The Latest Sport Aviation has a WHAT on the cover?

"Kyle Boatright" wrote:
A Cirrus? You gotta be kidding me.

Well it is the grand prize in their sweepstakes, so I didn't have a problem
with it. At least the pedigree of the company has its roots in experimental
aviation (at least I think they do).

I know, this is a quarterly topic for discussion, but I swear, EAA is
becoming AOPA. I guess it pays better or something. When was the
last warbird article in Sport Aviation? OK, how 'bout the last
restoration of an antique by the owner (not by someone who wrote a
bunch of checks).

Very disappointing.

According to its name and history, I would have expected EAA to put out a
magazine with exactly the content and focus that Kitplanes magazine has. In
fact I subcribed to Kitplanes long before I decided to join EAA (just two
years ago). The EAA magazines are indeed a disappointment.

But so long as they maintain a policy of advocacy and support for
homebuilders then I'm willing to stay a member.

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Kyle Boatright" wrote:
A Cirrus? You gotta be kidding me.

Well it is the grand prize in their sweepstakes, so I didn't have a
problem
with it. At least the pedigree of the company has its roots in
experimental
aviation (at least I think they do).

I know, this is a quarterly topic for discussion, but I swear, EAA is
becoming AOPA. I guess it pays better or something. When was the
last warbird article in Sport Aviation? OK, how 'bout the last
restoration of an antique by the owner (not by someone who wrote a
bunch of checks).

Very disappointing.

According to its name and history, I would have expected EAA to put out a
magazine with exactly the content and focus that Kitplanes magazine has.
In
fact I subcribed to Kitplanes long before I decided to join EAA (just two
years ago). The EAA magazines are indeed a disappointment.

But so long as they maintain a policy of advocacy and support for
homebuilders then I'm willing to stay a member.

How many of you have taken the time to send an e-mail to EAA expressing your
displeasure? It would help if every time you see things you don't like that
you let them know. As a magazine publisher, we really need the feedback to
keep the magazine aimed at our subscribers. That said, I also wonder about
EAAs magazine policy. I sent them an e-mail criticizing Tom's corner when
it was called the Homebuilder's Corner and he never said one word about home
building. The answer I got back was that it had always been called that and
it would probably not change. Well it has changed.
I certainly agree that the EAA magazine doesn't even come close to Kitplanes
for content that I'm interested in but EAA does lobby Congress in my behalf,
so I'll keep my membership a little longer. I just wish that EAA would
produce a magazine dedicated to Experimental Aviation.

On Feb 27, 8:57 am, "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote:

How many of you have taken the time to send an e-mail to EAA expressing your
displeasure?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When doing so I suggest you use real mail, typed on your letterhead if
you have one. Then send a copy to your local chapter.

-R.S.Hoover

"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote in message
.. .

I certainly agree that the EAA magazine doesn't even come close to Kitplanes
for content that I'm interested in but EAA does lobby Congress in my behalf,
so I'll keep my membership a little longer. I just wish that EAA would
produce a magazine dedicated to Experimental Aviation.

Like it or not, the EAA magazine is aimed at EAA members in general, not
homebuilders in particular.

I wonder what percentage of EAA members are actually homebuilders? I will
bet that it is a great minority. To be honest, I am a member that does not ever
see himself actually building an airplane. In fact, the first several years
that I was a member, I was not even a pilot.

I am a member of EAA for several good reasons, and I think it is a good
(not perfect) organization that is important to us small guys in aviation,
(homebuilder or not) particularly those of us who might fly Experimental ships.
I am also a member of AOPA, & the SSA. I would rate the EAA magazine higher
than either of those other organizations's publications, though the AOPA rag
seems to have improved in recent years.

Vaughn

"Vaughn Simon" wrote in message
...
Like it or not, the EAA magazine is aimed at EAA members in general, not
homebuilders in particular.

I wonder what percentage of EAA members are actually homebuilders? I
will bet that it is a great minority. To be honest, I am a member that
does not ever see himself actually building an airplane. In fact, the
first several years that I was a member, I was not even a pilot.

I am a member of EAA for several good reasons, and I think it is a
good (not perfect) organization that is important to us small guys in
aviation, (homebuilder or not) particularly those of us who might fly
Experimental ships. I am also a member of AOPA, & the SSA. I would rate
the EAA magazine higher than either of those other organizations's
publications, though the AOPA rag seems to have improved in recent years.


Vaughn,

Like you, I am a member of all three organizations and concur with your
assessment. I would rate "Soaring" at the bottom of the quality list.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder

On Feb 27, 3:50*pm, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:
"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote in messagenews:q4adnW7skPAdC1janZ2dnUVZ_viunZ2d@iwvis p.com...



I certainly agree that the EAA magazine doesn't even come close to Kitplanes
for content that I'm interested in but EAA does lobby Congress in my behalf,
so I'll keep my membership a little longer. *I just wish that EAA would
produce a magazine dedicated to Experimental Aviation.

* *Like it or not, the EAA magazine is aimed at EAA members in general, not
homebuilders in particular.


Judging by the amount of interest drawn by Cirrus, Piper, Cessna, and
the other production aircraft companies that show at Oshkosh, I would
have to agree.

