Letting my Flying Subscription Expire

OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here. I really like Flying. I believe it's
one of the few aviation magazines that actually has some balls to form an
opinion. I get tired of the aircraft and avionics reviews that are little
more than a regurgitation of a brochure. I also really enjoy their columns
on living with aviation. My favorite columnist is Lane Wallace but I also
like the way each of the others offer their own perspectives on how aviation
fits into their lives. Dick Karl most closely resembles my view of the
ultimate aviation situation (for my life anyway).

I like details too. For example, the latest issue had a feature on the Beech
Bonanza G36. The detailed account of the new Garmin autopilot operational
modes was a refreshing change from the other mags I subscribe to. And I
subscribe to practically all--Flying, Plane & Pilot, Pilot Journal, IFR, IFR
Refresher, Aviation Consumer, GA News, Trade-A-Plane, Aviation Safety, and
AOPA Pilot. I read every one of them cover-to-cover (except TAP of course)
thanks to a one hour+ commute on the train each way to Manahattan.

Richard Collins and Mac McClellan may **** some people off but they at least
take a stand on a subject or have a real opinion. Are Mac's articles on the
latest biz jet a bit out of my league? Sure it is but I'm sure it appeals to
others and the larger audience enables its low subscription price. Collins
sometimes sounds like he's high on himself but he's also the first to admit
he screwed-up so he deserves some respect for that.

For less than $10 a year, I think it's a bargain.

Marco "information junkie" Leon

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
. ..
My last issue of Flying came in the mail today, and I won't be re-upping
the
subscription. In recent years, I've grown more and more reluctant to renew
it, but when it came to crunch time, I went ahead and mailed in my $12.00
or
whatever. Not this year, though. In all honesty, I don't remember the
last
article or column in Flying that made me want to go back and re-read the
article. Instead, the magazine arrives and I spend an hour or so breezing
through it, then it goes into the trash can, leaving me wondering what I
missed.

Once upon a time, I subscribed to 4 or 5 aviation magazines and enjoyed
them
all. Now I'm only taking two aviation related mag's - Sport Aviation and
AOPA Pilot, and both of them are member benefits from their sponsor
organizations. I have a tremendous interest in aviation and love to read,
so why don't the aviation magazines interest me anymore? Have the
magazines changed? Is it me? Is it that the subject matter is finite and
after reading 20 years worth of aviation magazines, there is very little
left that is new and interesting to me?

Anyway, it is sad in a way that there isn't an aviation magazine that
interests me enough that I'll spend $12 or $15 a year for a subscription.

KB










Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

I am exactly like you and I let mine expire many years ago. I did not
want review on $2.2M jets. I get AOPA Pilot and EAA Sport Aviation.
However, I also get Plane & Pilot. I do find it rather more to the small
GA pilot/owner. Might give it a try.

Ross
KSWI

Kyle Boatright wrote:

My last issue of Flying came in the mail today, and I won't be re-upping the
subscription. In recent years, I've grown more and more reluctant to renew
it, but when it came to crunch time, I went ahead and mailed in my $12.00 or
whatever. Not this year, though. In all honesty, I don't remember the last
article or column in Flying that made me want to go back and re-read the
article. Instead, the magazine arrives and I spend an hour or so breezing
through it, then it goes into the trash can, leaving me wondering what I
missed.

Once upon a time, I subscribed to 4 or 5 aviation magazines and enjoyed them
all. Now I'm only taking two aviation related mag's - Sport Aviation and
AOPA Pilot, and both of them are member benefits from their sponsor
organizations. I have a tremendous interest in aviation and love to read,
so why don't the aviation magazines interest me anymore? Have the
magazines changed? Is it me? Is it that the subject matter is finite and
after reading 20 years worth of aviation magazines, there is very little
left that is new and interesting to me?

Anyway, it is sad in a way that there isn't an aviation magazine that
interests me enough that I'll spend $12 or $15 a year for a subscription.

KB

I get flying mag too, and I'm gonna let it lapse. As has been mentioned,
they are focusing more on VLJ's and high end avionics. Way outta my
league.

However, I can recommend General Aviation News, and Kitplanes if you're
into that. Plane and Pilot is OK.

I like it too, and I find it a good bargain.
I get AOPA and Flying, and appreciate them both.
I like Collins because of his statistical presentation, which I find sound.
And I still think a flight test and review of the latest Gulfstream holds its
own against yet another single-engine 110Kt tin bird.

GF


In article , mmleonatyahoo.com says...


OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here. I really like Flying. I believe it's
one of the few aviation magazines that actually has some balls to form an
opinion. etc

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

When Collins came back, the magazine practically turned into "The
Richard Collins Magazine".

Amen. What a freakin' blowhard.

And Garrison on his own isn't enough to keep me resubscribing,

He is for me. Far and away the best writer in aviation journalism. I
don't get the Lane Wallace fan club, though; she often comes across as
maudlin to me.

That said, every now and then Flying runs a feature that seems
interesting, and it's one of the least expensive aviation magazines
I've seen that's worth reading. But I already have a LOT of reading
in my life. Aviation isn't the only topic for periodicals to which I
subscribe, and there are still books, and of course online resources
to read.

