What does the Kitfox community think of Sport Aviation?

[Chad Jensen]

There has been a lot of discussion of Sport Aviation on several other boards, but none started by me...I thought I'd ask the community here what you all think of it? I am taking the lead for homebuilt coverage in the magazine now, and I like the vision we have developed for future stories...covering the people, what it took to get the project complete, challenges along the way, family and friend involvement, and of course, the airplane. That's a very condensed version of what we've spent several meetings developing...much more coming.

What say you?

[Dick B in KY]

I like it, but think it needs more how to articles on homebuilders projects. Something the average builder can relate to and has probably been faced with during construction. The Hints for Homebuilders is good, so don't get rid of it. By the way, I liked your article in the latest edition on your first test flight.

Dick B

[mr bill]

There should be more technical content, eg electrical, mechanical "how to" articles. Some woodworking, fabric work, steel tubing,welding and of course sheet metal construction.

[Chewie]

Chad,
I also enjoyed your article (Feb '12).

I'm too new to know much about homebuilding, but anything to bring new people in and provide a glimpse into the world of homebuilding, from research to purchasing to flight test like you just did, is great. If people want more specifics, they have many options to go into clubs and type-dedicated forums like this one.

Mark
EAA # I forget

[Av8r3400]

I have to admit I'm not really a fan of the "new and improved" Sport Aviation. I will continue to be a member due to my involvement on the local chapter level (Officer Chapter UL75 - 130+ members), but the mag is losing me.

I liked the old SA, like back in the 80s, for example. The focus of the content was technical and aircraft oriented. Building tips and tricks. Articles about the airplanes, not the owners life stories. (The Corsair article in February's issue for example: all people no plane.) And what's with all the pushing of the no-market, unusable electric airplanes? Some sort of Solyndra-esc green push?

Writers have been added from the non-experimental world who's contributions seem to have come right from Plane and Pilot or Flying magazine, with little or no relevance to the EAA world. Mostly about million dollar certified planes, IFR techniques and travel brochure photography. Soon to come the same old rehashed reviews of the "new" Archer or Skylane?

It seems like all kinds of off topic "fluff" has been added to the proportionately small amount of EAA-tech content to fill the coffee-table picture book that I get in the mail every month. Plus, who's idea was the over-sized "Life Magazine" format, anyway?

You guys just had a major "right sizing" of the staff over there at EAA-HQ. Now, maybe its time to do the same thing with the Magazine: Refocus.


In my opinion. :rolleyes:

[ken nougaret]

i'll second what av8r3400 said. too much of the high cost certified aircraft and not enough for the little guy do it yourselfer. and the larger magazine doesn't stack well with the others.
ken

[rcnut]

I also agree that the "new" magazine is to much about people and high priced aircraft. There are plenty of chapters that your editor can contact and find out what "mom & pop" are building and do come creative articles on Construction and problem solving. lets get out among the Builders and talk to them!!!!!!!!!

[jiott]

I agree with most of the previous comments. Most of us also subscribe to "Flying", "AOPA Pilot", so there are plenty of magazines to get info on the non-builder end of aviation. The EAA is the one place you expect to find a focus on building, especially the smaller more common stuff. Safety articles relating to experimental planes are also good.

Jim

[cap01]

Flying magazine lost me years ago with all the multi million dollar stuff they wrote about that I would never see or get to use

[inzersv]

I agree with everyone's post on this subject. Sport Aviation is the only flying mag I receive now and I am concerned that it is going the same direction as the other magazines.

[akarmy]

First off, Chad, Thanks for asking. I can't remember us ever being asked for input before!

While I agree with the theme presented thus far that we all want more hands on building focused articles, I don't see it as a major problem as of yet. There were a number of good additions to the mag redesign that specifically added more of these types of articles while expanding the coverage to other areas. I think for the most part it's a nice blend of topics and information.

Overall I think it's very hard for a magazine to survive in this 21st century environment. We spend hours and hours obsessing about very specific information that interests us and have access to that information via the internet. I'm not sure how a print publication is going to cater to that need.

I really enjoy the online version of experimenter as well where much of the more hands on information is presented.

Keep up the good work and thanks for taking our input back to HQ to influence future directions.

PS, I'm a chapter president of a fairly large chapter (326 in Puyallup WA) which has over a hundred members and I know how hard it is to find information and materials that appeal to everyone!

[rcnut]

Andy, I will be in Puyallup for 2 wks PM me if you would like someone to fly with in March
gary_hensen@yahoo.com

[HighWing]

Frankly, I am heartened by the responses so far to Chad's question. Got to give him credit for posting it. I sorely miss the old days. As I recall there was a publication that could be ordered along side SA called "Experimenter". On top of the $40 already, I don't think I would opt for it right now, but if it was a choice between Experimenter and SA, it would not take a moments thought to opt out of SA and go to the meat of homebuilding. My take on the whole thing is $$ and trying to keep the real homebuilder memership while increasing circulation by trying to capture other aspects of aviation is good from the bean counter point of view, but it really doesn't work for me. I wrote the following personal note to Chad and got a very nice reply. A couple of things of note. Mac McClellan is here to stay and we will likely be treated to monthly monologues on how fun it is to fly the big bucks in extremely poor weather into airports the bulk of us use our GPSs to avoid. And GA is here to stay as well

Hi Chad,
I hope you can accept a tad bit of cynicism. The only thing that has changed from the beginning is the name. Home building / experimental aviation has been going on for quite some time. I think it has been EAA that has changed and I suspect 90% - at least of the actual experimental guys - would agree with me. Going back one step to its roots is a good thing. My satisfaction would increase quite a bit if your column was duplicated several times by other columnists and let the certified flyers find their technical niche in their dedicated publications where amateur built is non existent. Mac McCLellan every month, give me a break. Has he ever even seen an amateur built airplane? Every other month would be plenty for him to tell if his experiences flying his fancy twin into weather.