* *I wonder what percentage of EAA members are actually homebuilders? *I will
bet that it is a great minority. *To be honest, I am a member that does not ever
see himself actually building an airplane. *In fact, the first several years
that I was a member, I was not even a pilot.


You are probably right as a total percentage of EAA Membership. The
EAA for some reason seems to draw a wide spectrum of pilots and as you
say, some non--pilots.

* * *I am a member of EAA for several good reasons, and I think it is a good
(not perfect) organization that is important to us small guys in aviation,
(homebuilder or not) particularly those of us who might fly Experimental ships.
I am also a member of AOPA, & the SSA. *I would rate the EAA magazine higher
than either of those other organizations's publications, though the AOPA rag
seems to have improved in recent years.

Vaughn

I have been a frequent reader of the AOPA magazine and the Sport
Aviation Subscriber. Of the two, the Sport Aviation seem to be much
more oriented to the individual recreational pilot. AOPA tends to
lean more to the commercial pilots at least from my perspective.

"BobR" wrote in message
...

You are probably right as a total percentage of EAA Membership. The
EAA for some reason seems to draw a wide spectrum of pilots and as you
say, some non--pilots.

More importantly, (and often neglected) that group of "non-pilots" is rich
with future pilots.

Vaughn

"Vaughn Simon" wrote in message
...

"BobR" wrote in message
...

You are probably right as a total percentage of EAA Membership. The
EAA for some reason seems to draw a wide spectrum of pilots and as you
say, some non--pilots.

More importantly, (and often neglected) that group of "non-pilots" is
rich with future pilots.

Vaughn

The problem that I see is that any time you try to be something for
everybody you end up with something that is kind nothing for anyone. In my
electronics experience, any time I saw a "Universal" electronic gadget I
steered clear as it would be at least difficult and would contain a bunch of
stuff that I was not interested in. Same with the magazine. As
publisher/editor of Experimental Helo magazine we are very aware of this
trap and have focussed our efforts. We will not accept ads from Ford, John
Deere or any other group not specifically involved in helicopter related
activity. That includes the gyrocopters. Based on subscriber feed back, we
seem to be scratching a particular itch. With that said, we are not
forecasting immediate indoctrination into the Fortune 500.
It's too bad EAA can't see their way clear to have a magazine for the
Amateur builders like the War Birds, and Antique guys. I tried the
Experimenter and it didn't match up to Kitplanes either.
Stu Fields

Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
"Vaughn Simon" wrote in message
...

"BobR" wrote in message
...

You are probably right as a total percentage of EAA Membership. The
EAA for some reason seems to draw a wide spectrum of pilots and as you
say, some non--pilots.

More importantly, (and often neglected) that group of "non-pilots" is
rich with future pilots.

Vaughn

The problem that I see is that any time you try to be something for
everybody you end up with something that is kind nothing for anyone. In my
electronics experience, any time I saw a "Universal" electronic gadget I
steered clear as it would be at least difficult and would contain a bunch of
stuff that I was not interested in. Same with the magazine. As
publisher/editor of Experimental Helo magazine we are very aware of this
trap and have focussed our efforts. We will not accept ads from Ford, John
Deere or any other group not specifically involved in helicopter related
activity. That includes the gyrocopters. Based on subscriber feed back, we
seem to be scratching a particular itch. With that said, we are not
forecasting immediate indoctrination into the Fortune 500.
It's too bad EAA can't see their way clear to have a magazine for the
Amateur builders like the War Birds, and Antique guys. I tried the
Experimenter and it didn't match up to Kitplanes either.
Stu Fields

You hit on something with your final statement that has bothered me
since I joined EAA. There were several alternate publications in
addition to Sport Aviation but NONE were oriented to BUILDERS! That
is an oversight that has grown more evident since the SA publication
seems to be moving away from that theme. I did complain a long time
ago about their website not containing much for the homebuilder and
they did improve that substantially.

I will say that I have found something of interest to me in ever issue
of Sport Aviation and would not want to stop receiving it. I would
just love to see a magazine similar to Experimenter that was fully
oriented to builders. I would also add that I have always thought it
strange that the main area at Oshkosh seems dedicated to everthing
except building. You half to go to another area well away from the
main square to find the kit plane and builder oriented displays.

"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" wrote in message
.. .

The problem that I see is that any time you try to be something for everybody
you end up with something that is kind nothing for anyone. Same with the
magazine.

I don't put the EAA magazine in that category, and never have. It is a
magazine that seems pointed directly at the center of gravity of the EAA
membership. Judging from the volume of ad copy, the folks who really matter
(the advertisers) agree. For decades, it has been one of the first magazines
that I pick up every month. The only Aviation magazine that regularly beats it
(in terms of my personal interest) is "Air & Space". That said, I agree that it
is no airplane homebuilding magazine, and perhaps EAA needs to adjust its mix of
specialty publications.


As publisher/editor of Experimental Helo magazine we are very aware of this
trap and have focussed our efforts.

Which must be why EAA has a mix of 5 focused magazines in addition to "Sport
Aviation".

Vaughn