Letting my Flying Subscription Expire

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 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?

Yes, the subject matter has changed. It has shifted to high-priced
aircraft and avionics. Although, there aren't many aircraft today that
aren't high priced, relatively speaking.
Also, if you go back through the years, there is a five year cycle or
recyle of magazine topics. Every five years, the topcs are updated to
reflect the change in technology.

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
. ..
[...] 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?

Only you can say. However, if your experience is similar to mine, it's a
combination: you have read the same thing over and over again often enough
that it's no longer interesting; but also, I feel that Flying in particular
has been going downhill. I can't stand either Mac or Collins -- Mac just
seems like too much of an idiot sometimes, and Collins is just too full of
himself. When Collins came back, the magazine practically turned into "The
Richard Collins Magazine".

Back in the day, there were several authors in the magazine that I enjoyed
reading: Gordon Baxter (duh), Len Morgan, and Peter Garrison being the top
three. "I Learned About Flying From That" kept my interest occasionally as
well. But Baxter and Morgan are both gone and while their replacements are
competent enough, they don't draw me hopelessly in the way those two did
(especially Bax). The stories in "ILAFFT" have gotten old (I guess there's
only a limited number of ways most people wind up crashing or nearly
crashing an airplane). And Garrison on his own isn't enough to keep me
resubscribing, especially when I not only have lost interest in most of the
rest of the magazine, but the principals in the magazine are people who
irritate 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.

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.

Have you tried Air & Space Magazine? It's not targeted at general aviation
per se, but rather runs a broad gamut of aviation topics. IMHO, it is to
Flying Magazine what Scientific American is to Discover Magazine. I also
still keep my subscription to Flight Training Magazine, even though it's now
published by AOPA and has a lot of duplicated content. I am especially
interested in the topics targeted at flight instructors, or which address
the learning process generally; as far as I know, there's not another
aviation magazine out there that provides that slant.

But as far as general aviation, and general piloting topics go, I think the
two you're getting now are about the best around. Hopefully they still
interest you, more than Flying Magazine at least.

Pete

"Flying" has always catered to the high-priced sector.
Maybe some years ago you still thought the day would come when you would be
trading-up to a G-IV! ;-)

GF


In article ,
says...


"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...
[...] 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?

"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...

"Flying" has always catered to the high-priced sector.
Maybe some years ago you still thought the day would come when you would
be
trading-up to a G-IV! ;-)

As if there aren't enough rags devoted to corporate aviation (which is
hardly GA anymore...more like the airlines), but then those advertisers pay
the big bucks and thei CEO's need their butts kissed. Even more, Flying's
writers are getting more and more repetitious. I found their technology
articles are more oriented toward gadgetry that making for sense/use of
technology.

I killed my supscription a couple years ago.

I get AOPA Pilot and a couple newsletters. Suites me just fine.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

The EAA has some good magazines, check them out www.eaa.org


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...
|
| "Greg Farris" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Flying" has always catered to the high-priced sector.
| Maybe some years ago you still thought the day would
come when you would
| be
| trading-up to a G-IV! ;-)
|
| As if there aren't enough rags devoted to corporate
aviation (which is
| hardly GA anymore...more like the airlines), but then
those advertisers pay
| the big bucks and thei CEO's need their butts kissed. Even
more, Flying's
| writers are getting more and more repetitious. I found
their technology
| articles are more oriented toward gadgetry that making for
sense/use of
| technology.
|
| I killed my supscription a couple years ago.
|
| I get AOPA Pilot and a couple newsletters. Suites me just
fine.
| --
| Matt
| ---------------------
| Matthew W. Barrow
| Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
| Montrose, CO
|
|

"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

Dan,

there is still a concerted politico/religious attack on public
school science education underway in the U. S.


Well, in that regard, you're right, the topic deserves attention.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)