Since I have you on the phone, I would like to suggest that your membership folks stop sending me renewal information six months before expiration. I know all about float and want my money in my bank until it is due not in your bank where you get free use of it for six months. I recently renewed two days late, and argue with myself every time if it is even worth it. As I am just a guy that has built four airplanes on a budget, have a SEL rating as the vast majority of us do and feel a bit out of sorts as my rag and tube choice is often pretty much ignored. All this, because we all know the golden rule - "he who has the gold makes the rules".

Kitplanes vs. Sport Aviation - no brainer.

Lowell

[Peteohms]

This isn't about the magazine per se but EAA in general. Too many chapters have gone "Young Eagles" and do almost nothing to encourage building.

[colospace]

Good previous comments.
I admit to enjoying articles that evoke the adventure of flying and those that cover vintage/classic/warbird aircraft and their eras, but feel homebuilding has increasingly been taking the backburner. I don’t need to read about the high end planes, equipment or even blitzing across the country IFR; I get more than enough of that from AOPA Pilot. I currently also get Flying magazine (because it was too cheap at the time not to renew), but I will not be bothering to re-subscribe as I skip reading half of it anyway (especially since most of the writers I had enjoyed have bailed or been booted out). EAA and Sport Aviation DO NOT need to be all things to all people.
Chad, specific to your question, I would like to see more on electrical system design and tips. And not just in the panel, but also antennas, lights, engine…..the whole enchilada.

[Chad Jensen]

Thanks for the feedback! Keep it coming...something we are working on with the magazine now, which I am sheparding, is the expansion of coverage of homebuilding in the magazine. We are working on some cool articles over the next few months! I also want to make sure everyone knows up front, SA will not be a homebuilders only magazine again. As much as I wish it could be, the membership of 176,000 and growing is speaking, and the diversity is showing more in the publication.

I love all things aviation, and I don't mind any of it, even as the homebuilder guy at EAA.

You all know about Experimenter e-newsletter, correct? I write for it each month, and everything we cover there is meaty homebuilding stuff. Every issue, every article.


First off, Chad, Thanks for asking. I can't remember us ever being asked for input before!
Well, you have someone that cares deeply about homebuilding in me, and I want to make sure each of the type communities are being served. I have a LOT of ground to cover, so I apologize in advance if I'm tardy on responding at times, but I do check in here as often as I can.


While I agree with the theme presented thus far that we all want more hands on building focused articles, I don't see it as a major problem as of yet. There were a number of good additions to the mag redesign that specifically added more of these types of articles while expanding the coverage to other areas. I think for the most part it's a nice blend of topics and information.

Overall I think it's very hard for a magazine to survive in this 21st century environment. We spend hours and hours obsessing about very specific information that interests us and have access to that information via the internet. I'm not sure how a print publication is going to cater to that need.
These two paragraphs sum up the majority of the feedback we get. Everyone is worried about the magazine surviving with online info available at the stroke of a key. When we talk at grass roots tour stops or chapters, the feedback we get on the magazine is great...the biggest complaint is the size. ;)


I really enjoy the online version of experimenter as well where much of the more hands on information is presented.
Excellent!! We are working on getting it put in to a pdf version so it can be read offline and printed out nicely.


Keep up the good work and thanks for taking our input back to HQ to influence future directions.

PS, I'm a chapter president of a fairly large chapter (326 in Puyallup WA) which has over a hundred members and I know how hard it is to find information and materials that appeal to everyone!
You're most welcome! Finding articles, quality articles, is difficult, but I always encourage members to send in a well written article for consideration. You never know...I didn't think I was good enough to write and get published, but I sat down and wrote one night, and all of the sudden I get one in! :cool:


Frankly, I am heartened by the responses so far to Chad's question. Got to give him credit for posting it. I sorely miss the old days. As I recall there was a publication that could be ordered along side SA called "Experimenter". On top of the $40 already, I don't think I would opt for it right now, but if it was a choice between Experimenter and SA, it would not take a moments thought to opt out of SA and go to the meat of homebuilding.
Experimenter is available for free to members and non-members alike...
http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/
Click subscribe, and you get it!


Kitplanes vs. Sport Aviation - no brainer.

Lowell
Magazine to magazine, Kitplanes is great, and it's all experimental. They are a focused magazine. Sport Aviation is a magazine for an organization with diverse interests. It's not all about homebuilding, and hasn't been since the early 1960's. Paul had these same complaints then...not that they aren't valid, but it's something EAA has been dealing with for decades.


This isn't about the magazine per se but EAA in general. Too many chapters have gone "Young Eagles" and do almost nothing to encourage building.
I'm finding this to be true in some areas, but I've also come across and been in contact with a lot more builder focused chapters than I thought were out there. Chapter focus is something we can't and won't try to control. We just want to see the chapter network grow interest and participation so we get to keep doing what we love, whether that's building, flying Young Eagles, or running to breakfast in your Archer.

