I've decided to let my Flying subscription lapse, but will keep my Plane & Pilot subscription, for whatever that's worth. The latter is certainly a physically flimsy magazine compared to the heft and quality of Flying, but the content is a lot more relatable to me. Fewer articles about twin turboprops flying to islands, and more articles about pancake breakfasts, light GA aircraft, and the kind of flying most of us do recreationally, I'd guess. I also get AOPA Pilot and EAA's Airventure..sorry, Sport Aviation. I like them both, although I wish the latter would not spend 9 months talking about what they are going to do, are doing, and did do at Air Venture.
I think SA is locked in a trap of EAA's own making. Once upon a time, SA was the resource for learning how to build and restore airplanes yourself (not by writing a big check to someone). Every month, they took a couple of Oshkosh award winners and wrote an in-depth story about the build/restoration. There was also a lot of technical content. Today, that information is available in 20 places today, so it is redundant in SA.
avbrief.org
Except for the hundred pages of ads.
Heh, it's like those HGTV shows my wife loves to watch, where the wife is an artisanal potpourri maker and the husband is a stay-at-home dad. Their budget is $1.3 million.
I'll check it out. Thanks!
They already include an aircraft for sale rag in the package that delivers the magazine. I promptly throw that into the trash. The only part of Flying that is readable is he columns from the original Flying columnist.
I can't stand that fake stuff. And the channel wants money from the cable company to broadcast that pile of manure, on top of the ad revenue!
Man, you should write for AvBrief.
True. But Avweb has been watered down over the years. Dr whoever who had the mustang accident at Oshkosh put a dent in their editorials, then when Bertorelli left, the remaining snark was gone. I miss that.
www.flyingmag.com
