BMFA NEWS

[Martin McIntosh]

Oh dear, I seem to have stirred up a bit more than intended. I agree that articles by Manny and others are very informative, but much of the rest would only be of interest to a very small minority which do not represent model flying in this day and age. How many of the public would travel miles to see some free flight or control line models at a display? Is this the image we want to convey? I think not.

I did these things as a child when I could not afford radio gear.

The magazine at one time not too far back appeared to improve considerably but has now reverted to the old format.

The idea of on line only appeals. We did this with our club newsletter (eventually) and saved a small fortune.

[FlyinBrian]

Martin

With little more what you have written here you could have produced an article for the BMFA Mag about your own models/interests or your club. The BMFA represents ALL Aeromodellers not just RC. Agreed some months other disciplines hold sway but only because someone wrote an article and sent it in.

I responded once (a few years ago) to a request for copy and to my astonishment not only was it published but I received a cheque for £40.00.

[Dwain Dibley.]

To get back on track then............

I have to say I just love reading stuff and learning stuff, I like reading about stuff I don't do and stuff I do do.

I especially like the feel of a book/mag in my hands.

You can fall asleep gracefully with a mag in yer mits.....fall asleep at your PC and you smash your face on the keyboard !!

D.D.

[Geoff S]

Dwain, I've done all those things

I thought the magazine that arrived this morning was excellent. I like to see what other branches of the hobby are doing - even free flight which is very hi-tech these days as I discovered a few years ago at the Nats when I chatted to an enthusiast in the marquee. I thought the article on the Croydon club very interesting and was surprised to learn gliding guru Derek Piggot (his book is on my workshop bookshelf) was a member and that he's still going strong.

Like Pete I've edited a few magazine in the past - sailing club and motorcycle club. My biggest job was editing the Tandem Club Journal which had a national (even international) circulation of around 2000 copies and it took a lot of work both writing and getting contributions. It was in the days before the internet was widely available and I had the use of an Amstrad PC with all the software on floppy disc drives (5.25"!!). Most of the copy was on paper and my wife typed it in for me with the paper over the screen so she didn't have to turn her head - considering she couldn't see what she was typing there were very few errors.

It's hard work. As for an on-line version well I prefer the paper. I subscribed to the digital RCME last year and found it difficult to read, mainly because my vdu is in landscape and the mag is in portrait. I read an awful lot on-line so it's not as if I'm not familiar with it.

Geoff

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Geoff Sleath on 17/03/2017 21:13:37:

My biggest job was editing the Tandem Club Journal which had a national (even international) circulation of around 2000 copies and it took a lot of work both writing and getting contributions.

I assume you've taken a back seat now?

[Mike Etheridge 1]

Anyone know what happened to page 7 -see index?

[Geoff S]

Posted by Martin Harris on 17/03/2017 21:34:17:

Posted by Geoff Sleath on 17/03/2017 21:13:37:

My biggest job was editing the Tandem Club Journal which had a national (even international) circulation of around 2000 copies and it took a lot of work both writing and getting contributions.

I assume you've taken a back seat now?

No, that's my wife's seat

Geoff

[Martin Dilly 1]

Interesting to read the diverse comments on BMFA News. Like most of its readers, I have a particular main interest in the sport; having done a bit of radio flying in the days of bang-bang rudder and making your own gear I moved on to competition free-flight which I found far more challenging and interesting. I realise that for most people it’s too difficult to build a model that’s strong enough, light enough and efficient enough to do well in an event where the stopwatch is the sole judge, rather than someone’s opinion. I’ve certainly found it hard enough…

However, how on earth do you make an interesting article about people who are NOT competing in one of the disciplines and presumably therefore not trying to fly as well as possible? To a contest flyer like me it seems a bit pointless, the more so when you realise a lot of BMFA members now don’t actually build or design the aircraft they fly. Maybe that’s why editors run articles on the competition part of our sport; it does seem odd, though, that some people posting appear to resent the fact that there’s any other part of model flying than theirs.

By the way, one reason that model flying benefits by recognition as a sport is that it has a strong competition element. Towing an F1A free-flight glider while trying to feel a thermal to launch into, flying an F3A RC aerobatic schedule accurately or trying to score cuts on a streamer while flying a 100 mph F2D control-line combat model have all the elements of the better-known sports; it was by focussing on those aspects that recognition for all of us was obtained in the 1980s, so let’s not grudge a bit of coverage in BMFA News of contests and those who do well in them, even if some of them do get photographed receiving the silverware at the annual dinner.

[Peter Jenkins]

Posted by Percy Verance on 17/03/2017 15:08:57:

It wasn't so much you causing the irritation Jon, but those whom could perhaps be spending their time on other/more productive ways to aid the whole model flying cause........

Several ways and methods of potentially going about this have been mooted/discussed on here a number of times, but have seemingly fallen on deaf ears, of which there appear to be plenty at the BMFA.