[JimS]

Chad,

I've been an EAA member since about 1984. Joined AOPA a few years later and have been getting Flying magazine for about the same lenght of time. I'm a CFI, have some multi time, fly the Kitfox I built, and I really enjoyed reading Macs articles in Flying. In fact I enjoy most all the writers of Flying and AOPA magazines. They write about things I expect to read about when I open the pages of those mags. BUT...As others have said, when I open Sport Aviation and read about Macs trips in his Baron, or L. Wallaces X-country in a Grumman, well lets just say I've kept every issue of over twenty years worth of EAA magazines, but the last issue with the corsair went in the recycle bin. I had shared my opinion a couple years ago (with a response to an EAA servey) that Kitplanes should be the flagship EAA magazine. Then once or twice a year there would be an issue of Sport Aviation that would start to look like a magazine that you would expect from EAA and it would make me think "maybe someone at EAA is starting to get it", but, with articles like a flight review on the TBM 850 in Sport Aviation, lets just say I've lost hope.

Chad, I've read the whole thread at the VAF site also and I applaud you for trying to put a positive spin on this topic. I bet you have the best intentions in the world and I can sense your inthusiasm. I just fear that the mountain you will be trying to climb at EAA to get the voice of homebuilders heard will be too high.

JimS

[Chad Jensen]

The magazine certainly has seen its share of variety over the last few years. I think the TBM article is as far to the other side as it will ever see, but Socata is a major sponsor of AirVenture, so that may have been why. That was before my arrival, so I can't say for sure.

I will agree that I am enthusiastic about EAA in general...not just homebuilding, but I am certainly proud to be in the position I am to serve the needs of the community for which I am passionate about. I don't see it as a mountain to climb really. Every single community that is a part of EAA has the same problem, because they all share the same sentiment...that they are being left behind. All of them say that.

That is something that EAA has been dealing with since almost the beginning. Paul has taken more heat over the years than any of us combined, so it's not a new thing. Paul wrote about exactly what we are talking about these days back in February of 1963.

I'm hoping to bring some great homebuilder coverage and stories to the magazine, and working with Mac has been great...he just needs a little more education on the experimental side of things. ;)

[wannafly]

I echo the thoughts of many so far. The magazine is loosing me. I can't relate to the high power beyound my wildest dream stuff. On occassion I have found it interesting but frankly this forum offers me more bang for the buck than the SA magazine. I belonged to an EAA chapter for a short time as all were welcome and as it progressed it seemed to be more about go big or go home. Have money will build was the name of the game. I joined COPA instead and very much like their publication. They are more realistic for my budget kind of guys. But on a side note I still dream of flying into Oshkosh and camp under my Kitfox wing one day, or into Arlington, or the factory flyin or down to the "Kitfox Squadron". The bucket list just keeps growing.:rolleyes:
I also want to thank you for asking and doing what you can to keep us flying our most glorious Kitfoxs':D

[Chad Jensen]

...frankly this forum offers me more bang for the buck than the SA magazine.
This statement right here is one of the exact reasons that SA has been broadening over time. Forums are free (most of them anyway), and the knowledge that is out there for the taking is everywhere, some right, some wrong. Monthly print magazines are a dying breed, and making SA what it is today is an effort to keep it alive and well...so far, so good. It just can't compete with the internet and the 'gotta have it now' way of life most live now.

But on a side note I still dream of flying into Oshkosh and camp under my Kitfox wing one day, or into Arlington, or the factory flyin or down to the "Kitfox Squadron". The bucket list just keeps growing.:rolleyes:
Speaking of bucket list...
http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?1361-What-s-on-your-Oshkosh-bucket-list

I also want to thank you for asking and doing what you can to keep us flying our most glorious Kitfoxs':D
You're more than welcome...:cool:

[Fooey]

One thing I don't like is the size. And one thing I would like to see is a monthly article written by a builder and not a staff writer with a canned idea of what we all would like to hear. A builders tale of his venture from start to flight with photos of his pride and joy. I bet you could get a ton of builders who would love to tell their story for free. I do enjoy the magazine but if it comes the same day as Kit Planes I pick that one up first.

Thanks for asking.
Fooey

New LSA pilot waiting for the right Kitfox to come along.

[Chad Jensen]

Fooey, you hit the nail on the head! Rod and I had a brainstorming session a couple of weeks ago to lay out how the contemporary style, and what you described is the tip of the iceberg on what we laid out. :cool:

We hear about the size of the magazine a lot...most people like it, but it's probably the thing people are most vocal about.

[DesertFox4]

I'd just like to see anything about Kitfox's or even a Kitfox in "what our members are building" section. Been quite a while now since our community had much recognition in S.A. Maybe a mention or two about Kitfox Aircraft LLC's incredible accomplishments since 2006.
Bronze Lindy in 2010 for the Rotec radial powered Super Sport is just one of them. I was there. You couldn't get near the Kitfox all week for people wanting a look at aviation nostalgia personified. We just had two fly from Idaho to the Bahamas and back.

As a member in immaculate standing since 1982 I lived for the arrival of Sport Aviation. Saved every issue as a treasure trove of building tips and collective experiences, many useful should I be lucky enough some day to build my own airplane.
Now if I spend 15 minutes in each issue it's rare. Usually next day it's tear off my mailing address label and into the recycle bin. Past the point of caring about the latest twin engine turbo something or other with panels worth more than the last 3 houses I've owned. I'll never get the chance to sit in one of those much less fly one. Give me simple, fun aviation. Sport Pilot world is were lots of us will be living aviation for the remainder of our flying lives. I do appreciate that part of my dues goes towards EAA's legal department and the fact that they do a decent job of keeping the big bad wolves from Washington D.C. out of our cockpits and hangars.


