Doe Mac McClellan Write For EAA?

[Ylinen]

I read that many are not happy with the current magazine, but I don't read much with real suggestions to what they want in the magazine that is not. Just, "I like it the way it was"

I like the format and style of the magazine.

For me, I would like to see more coverage of Light Sport.

I would like to see more coverage of BUILDS. Especially how people are modifying and improving a kit plane.

More coverage on Flight Testing and best practices.

It would be nice if each month, they did an article on each phase of the build process.

Would like to see articles on how to set up your shop for a build. Best practices on documenting your build.

In other words, more depth on building.

[Floatsflyer]

Ylinen, most if not all your coverage requests are covered in EAA publication "Experimenter" Check it out.
.

[Bob Dingley]

Ylinen, most if not all your coverage requests are covered in EAA publication "Experimenter" Check it out.
.

Right on Floats. If I had my preferences, I would get EXPERIMENTER in my mailbox and read SA on my laptop. But thats just me.

Bob

[Kyle Boatright]

I may be repeating myself in this thread, but SA is doing a terrible job of selling the sport of aviation, which by definition should be fun. Mac isn't about editing or writing for a fun magazine. His columns pretty much exist in a universe without fun. He writes about procedures, regulations, transportation, and how to not kill yourself. There's nothing fun or inspiring in there.

On a broader sense, in this month's edition, there are 17 pages of crash and/or safety content in 5 different articles and columns. That's out of 75 or 80 pages of content (the rest of the magazine is advertisements, EAA contact info, etc.). Let's call the safety topics 20% of the content of the magazine.

If you want to turn people away from aviation, there is no better way to do it than to drone on and on about the dangers, the risks, etc. Certainly we need to be aware of the risks and mitigate them, but EAA is in the business of promoting aviation and drawing in new people. You draw people in by telling them how great flying is, not with endless reminders about the dangers of the activity.

As examples, Ducati, Ferrari, Porsche, and other performance vehicle manufacturers stress the thrill and enjoyment their products provide, not the fact that their products can kill you pretty fast, especially if you are careless. Same thing with enthusiast magazines. Fine Woodworking may mention a safety device and spend a page or two an issue on shop safety, but the magazine doesn't flood its readers with statistics around tablesaws, finger amputations, and kickback. That would be bad for business. Instead, the magazine focuses on the enjoyment of woodworking and the satisfaction of making something with your hands. Similarly, there is Road & Track magazine. They review all sorts of high performance vehicles, and occasionally talk about airbags, ABS, and other safety features, but they don't shoot themselves in the foot by focusing on the fact that tens of thousands of Americans a year die in auto accidents. The magazine sells the product (sport?) with good writing which makes you want a Porsche or maybe encourages you to restore and drive an old MG.

Going back to Sport Aviation, this month's magazine had exactly one article that was relatable to the enthusiast - the one about the Venture. The article about Pilots & Paws was nice, as was the one about the first female pilot to circle the globe, but dedicating 15 pages of the magazine's content to those two stories was too much. Do you think anyone who reads those stories will be inspired? Not that they are bad stories, but there isn't anything inspiring there.

The bottom line is that SA has become Flying Magazine. We don't need another Flying magazine - that space is already served. We need a publication that is informative and inspirational. The current staff isn't providing that magazine.

[Sam Buchanan]

But Kyle.......Flying Magazine is the only kind of magazine the current editorship knows how to publish........old habits are hard to break.....

[Mayhemxpc]

"SA is doing a terrible job of selling the sport of aviation, which by definition should be fun. Mac isn't about editing or writing for a fun magazine. His columns pretty much exist in a universe without fun. He writes about procedures, regulations, transportation, and how to not kill yourself. There's nothing fun or inspiring in there."

BINGO! That is it. If we are going to promote aviation we will not be successful without the joy of flight! yes, yes, all of those other things are important, but without the joy, there will be no sport aviation.

I liked the Disney Movie "Planes." Somehow, though I felt that I did not like it as much as I wanted to. I thought that there was something missing, something left out. When I mentioned that, a friend who is an editor for a more sedate, business oriented magazine said, "the joy of flight. What was missing was the joy of flight." If we want aviation not to die with us, but to live on for our children and their future, we have to turn them on! We have to get them to the point where they are racing us to the mailbox to get to Sport Aviation before we do. We can do that. We just need to include stories that will inspire, not frighten, and never bore (except for describing the joy of boring holes through the sky.) I think, that if Mac sets his mind to it, he can remember how to do just that.

Chris Mayer
N424AF
www.o2cricket.com

[miemsed]

I love the SA mag, keep up the good work.

[Bob Dingley]

Kyle,


There are real hazzards for a publication to stop being a constant nag regarding safety. In fact, its prudent that they constantly beat the drum for safety and profesionalism.


Lets go back to 1972 when FLYING published an article by an Alaskan pilot about his methods and techniques for safely flying through icing conditions. No joke, I read it. He emphasized that he did it all the time "because HE was a REAL pilot, had lots of time in ice and knew what he was doing." Or words to that effect. Furthermore, "you ordinary pilots cannot hope to do what I do." Or words to that effect. The readers must have been stunned or something because there little response on the letters page.


Jump ahead a few months and Louisiana Congressman Hale Boggs and others were lost in a 310. Icing was forecast to be terrible and it sure was. Especialy in the mountains along the filed route. A huge search effort was without results. The 310 was never found. Remember how impatient the US Congress was. They over ruled FAA and mandated that a thing called an ELT be invented and installed in everything but the follow me truck.


Now the letters swamped the magazine. The magazine never again strayed from "nothing but safety all the time" line. The name of the pilot/writer has long since been forgotten. We still have ELTs. A magazine has gotta do what a magazines gotta do.


Bob P.S. This would never have happened in Experimenter.

[Kyle Boatright]

Kyle,


There are real hazzards for a publication to stop being a constant nag regarding safety.

I don't think anyone has come forward proposing publishing articles that suggest doing really dumb things (like in your FLYING example). I am suggesting that if you're trying to grow the sport or organization, continually pounding on the topic of safety will be counterproductive.

[rwanttaja]

On a broader sense, in this month's edition, there are 17 pages of crash and/or safety content in 5 different articles and columns. That's out of 75 or 80 pages of content (the rest of the magazine is advertisements, EAA contact info, etc.). Let's call the safety topics 20% of the content of the magazine.

Well... as one of the contributors to that 17 pages of safety content, I have to mention that March is the annual Safety issue for Sport Aviation. So there's a lot of safety content.

Hey, and us safety-article-writers have to eat, too (or in my case, have to splurge the whole thing on some toy or airplane gizmo).

Ron Wanttaja