Edited By Percy Verance on 17/03/2017 15:14:26

Percy, you told us that you were leaving the BMFA at the end of last year. So why are you continuing to run the BMFA down as you are no longer a member? Is it habit?

[fly boy3]

Just wondered if in the past we have had a poll on this forum as what type of flying we are interested in. Such as scale, gliding, sport, free flight etc. Would be interesting to see again if we have. Where would I have to look for poll results of the past ? Cheers 

Edited By fly boy3 on 18/03/2017 15:14:55

[ken anderson.]

.................Posted by kevin b on 17/03/2017 19:18:01:

Posted by ken anderson. on 17/03/2017 16:46:33:

yes --- kids are great-i used to be one....

ken Anderson...ne...1..... old kids dept.

What do you mean "used to be".

......................................................................................................................................

you're right of course Kevin..... its just that the toys are more expensive nower day's.

ken Anderson...grown up/not kid's dept.

[ken anderson.]

the latest edition of the BMFA news came in the post yesterday, plenty of reading and also in the package was the latest version of the bible(BMFA handbook) again nicely put together....... I tend to use it for reference rather than read it/all ...... well done to all concerned...

ken Anderson...ne...1 well done dept.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Yep, looks good to me as well, plenty to say on a variety of topics.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Paul Marsh]

The Nationals coverage was a bit weak. It's supposed to the their flagship event, and it only got a brief mention, some small photos and only 4 pages.

In comparison, the other less "interesting" events got twice as many pages and a larger text column.

[Dave Bran]

Posted by john stones 1 on 26/09/2017 13:11:15:

Yep, looks good to me as well, plenty to say on a variety of topics.

Though try finding Multicopters.

Also The Handbook Page 72 Section 24.9 is so lacking and downright wrong its laughable. Appears to have been written five years ago by a raw novice with no idea of FPV safety..

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Dave Bran on 26/09/2017 18:42:25:

Posted by john stones 1 on 26/09/2017 13:11:15:

Yep, looks good to me as well, plenty to say on a variety of topics.

Though try finding Multicopters.

Also The Handbook Page 72 Section 24.9 is so lacking and downright wrong its laughable. Appears to have been written five years ago by a raw novice with no idea of FPV safety..

Don't recall commenting on the handbook, i also said it looks good to me, you don't need quote me to offer an opinion, opinions are like BMFA news there's a variety.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Dave Bran on 26/09/2017 18:42:25:

Also The Handbook Page 72 Section 24.9 is so lacking and downright wrong its laughable. Appears to have been written five years ago by a raw novice with no idea of FPV safety..

Could you point us to an authoritive source with easy to understand information - I've tried looking on the OFCOM site and I'm even more confused than usual! I have no idea of the validity of the handbook's information - will you be contacting the BMFA to advise them?

[eflightray]

Would I be right in thinking that most if not all those that moan would never consider actually writing an article, or offering to do some editing ?

I'm fairly happy to be in the BMFA,

I'm also happy to be a country member flying on my own, and don't have to put up with those club members who know everything, moan at everything, but never offer to help run/organise things.

Ray.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by eflightray on 26/09/2017 20:01:59:

Would I be right in thinking that most if not all those that moan would never consider actually writing an article, or offering to do some editing ?

I'm fairly happy to be in the BMFA,

I'm also happy to be a country member flying on my own, and don't have to put up with those club members who know everything, moan at everything, but never offer to help run/organise things.

Ray.

Pretty much agree, best not read handbook page 23 (g) though

For the avoidance of doubt (the tongue is in the cheek)

[Cuban8]

Very sadly and considering the great amount of work that's clearly gone into the October issue, I fear that most ordinary club flyers paying their BMFA because they have to, will find the contents very dull and irrelevant. New handbook is very well presented though.

Edited By Cuban8 on 26/09/2017 21:54:38

[ChrisB]

I think most, like me skim the magazine and read the bits they consider relevant to them. I suspect only a few read every word cover to cover.

I like the handbook, it was certainly time for a refresh. Again, many will only read the bits they consider relevant. But at least people can't say they weren't given the opportunity.

[The Wright Stuff]

So, Bernoulli or Newton?

Discuss!

[Cuban8]

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 27/09/2017 09:12:19:

So, Bernoulli or Newton?

Discuss!

See my post above!

[fly-navy]

It's just the same as folk moaning about having to sit and watch that load of carp on tv, leave the room or turn it off. If folk do not like the magazine recycle the blooming thing, I put mine in the docs surgery waiting room when I have finished and do notice it getting read. Not everything in it is for me, helios, drone etc.I do appreciate though a lot of people doing their very best to make a meaningful contribution to our hobby and think they deserve our appreciation, I'm very long in the tooth and do not totally agree with all this electric writing, personally I enjoy reading my mag down the garden with a cup of coffee, each to their own, we all have opinions bit like Marmite isn't it!

Through reading the issues I am thinking of FF build, it looks interesting and a challenge and something I would never have contemplated in the past. DD says he's only in his fifties but looks eighty