BTW, I've attended approx. 15 AirVenture's since the late 70's. I do enjoy the big show. I've got to meet some of the worlds greatest aviators up close and personal over the years. I'd list some of them but it'd just come off as name dropping.;)

Anyways, best of luck Chad. Thanks for asking and in some cases letting us vent publicly.

[Chad Jensen]

I'd just like to see anything about Kitfox's or even a Kitfox in "what our members are building" section. Been quite a while now since our community had much recognition in S.A. Maybe a mention or two about Kitfox Aircraft LLC's incredible accomplishments since 2006.
Bronze Lindy in 2010 for the Rotec radial powered Super Sport is just one of them.
I can't officially say to expect something in the near future...but expect something in the near future. ;):cool:


Anyways, best of luck Chad. Thanks for asking and in some cases letting us vent publicly.
I asked for it. :D Seriously though, there has been a void in the EAA/communities relationship for a long time, and I'm here to close that gap so we communicate effectively and bring the relationships back.

[Esser]

This is an old thread but I just want to say that I think the magazine is great and it might be my imagination but I think it has gotten better in 2012. Sure it's not all homebuilding and such but I think it captures the image of what EAA is: A bunch of people who like to fly. I read it front to back and find 95% of the articles interesting. When there is an article about a twin engine pressurized gismo that I will never fly it doesn't make it bad. I will never fly a DC-7 but you have to admit it, it's interesting to read about. When I read the magazine it makes me want to go out and fly. So in my opinion Chad, it's doing the job well.

[av8rps]

This is an old thread but I just want to say that I think the magazine is great and it might be my imagination but I think it has gotten better in 2012. Sure it's not all homebuilding and such but I think it captures the image of what EAA is: A bunch of people who like to fly. I read it front to back and find 95% of the articles interesting. When there is an article about a twin engine pressurized gismo that I will never fly it doesn't make it bad. I will never fly a DC-7 but you have to admit it, it's interesting to read about. When I read the magazine it makes me want to go out and fly. So in my opinion Chad, it's doing the job well.

I know this thread is old, but I'm going to throw in my 2 cents worth;

I know it is tough for EAA to be all things to all people...just look at the large variety of aircraft that show up at AirVenture ever year. There's a bit of everything. Problem is, they need to do it with essentially one magazine...and that's tough.

So knowing that, it is extra important that EAA doesn't allow any particular group, or writer (s), to overpower the content of the magazine with articles and features based on their personal preferences. Broad coverage of the entire field of aircraft has to be the mission. And if EAA could extract demographics on their members preferences, that would be an even better way for them to know they are addressing their members interests.

But, in addition to satisfying the wide interests of the membership, EAA needs to continue what they've done since the beginning; Show ways for people to get involved in aviation for less money. Inexpensive aircraft are all over the place, but rarely do they get much attention anymore. Yet, showing a wannabe aviator how to get into aviation affordably is probably the best thing any of us can do to keep aviation alive. The financial stumbling block in aviation is a huge issue for most every aviation wannabe I've run into. So featuring low cost aircraft alternatives in EVERY Sport Aviation magazine should be an automatic in my opinion. And of course the how-to-do-it-yourself information goes hand in hand with the low cost aviation mantra. So if EAA were to do that every month, I'm pretty sure the "grass roots" gang will be happy.

And to keep the rest of the membership happy, covering the variety of all the other aircraft articles would be great (maybe I could give up my Flying or Plane and Pilot?). And while I personally don't ever see myself owning a DC-7 or a Corsair, I can put up with articles on aircraft like that as long as those are the exception, and not the rule.

And heck, when I get to the back of the magazine and then find myself going back to the articles I initially passed over (like the DC-7...) I almost always learn something ;)

Paul Seehafer
EAA 181597
Lake Amphib, Kitfox Floatplane, Kitfox Speedster project, Just Aircraft Highlander, and an Avid Flyer (or two)

[IVPleasure]

Size matters.

Since the size change I rarely even bother looking inside the magazine and it certaily does not fit on the shelf properly. Of those that say the size is OK I suspect it is more like "tolerate" it. Changing back to a standard size most likely wouldn't bother all those that "like" it now but would certainly please the rest of us. It would be interesting to know the real reason EAA decided to **** off so many of it's members. I suspect it all had to do with money.

The magazine should primarily focus on affordable flying.

Dave
Slow build Kitfox IV-1050 because that is what I can afford.

[av8rps]

Size matters.

Since the size change I rarely even bother looking inside the magazine and it certaily does not fit on the shelf properly. Of those that say the size is OK I suspect it is more like "tolerate" it. Changing back to a standard size most likely wouldn't bother all those that "like" it now but would certainly please the rest of us. It would be interesting to know the real reason EAA decided to **** off so many of it's members. I suspect it all had to do with money.

The magazine should primarily focus on affordable flying.

Dave
Slow build Kitfox IV-1050 because that is what I can afford.

While I generally agree with Dave that the magazine would fit in more places if it were smaller, I personally like the larger size. There is no question it holds more information, and it also feels like a much higher quality periodical with the larger size and the beautiful matte finish printing of the photos. Sure, when I'm done reading mine and I try to put it in the magazine holders that the rest of my Sport Aviations are in, it doesn't fit. So I line them up on my shelf like a book and it works just fine. And I always leave the latest copies out on the coffee table. It's a pretty classy periodical overall, and it generally gets picked up by people that visit.

So while I do think the magazine might be easier to store if smaller, I feel the quality improvement, along with the increased content allowed by the overall bigger size makes me feel like I am getting more for my membership money. And as much as I like my Kitplanes magazine (like many of you), I really feel that my EAA magazine just flat out makes Kitplanes look like a throwaway you buy at the bookstore.

And btw, because I save all of my aviation magazines, I've noticed over the years that many of the other magazines have actually gotten smaller :eek:. So when we say size matters, I'm more concerned with any of them making it smaller, not bigger. I want all the content I can get.

And as we discussed previously, the content is still the most important aspect of Sport Aviation. But I can see where members may be torn over the size. My vote would be to keep focusing on the content and keep the size the same.

And for all those that think online content will replace the magazine eventually, I personally hope to never see that day. Yeah, I read and enjoy many on line magazines and info like many of you. But I still really enjoy getting magazines in the mail that I can read without having to sit at a computer screen. I just find that premium and can't imagine having to give that up in favor of everything on-line. Newspapers believed radios would put them out of business, but it never happened. And radio thought television would put them out of business, but that never happened. And the internet was thought to put all of them out of business, but that hasn't happened either. So I applaud EAA for recognizing the importance of their magazine, and Chad Jensen for having the interest and courage to ask all of us what we think.

But hey, can someone do something about my "General Aviation News"? Yeah, I know it is supposed to be like a newspaper, but that one is absolutely impossible to make fit anywhere ;)

[Chad Jensen]

Glad to see this thread still has life in it. The people that need to read it are reading it. :cool:

[Av8r3400]

Also glad to see you are still watching it, Chad.

[Chad Jensen]

I try to check in here daily. :cool:

[Av8r3400]

Chad - I know you must be a busy guy and we appreciate your checking in with us here every once in a while (though you haven't in a couple of weeks).

I just got my most recent Sport Aviation (SA) and I had to resurrect this thread to comment.

What an absolute disappointment.

Not one feature article about an experimental airplane in the entire magazine. The beautiful cover shot of the Pitts Special got me in and in the first paragraph of the article the author admits the plane only the cherry on top of the article (not a prominent part - an afterthought). Another human interest story. The Staggerwing (Museum) story with little aircraft content, and on and on.

Then to top it all off a $100k electronics makeover of an AZTEC?? Who are you guys publishing to? Because I surely don't get it.

The first "meat and potatoes" mention of airplanes is 100 pages in, with the builder reports. At that it's only little paragraph descriptions.

Do you guys publish a magazine about airplanes anymore? Is there technical content in the war birds or classics publication that may be of interest to people who are building and flying EXPERIMENTAL aircraft?

Speaking as an officer in a large and very active Chapter, I can tell you I am not the only person who is of this opinion. I hear it from my membership at virtually every meeting and function we hold.

If you want to publish an aviation human-interest, sociology journal, more power to you. I wish you well. Just let it be known to the people there that you have tens of thousands (if not more) members who would love to have the old SA back - technical content, feature articles about airplanes or building techniques or kits or engines or ...

[rcnut]

I compleatly agree, I use to look forward to getting Sport Aviation and reading it from cover to cover. but now I wish I had a bird cage so I could put it to good use and line the cage with it. Or maybe all of the members that are coming to Air Venture could bring their copy alone so they would have some fire starter for their camp site. Were is the Experimental articles in the Experimental Aircraft Assc. magazine???????? To bad the new "regime" did not have ROOTS in the EAA . I miss the construction, how to, articles.

[rwaltman]

One more vote to the "its not about us anymore" list.

Please allow me to remind you that the 'E' in EAA stands for 'Experimental', not 'Exclusive', 'Expensive' or 'Estranged'

Roberto.


The most detestable word in the English Language is 'exclusive' - Carl Sandburg.

[bdemunck]

Put my vote in for "disappointment" of the new Sport Aviation Mag. What's with the over-sized paper anyway. I liked the old size magazine. And content, man EAA is missing the boat there. If Tony B. were alive today, he couldn't write fast enough to get some good building tips published. I'm sorry EAA, you need to go back to the drawing board on this!

[Geowitz]

Yup. Me too... And last month, personalizing the NTSB. That brings a thought to mind... "we're from the government and we're here to help"...right. Just another sign of the times.

[HighWing]

Couldn't agree with the sentiments more.

Regarding taking the copies to Oshkosh to light fires, why not take them and stack them on the ground in front of the EAA headquarters booth. My plan was to be there, but circumstances have changed that. It would have been fun to make such a statement.
Lowell

[Torch]

I had a huge deep belly laugh when I found out mac maclellen was onboard. What a joke. Lane Wallace=boring, same thing with Lauren Paine. I'm going to keep my EAA membership to support the EAA in general but I will be renewing "no magazine" when my membership is due. I just found out you can do that. Some of the recent articles just floor me, rich kid "commuting" in a P51 to "pay his dues" working on the race plane that fell in his lap. Anything maclellen writes puts me to sleep. I've had enough of Lauren Paine's military stories. Van's aircraft is sure getting plenty of exposure although I know they are advertising customer. I bet Van himself is even tired of all the Van worship. I remember when EAA was about airplanes, not anymore. I will be going to oshkosh this year to help the bottom line and boost the economy but there is less and less for me and the EAA.

