Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 116

Thread: Doe Mac McClellan Write For EAA?

  1. #11
    As Anatole the Chef would say, "You must takes zee smooths with zee roughs!"

    I've been a member since 1985, own and fly a Pietenpol, am building (slowly) a Druine Turbulent. I am low-tech and I like the current iteration of SA. I think it went through a rough patch, but in the last couple of years is getting much better. There are, in fact, more grassroots tech articles than there were several years ago. There are also more grassroots stories, and more "story" stories. As to writers, I think Jeff Skiles is a gem that EAA should never let go of. He's a natural writer writing well about something he loves. Lane Wallace, Budd Davisson, Mike Busch, Brady Lane, Mark Phelps, Pat Matheny, Robert Rossier, and Lauren Paine all write well and usually on topics that interest me, though I have to admit that some are more acquired tastes than others. J. Mac McClellan writes very well, too. Often his topics don't interest me, but sometimes they do. His article on en route accidents in this month's SA was very well written and interesting. To me.

    Now, with this line up of a couple of GREAT writers, several very good ones, and an overall redirecting back towards nuts-and-bolts flying, you're really going to toss your membership because one guy sometimes (often?) writes about topics you that don't interest you? I encourage you to at least compare your SAs from a couple of years prior to Mac's arrival to what SA publishes today. I think you'll be surprised.

  2. #12
    Aaron Novak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wi
    Posts
    275
    If you want technical articles, SA is not that anymore.....although it used to be. Honestly Kitplanes is a MUCH better read if someone wants technical information on homebuilding. In the last handful of issues of SA, I would once in a while see a semi-technical article that seemed interesting, only to find out it was a reprint from SA's past. It seems, at least to me, that SA has gone towards entertainment, while Kitplanes has gone towards education. From a technical aspect anyway.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NW FL
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Novak View Post
    If you want technical articles, SA is not that anymore.....although it used to be. Honestly Kitplanes is a MUCH better read if someone wants technical information on homebuilding. In the last handful of issues of SA, I would once in a while see a semi-technical article that seemed interesting, only to find out it was a reprint from SA's past. It seems, at least to me, that SA has gone towards entertainment, while Kitplanes has gone towards education. From a technical aspect anyway.
    I agree with Aaron. I do enjoy rereading old copys of SA from the 1960's from that big stack out in my shop. Suggestion. Pick a few old articles for reprint from time to time. Here in the 21st century we have the Experimenter and I do like it. Trouble is, its only available online and its like reading it through a paper towel tube. If only I could swap and get Experimenter in the mailbox and SA online. NRA gives you three magazine choices.


    I think that Mac is an asset. I like the way he thinks. We both like Barons. Enough said.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    361
    There have been numerous threads on this.

    Mac is a fine writer/editor for Flying. But I already get that magazine and don't need SA to be redundant with Flying.

    SA shouldn't be personality driven with monthly columns to fill space. SA needs to be inspirational more than anything. It should be about the unique people within EAA, their interest in aviation, and the amazing contributions they make. It also needs to provide solid technical content. Every time Mac writes about his Baron or an article is published about a million dollar turbine, some inspired person's eyes glaze and they walk away from "Sport Aviation" and EAA.

  5. #15
    miemsed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright View Post
    There have been numerous threads on this.

    Mac is a fine writer/editor for Flying. But I already get that magazine and don't need SA to be redundant with Flying.

    SA shouldn't be personality driven with monthly columns to fill space. SA needs to be inspirational more than anything. It should be about the unique people within EAA, their interest in aviation, and the amazing contributions they make. It also needs to provide solid technical content. Every time Mac writes about his Baron or an article is published about a million dollar turbine, some inspired person's eyes glaze and they walk away from "Sport Aviation" and EAA.
    I am sorry but for every member that does not like a certain article in the mag, there are just as many if not more members that will like that same article. If someone is going to give up their membership or walk away because they do not like an article, well".........
    States visited with my Piper Challenger




  6. #16
    Ironically, the most recent issue of Kitplanes has a retread tech article from year 2000 about weight and balance. But whatevs...Everything everywhere used to be better, amirate?


  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Clarklake, MI
    Posts
    1,189
    After giving it a lot of thought I'm good with them doing away with the magazines completely. Design a user friendly, easy to read home page, update it weekly. Attach 1 or 2 Mac-less PDF "articles" which can be read or not and/or saved/printed for reference. I like Experimenter but I'd gladly forfeit the magazine style layout for something easier to peruse.

    Plenty of technical information on the internet. The current EAA forum could be used for that purpose. That fosters contribution without the need to create a full length magazine article. Other forums do a great job of dispensing technical information without printed media, I'll use the PWC forum "GreenHulk" as an example. They maintain a good balance of technical exchange and socializing.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by martymayes View Post
    After giving it a lot of thought I'm good with them doing away with the magazines completely. Design a user friendly, easy to read home page, update it weekly. Attach 1 or 2 Mac-less PDF "articles" which can be read or not and/or saved/printed for reference. I like Experimenter but I'd gladly forfeit the magazine style layout for something easier to peruse.

    Plenty of technical information on the internet. The current EAA forum could be used for that purpose. That fosters contribution without the need to create a full length magazine article. Other forums do a great job of dispensing technical information without printed media, I'll use the PWC forum "GreenHulk" as an example. They maintain a good balance of technical exchange and socializing.
    In a sense, you're right, but that concept relies on a "pull" model where people come to forums seeking information. Magazines "push" information to everyone on the mailing list, making it much more likely to achieve market penetration (with information or AD space) than a forum. Of the 150K EAA members, how many use this site? <5%, I'd bet. That other 95% gain something when a printed magazine shows up at their house every month.

  9. #19
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Boatright View Post
    As Anatole the Chef would say, "You must takes zee smooths with zee roughs!"

    I've been a member since 1985, own and fly a Pietenpol, am building (slowly) a Druine Turbulent. I am low-tech and I like the current iteration of SA. I think it went through a rough patch, but in the last couple of years is getting much better. There are, in fact, more grassroots tech articles than there were several years ago. There are also more grassroots stories, and more "story" stories. As to writers, I think Jeff Skiles is a gem that EAA should never let go of. He's a natural writer writing well about something he loves. Lane Wallace, Budd Davisson, Mike Busch, Brady Lane, Mark Phelps, Pat Matheny, Robert Rossier, and Lauren Paine all write well and usually on topics that interest me, though I have to admit that some are more acquired tastes than others. J. Mac McClellan writes very well, too. Often his topics don't interest me, but sometimes they do. His article on en route accidents in this month's SA was very well written and interesting. To me.

    Now, with this line up of a couple of GREAT writers, several very good ones, and an overall redirecting back towards nuts-and-bolts flying, you're really going to toss your membership because one guy sometimes (often?) writes about topics you that don't interest you? I encourage you to at least compare your SAs from a couple of years prior to Mac's arrival to what SA publishes today. I think you'll be surprised.
    Yes, yes I am. I joined EAA because it was about sport aviation. Mac has nothing to do with that. Therefore I don't feel the need to continue my support.
    Ryan Winslow
    EAA 525529
    Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction

  10. #20
    Flyfalcons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bonney Lake, WA
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by miemsed View Post
    I am sorry but for every member that does not like a certain article in the mag, there are just as many if not more members that will like that same article. If someone is going to give up their membership or walk away because they do not like an article, well".........
    It's not "an article".......
    Ryan Winslow
    EAA 525529
    Stinson 108-1 "Big Red", RV-7 under construction

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •