advertising client triggered which article. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thomas Borchert wrote:
Andrew, Well, you know any alternatives that come even close? No. Well, I trust here (the rec.aviation groups in USENET) in the sense that a biased posting typically generates responses. It's not always clear which poster is being more biased than another, but at least all sides are presented. And certain posters have enough of a reputation that I tend to trust them over an "unknown". As it happens, I did decide to subscribe to AC, at least for one cycle. But I'm not sure it'll stick, as I'm already starting out with a fair amount of mistrust. I can get product features anywhere. What I need in a review is thoughtful consideration of the consequences of those features. If important considerations are left out, then there's not all that much value. But we'll see. - Andrew |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andrew Gideon wrote:
What do people here think of Aviation Consumer? I was considering subscribing to help me "keep up" in the product space. But some recent articles lacked details which I view as significant, and that leads me to question the periodical. Subscribe to it for a while if you like. My problem is that after a decade or so of subsribing to it, it was the same old stuff over and over again. I let it lapse. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ron Natalie wrote:
Subscribe to it for a while if you like.Â*Â*Â*MyÂ*problemÂ*isÂ*thatÂ*afterÂ*a decade or so of subsribing to it, it was the same old stuff over and over again.Â*Â*IÂ*letÂ*itÂ*lapse. In fact, I don't really care about the paper periodical. A product review periodical's paper is useful only if (1) you happen to be shopping for the right product at the right time or (2) you archive it. Of course, the archive must be easily searched lest it go unused. Stacks of periodicals are pretty poorly searched (although year-end indices help a lot!). But a web site? Perfect! So I really subscribed for access to the web site. "Same old stuff" therefore isn't too likely to be an issue for me (as long as new products/planes are reviewed as well, of course {8^). - Andrew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Biased Aviation Consumer | Luke | Products | 3 | June 3rd 04 02:03 PM |
Aviation Consumer and Collision Avoidance | BHelman | Products | 52 | April 23rd 04 05:35 AM |
further thoughts about women suicide bombers | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 24 | January 18th 04 07:52 AM |
Telex PC-4 Intercom thoughts? | [email protected] | Owning | 0 | July 24th 03 01:02 PM |
Thoughts at a funeral for a stranger | matheson | Military Aviation | 2 | July 4th 03 05:27 AM |