[Chad Jensen]

Thanks for the continued feedback guys. I was kind of surprised to see a lack of feedback (there was some) on the Kitfox radial cover though.

I keep the folks here at EAA informed as to what is being talked about on the forums with regard to the magazine. On the forums, it's more on the 'we don't care for this' side, and in person, chapter visits, people at the museum, etc, it's 'we LOVE the magazine'...and yes, these are homebuilders too.

It's an odd mix if you ask me, and after being here for 10 months now, the mix is the same. We continue to survey members on the magazine, and from what I see, the magazine is taking direction from member feedback from the surveys. I know you probably won't believe me, and I can't share the survey (it's not mine to share), but it surprises me too. One note about the size though, because it comes up all the time...the majority overwhelmingly love the size of it. I could go either way, but I do like that it stands out in my magazine stack. ;)

I'm slowly leaking the relaunch of Experimenter in digital magazine format (no more newsletter!) where there will be interactive videos that will download with the issue so an internet connection isn't necessary once you have it downloaded. I'm really excited about it...and it will be launched very soon!

I would love to see a bunch of Kitfox articles from owners and builders, so if you have something to write about, send it to me!

cjensen@eaa.org

920-426-6806

:cool:

[Esser]

My only comment about the kitfox article was that it was a year and a half old news.

[HighWing]

Sorry Chad, don't believe it for a minute. I participated in one of your surveys lately and was very disappointed in the format. Must answer questions that didn't have any of the multiple choice selections that remotely addressed my experience or preferences. Like most surveys, it was designed by experts who can manipulate the results simply by selecting certain questions then supplying the multiple choice answers that best suited the agenda. Then, sadly, not even the usual blank space at the end for a written response giving freely composed opinions. Maybe one question you can answer - how many people in the decision making councils in EAA or the editorial staffs of Sport Aviation have actually gotten their hands dirty in the construction of an amateur built airplane? Does your "love to see a bunch of Kitfox articles from owners and builders, so if you have something to write about, send it to me!" comment suggest that there are no staff writers interested enough or qualified to write about such things. I just logged on to Kitplanes website and looked over the contents pages. All build or maintenance related articles with some aerodynamic theory. Not all experimental airplane owners are builders, but the vast majority maintain their own airplanes. Not much in the mag there for me. Then this from the EAA website - "The new EAA Sport Aviation is chock full of all the things that set EAAers apart. You'll find "how do I?" features with special emphasis on innovation, affordability, fun, and the spirit of community and camaraderie." I refer you to Av8or3400's comment that resurrected this thread - Show me the beef!
Lowell
EAA 448383 1/04/1994

[Chad Jensen]

Sorry Chad, don't believe it for a minute. I participated in one of your surveys lately and was very disappointed in the format. Must answer questions that didn't have any of the multiple choice selections that remotely addressed my experience or preferences. Like most surveys, it was designed by experts who can manipulate the results simply by selecting certain questions then supplying the multiple choice answers that best suited the agenda. Then, sadly, not even the usual blank space at the end for a written response giving freely composed opinions.
The survey's are undergoing a major overhaul so we can better capture member inputs, but it's part of a larger redesign of our digital offerings, including the website...which is clearly dysfunctional.


Maybe one question you can answer - how many people in the decision making councils in EAA or the editorial staffs of Sport Aviation have actually gotten their hands dirty in the construction of an amateur built airplane?

3 of 4 but if you go in to editorial staff or contributors, it goes up from there.


Does your "love to see a bunch of Kitfox articles from owners and builders, so if you have something to write about, send it to me!" comment suggest that there are no staff writers interested enough or qualified to write about such things.
Absolutely not. We have several people qualified, we just want more people participating in the content. That's one thing that has been severely lacking over the last few years...member submitted stories and articles (we see very few...). I want the new Experimenter to be chock full of interesting member building stories, tips, and how-to's.


I just logged on to Kitplanes website and looked over the contents pages. All build or maintenance related articles with some aerodynamic theory.
You have to remember something when comparing SA to Kitplanes (and I LOVE Kitplanes...). Kitplanes has one mission. To cover amateur-built airplanes. That's it, that's all they have to do to be successful. Sport Aviation is just that...the sport of aviation...aerobatics, vintage, warbirds, ultralights, rotorcraft. All areas that Sport Aviation has included for a long, long time. Go back and look at the covers in the archives. You won't see a homebuilt on every cover. You'll see jets, turboprops, warbirds, vintage airplanes...even girls!! My point is, EAA has always been a place for everyone (ask Paul!). Perhaps the recent content swing was a little too far, and we are working to correct it back the other way, but there is a balance to find again, as there always has been.

One big reason I'm bringing Experimenter back, though, is to get all-encompassing EAB magazine back in to the fold at EAA. Sport Aviation is the flagship for our membership, and the membership has a multitude of interests.

I completely understand and get what you're saying Lowell...Sport Aviation is different as a whole now. The EAB content is still there (28 pages by my count in the July issue), but it's a bigger overall magazine now too.

I need to go home and pound out some ribs over lunch!:cool:

[Av8r3400]

Chad bringing back Experimenter is an excellent idea. However maybe 1 in 10 "experimenters" are on line or not savvy enough on the computer for an online magazine to be of use. You are setting yourself up to fail by going cheap and not publishing it as a "hard copy" periodical. You have the Warbird and Classic focused publications, why not the CORE FOCUS of the EAA?


