Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Aerospace / Re: New Russian SAT SR-10 trainer
« Last post by Flying Sorcerer on Today at 01:35:18 am »
Who's the intended customer?
2
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: Aviation magazines English vs. French
« Last post by Schneiderman on Today at 01:28:08 am »
The problem is the obvious one that magazine publishers are aiming to maximise sales and hence have to provide a broad spread of articles to appeal to multiple markets, thats just business. It is therefore inevitable that for some readers many of the articles will be of limited interest. For example just reading your post makes it clear that the overlap between your areas of interest and mine are going to be very small, no magazine could expect to satisfy both of us. So it goes.
Where I do agree with you is regarding the decline in Aeroplane, the presentation is indeed poor, to my taste, but I would not go to the extreme of your description. I would not criticise the ratio of text to images so much as the shallowness of the articles. Some are less informative than Wikipedia.  With the advent of The Aviation Historian it looked at first if they had responded by upping their game, but that was shortlived (from my perspective at least). To me The Aviation Historian serves to fill a void in English language magazines left by the loss of Air Enthusiast and the shift in style of Aeroplane, whether it can continue to do so remains to be seen. Once again it depends on what the readership, which will be mainly UK-based, want and how that impacts sales. 
I have seen little in non-English language magazines to suggest that they are in any way superior.
3
Thank you Bring-it-on, very interesting.
4
The Bar / Re: Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD)
« Last post by Moose on Yesterday at 11:05:29 pm »

Really hoping for a Peacekeeper sized ICBM expecting to be disappointed. Maybe LRSO will be hypersonic?

I really hope I'm wrong but I'm expecting "new" refurbished MMIIIs with "new" "4th generation" Tomahawks.  The same that lost to the AGM-86 30+ years ago.
Refurbishing MM indefinitely was discarded as an option in 2015. Unless someone making decisions today stops the current work and brings the idea back, it's dead. And Tomahawk is not going to be the LRSO in any form, I don't think anyone would even pitch it.
5
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: Aviation magazines English vs. French
« Last post by PaulMM (Overscan) on Yesterday at 09:57:14 pm »
Aeromilitaria is a serious and worthwhile magazine but not exactly one you can pick up in WH Smiths.
6
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Re: Aviation magazines English vs. French
« Last post by CJGibson on Yesterday at 07:57:19 pm »
What do you think of Aeromilitaria?

Chris
7
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: XB-52 competition
« Last post by RyanC on Yesterday at 07:54:56 pm »
A chart describing the three original proposals for the 1945 Hevy Bombardment Aircraft competition of 1945.

Ranking was:

#1 Boeing won with 846 points
#2 Martin with 824 points
#3 Convair with 748 points
8
Bookshelf & Marketplace / Aviation magazines English vs. French
« Last post by Pasoleati on Yesterday at 07:23:55 pm »
Over the last 2 weeks or so I have browsed through a stack of Aeroplane Monthlies (via library; volumes 1985 - 1990, 2001 - 2007). The deline of the magazine clearly began in the 2000s and based on what I have been able to check at newstand this year, the downhill has continued. Not only has the design became repulsive, the contents have become more and more shallow and warbird- and museum-oriented. An example of the shallowness is that whenever they need a pilot report on German aircraft, they repeat Eric Brown for the umpteenth time. Alternatively they interview some f*cking warbird pilot (who hasn't probable even spun the aircraft), whose opinions as to what an aircraft was to fly in historical combat are worthless. I once asked Eric Brown himself as to how did he evaluate the famous and often-quoted SETP fighter evaluation conducted using warbirds. His response was that as an evaluation of these aircraft's true combat flight characteristics it is worthless.

The same seems to apply to all English language commercial aviation magazines. I don't get why. After all, Aeroplane Monthly was excellent up to around 2000, and there was Air Enthisuast, very good almost to the end. There is the newish The Aviation Historian, but even it succumbs to very British-centric and photo-heavy content. In its prime Air Enthusiast's balance between text and illustrations was something like 70 % text, 30 % pics. In The Aviation Historian the balance is reversed. A trend most disgusting.

I do not know how's the scene in Germany, but a quick look at what is available in French makes non-French speaking enthusiast bow his head in disbelief.

To put things into perspective, the Finnish aviation historical journal Suomen ilmailuhistoriallinen lehti has 4 annual issues each with 24 pages in black-and-white only and an annual cost of 29,50 euros has more good quality reading in one issue than the current Aeroplane in a whole year. And with a layout that doesn't make one puke all over.

So the question is WTF is wrong with British mgazine publishers?!
9
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Miles Aerovan variants?
« Last post by cluttonfred on Yesterday at 06:36:33 pm »
You're welcome!  One caveat, as it was nagging at me that I thought that they had tried retractable, external airfoil flaps on something.  Per Wikipedia:

Quote
In 1944 the prototype [M.38] was rebuilt as the M.48 Messenger 3 with fully retractable electrically-operated split trailing-edge flaps and a 155 h.p. Cirrus Major III engine. This model was not further developed as it did not provide any advantage over the other variants.
10
Postwar Aircraft Projects / Re: Miles Aerovan variants?
« Last post by Avimimus on Yesterday at 06:26:01 pm »
Thank you sir!
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10