Indeed. The stack of "must reads" at my bedside is a serious avalanche
threat. Try becoming well informed on the evolution/intelligent design
"controversy" if you're not a biologist to begin with.

If I had nothing better to do, maybe I'd have kept up the
subscription, but when it came time to do some paring down, Flying was
one of the first to go.

It's the only non-Belvoir I have left besides the "perforce" mags, AOPA
Pilot and Sport Aviation.


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:33:30 -0600, "Dan Luke"
wrote:


"Peter Duniho" wrote:

When Collins came back, the magazine practically turned into "The
Richard Collins Magazine".

Amen. What a freakin' blowhard.

And Garrison on his own isn't enough to keep me resubscribing,

He is for me. Far and away the best writer in aviation journalism. I
don't get the Lane Wallace fan club, though; she often comes across as
maudlin to me.

That said, every now and then Flying runs a feature that seems
interesting, and it's one of the least expensive aviation magazines
I've seen that's worth reading. But I already have a LOT of reading
in my life. Aviation isn't the only topic for periodicals to which I
subscribe, and there are still books, and of course online resources
to read.

Indeed. The stack of "must reads" at my bedside is a serious avalanche
threat. Try becoming well informed on the evolution/intelligent design
"controversy" if you're not a biologist to begin with.

That's easy. One is based on science and the other on superstition,
some times called faith.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

If I had nothing better to do, maybe I'd have kept up the
subscription, but when it came time to do some paring down, Flying was
one of the first to go.

It's the only non-Belvoir I have left besides the "perforce" mags, AOPA
Pilot and Sport Aviation.

"Roger" wrote:

Indeed. The stack of "must reads" at my bedside is a serious
avalanche
threat. Try becoming well informed on the evolution/intelligent
design
"controversy" if you're not a biologist to begin with.

That's easy. One is based on science and the other on superstition,
some times called faith.

It is not so easy. There is a great deal of misinformation abroad on
the subject, and it behooves a critical thinker to get the facts, which
cannot be reduced to sound bites. Although the Intelligent Design
movement recently suffered a disastrous, humiliating defeat in Dover,
PA, there is still a concerted politico/religious attack on public
school science education underway in the U. S. Citizens who are not
scientists may be deceived by the glib, superficially plausible
arguments of ID if they do not trouble themselves to understand how
science really works.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Well your right Flying Magazine is one of those magazines that tend to
be dry unless you like hearing someones personal flying experiences.
Don't get me wrong I do, but I get that at the Airport I am employed
at.

You mentioned liking Sport Aviation and AOPA Pilot. I subscribe to AOPA
Pilot because I enjoy all the benefits. Lately I have been disapointed
with AOPA Pilot. Again dry and boring with the exceptions of a couple
departments like the Features section and Never Again. I do the same
thing, brief through it except I keep all my magazines becasue there
are some articles I tab for future reference and share with my
students.

I am CFI so I really enjoy reading Flight Training magazine. Best of
all I get it for free because I give so many referals and my students
subsribe to it. I assure you that if you haven't read Flight Training
to subscibe to it. Guaranteed that you'll look back in your old files
and re-read time and time again.

Can Flying Magazine and replace it it with Flying Training.

Cjamairway

I also get "flight training". A lot of the articles seem to be cut and
paste of the same old info. I think this is due to "new" students.
Occasionally, a really good article is in there.

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Roger wrote:
Try becoming well informed on the evolution/intelligent design
"controversy" if you're not a biologist to begin with.

That's easy. One is based on science and the other on superstition,
some times called faith.

True. But the more I learn about the issue, the more I realize that many
people are confused on which is science and which is faith or
superstition. Even Darwin himself said something to the effect that if
fossils supporting his theory didn't start turning up soon, their absence
would disprove his theory. (150-odd years later, no luck yet.) Things
have only gone downhill since then for the theory of evolution -- the more
we know, the harder it becomes to support the theory from a scientific
standpoint.

One factoid that got my attention: Evolution proponents insist that
_only_ evolution be taught, while intelligent design proponents say teach
the pros & cons of all views and decide which has the most going for it.
The latter position is in line with scientific principles and an honest
effort to learn the truth, while the former smacks more of unsupportable
religious belief and superstition. Some folks don't think kids should
even be told that evolution is only a _theory_, not a proven fact, and
that there are other views with good scientific arguments behind them.
Is that objective science, or religious fundamentalism?

In the interest of returning to topic, I've determined that with spring
coming, I'm going to have to get out there and fix my airplane, as it
doesn't seem to be evolving on its own. At least, not in the right
direction. I was hoping if I left it alone over winter, it would turn
itself into a Columbia 400, or maybe a King Air. But, no luck so far.

Which reminds me... I've never understood how people can simultaneously
believe in evolution theory, and the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy).
Just doesn't make sense, from a scientific or logical standpoint. I've
seen some attempted explanations of this phenomenon, but they don't stand
up to critical and unbiased examination. It's sort of like believing if
you play the slot machines long enough you've just gotta win, when there
are big signs everywhere saying "Our slots return [some number less than
100]%" -- in other words, on average, you are going to lose. But, folks
keep believing what they want to believe, despite the facts staring them
in the face.

-Dan