You have to remember something when comparing SA to Kitplanes (and I LOVE Kitplanes...). Kitplanes has one mission. To cover amateur-built airplanes. That's it, that's all they have to do to be successful. Sport Aviation is just that...the sport of aviation...aerobatics, vintage, warbirds, ultralights, rotorcraft. All areas that Sport Aviation has included for a long, long time. Go back and look at the covers in the archives. You won't see a homebuilt on every cover. You'll see jets, turboprops, warbirds, vintage airplanes...even girls!! My point is, EAA has always been a place for everyone (ask Paul!). Perhaps the recent content swing was a little too far, and we are working to correct it back the other way, but there is a balance to find again, as there always has been.


I truly believe that the publishers of SA have lost sight of the forest because the trees are in the way. I would challenge you to do the same exercise and see what was on the covers in the 70's, 80's and 90's. I have those issues and I know. No, not every cover is a Tailwind or Dyke Delta, but there surely are not any articles about rewiring a new panel in an AZTEC or proper IFR techniques in a Bonanza!! Doesn't EAA stand for EXPERIMENTAL Aircraft Association? There is plenty of room for Classics and Warbirds in SA. By that I mean the aircraft, not the touchy-feely human interest stuff from cover to cover now.

I challange you: Bring back the experimenter magazine as an option and you will see so many people drop SA in favor of the focused EAA journal, SA will stop being published as it is or it will be lost.



(I'd be happy to give you a tour of and ride in my Kitfox. I'll be parked down on the Ultralight Farm all week. My cell number is always on my prop tag. I'd love to meet and talk with you. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I value your interest in our discussion here. We all want EAA to continue to succeed, that's why we are offering the ideas. :))

[inzersv]

Chad, I echo Av8r3400 completely. I don't throw away my hard copies. I switched to an online copy of Kitplane for a year and didn't really like it. I like hitting the sack at night with my magazine in hand. I realize that you are dealing with a diverse audience and something like the current magazine may reach more of the people; but we Experimenters want more how to and in a magazine format. I like the two magazines when they were out except there was too much duplication. Two different magazines for two different audiences could work. Just rub down with a little Icy Hot tonight and you should feel fine in the morning. ;) Keep us in the loop. :)

[Chad Jensen]

Same here...one of the reasons I chose to start this topic in this forum (haven't done it elsewhere yet, though there are plenty of discussions out there that I did not start) is because I observed what I feel are level headed people in this group. Now I'm very much looking forward to my Kitfox ride!! ;)

Market research (done by our new marketing team) and chapter presentations that I do have revealed the opposite...especially in keeping young people involved in aviation...that the digital strategy on a new magazine is the way to go. And it's by no means cheap. My cost in going from newsletter to digital magazine is quite substanital...to the tune of about $18k for the first year. Print magazines are another magnitude higher, which I simply can't afford right now. That's not to say it won't happen and we'll have both options available, but this is where we are starting. I saw the first cover a few minutes ago, and I'm really excited about it!

I have all of the magazines back to 1953 here too (and online)...I actually find some of them floating in to my dreams at night because I look at them so much! :D

[DesertFox6]

I'm a bit surprised by the negative undertone of some of our replies to Chad's queries about Sport Aviation here and would like to weigh in with a different perspective. I like the new format from front to back and I've kept every issue since its debut with the January 2010 issue; I have very few prior issues stashed away for such future reference or fun re-reading.

In the April 2012 issue, Jeff Skiles shared his opinion of EAA's flagship publication and how it fits into the larger EAA picture. In his article entitled EAA Roots, our newest (still wet behind the ears?:rolleyes:) commentary contributor discussed various subsets and type clubs within the EAA community and what they bring to the GA table in general. He frankly quoted the sentiments so many people who have decided to split from the EAA's sub-groups and form their own self/type-interest groups because "EAA has lost its way," or similar such sentiments. I don't find this evolution as detracting from the larger EAA vision but rather adding to it. When members of any family go off to start families of their own, we say "the family is growing," not "the family is drifting apart and will be lost." I find EAA is still leading from the front. When the FAA comes to the GA school of thought looking for data or with an axe to grind, they go to the biggest voices on campus, not the students in the subtropical sesquiplane studies department. The AOPA and EAA are, alphabetically, the BMOCs of our campus; experimental, antique, or certified spam. We need to support this hierarchy that WE built.

For those who've never been charged with writing, editing, or producing mass-media copy, you have only to read editor Mary Jones' review of the workup required to produce the new format on page six of the January 2010 issue. I can fully appreciate what went into the new version; in short, the larger paper makes for better photo-spreads and print integration. I can read the majority of the stories with a flip of the page instead of excavating crammed columns entombed among the want-ads in the back and I could go on. I enjoy the diversity of the articles BECAUSE they represent a wide-field-view of what EAA represents. We can slake our thirst for in-depth building tips faster on this site than anywhere else where The Experimenter had filled this need earlier; I agree it would be nice to see its return.

Jeff Skiles summed up the gist of his introspective article on EAA Roots with the simple observation that "EAA isn't about you, or about me. It's about all of us and so much more." I maintain that Sport Aviation's new look is actually strengthening EAA's charter and mission statement, "To Grow Participation in Aviation." It speaks to a larger audience than just we Kitfox fanatics and I'll remind all of the wisdom of strength in numbers.

If you've missed the recent news about the NTSB's latest concerns addressing how we experimenters are flying (and crashing) or how a new organization of hard-nosed, strong-willed souls representing us has just hit the streets with Dick Vangrunsven as its president and our own beloved Kitfox LLC among the charter membership, don't worry. I'm sure we will read all about it in Sport Aviation! ;)

"Over"...(click)

"E.T."

[jrevens]

Very well said, as usual, "E.T."

Overall, I prefered the smaller format, and the way the magazine was when I started receiving it in the early '70s. I loved the people who wrote & put it together. I still appreciate it today, but I'm grateful for Kitplanes. It interests me more. I also realize the extreme importance of continuing to support the EAA, AOPA, and all of my local aviation groups. I'm active in & a past president of my local EAA chapter, as well as serving the national organization in a small way. I also still love Oshkosh, even though it's grown & changed. I've flown there in different aircraft over the years, and this will be the 15th time I've flown my Thorp T-18 there from Denver, and it's one of my favorite things... because of the friends from all over the world who will be there. Someday before too long I'll fly my Kitfox to OSH. Thank you John & Debra, and thank you, EAA!

[quote=DesertFox6;24609]I'm a bit surprised by the negative undertone of some of our replies to Chad's queries about Sport Aviation here and would like to weigh in with a different perspective. I like the new format from front to back and I've kept every issue since its debut with the January 2010 issue; I have very few prior issues stashed away for such future reference or fun re-reading...."

[Av8r3400]

(Deleted by courtious request, untill further confirmation is published)




But most exciting of all is:

Paul H. Poberezny and Ed Fisher are working to reform the SAA - Sport Aviation Association. Returning to the roots of home building and flying fun rather than politics and mega money GA special interests.

You can email Ed directly: raceairdesigns (at) hotmail (dot) com with your name, address, email and phone number to get on their mailing list for future developments. They are not asking for dues or money at this time but will accept donations to help get the organization going.

Link to more information. (http://www.homebuiltairplanes.com/forums/hangar-flying/13042-sport-aviation-association.html)

[jrevens]

Please keep in mind that the SAA is not anti-EAA, but expects to again be a complimentary presence, with a more specific focus than the EAA. It may never return to being able to produce a fine quality magazine like it did until late in 2005 (TO FLY – very reminiscent of early Sport Aviation magazines), but it still feels like it could be something special to me. These are my words and my understanding of the goals of the organization.

[Av8r3400]

Hightower is taillights per AvWeb (http://www.avweb.com/) today. He's claiming it's too much of a hardship to move his family to Oshkosh. Yup.

Maybe they're hearing us finally...

[ken nougaret]

i'm glad to hear former cessna pres., jack pelton, is taking over eaa. i think he got forced out of cessna a couple of years ago due to the recession. i think pelton is more interested in general aviation than hightower.
ken

[DesertFox6]

Hmmm -

Didn't his predecessor, Tom Poberezney, leave kinda "all-of-a-sudden-it's-a-surprise-like" too? The EAA's got more surprise lead-changes than a Kafka novel! Is it something in the water up there in Wisconsin? Any chance of having a couple tanker loads being sent to the US Congress?? :confused:

"Enquiring minds want to know..."

"E.T."
(Could we at least get some free-trial samples out here in Arizona? We need to clean house out here pretty bad! ;) )

[War Eagle]

Hmmm -

Didn't his predecessor, Tom Poberezney, leave kinda "all-of-a-sudden-it's-a-surprise-like" too? The EAA's got more surprise lead-changes than a Kafka novel! Is it something in the water up there in Wisconsin? Any chance of having a couple tanker loads being sent to the US Congress?? :confused:

"Enquiring minds want to know..."

"E.T."
(Could we at least get some free-trial samples out here in Arizona? We need to clean house out here pretty bad! ;) )

I like that idea,

Can I sign up to drive one of the tankers?

[Esser]

I am a little behind on my Sport Aviation. I picked up September's issue and was absolutely amazed they printed Dave Matheny's article. If I was a nonpilot and I read that article it would put a horrible taste in my mouth of the flying community at large. Worse, we always complain about declining young pilots. Young people already think of the flying community as an old mans club. An old man with leather patches and a "call sign" would most certainly have most young people calling him (as a young person would say) a douche.

Instead of acting like an arrogant *sshole when someone comes along, why don't you put away the attitude, arrange a flight for them, and let them take the controls. I'm sure it will have a bigger effect on said person to experience flight instead of implying that acting arrogant will make someone want their license so they can act arrogant too.

I'm sorry Dave Matheny, I have not enjoyed many of your articles but this one puts the nail in the coffin for me. I call for the removal of your column from Sport Aviation. Perhaps they should replace the column with a regular spot on young pilots or new pilots. Or maybe on how to be a diplomat for the flying community.

[DesertFox6]

Hmmmm -

I dunno, Esser, I just re-read that piece by Dave Matheny and came away, again, feeling his tongue was planted firmly in his cheek. His self-deprecating demeanor led me to believe he was poking fun at himself by spouting such semi-official sounding "aviator-ace" verbiage, in character, with his little Quicksilver "fighter/warhorse" as a backdrop: Pretending to be a "Mister C:cool::cool:L type" to offset the perceived snobbery of the biker and the self-smug "knowledgeable air travelers" in his little Walter Mitty tale.

I thought his use of ironic humor pretty much said the same thing you did about "arrogant rectal orifii." He can't stand them either and was making a perfect example of how those types come across to him; a humbly self-aware driver of a little ultralight. ;)

Then again, I may be missing something here...

"E.T."

[Esser]

Perhaps I need to re-read the piece with a different eye.