Model Aviation World

[Mentalguru]

I definitely feel better!

I used to like the combo approach although it does reduce the chance of relevant articles, now I can choose a tank mag or an air mag.

as it was i bought both, but pocket money might make me choose one or t'other in the future. I thought the MAW issue was good, quality is high both on builds and content, but would like to see more reviews, more 1/72, more pics, more detail , more profiles, more plans!

Quality- hmmm- a LOT of low quality stuff out there. Probably because the amount of truly high quality modelling available for publication isn't actually that high. But MIS and Tamiya both somehow had it in spades...

Just Air Modeller for me now. 3 quid a month spend and total class front to back.

[gcn]

I had high hopes for this and the front cover whetted the appetite further.

Upon opening a copy in WH Smiths I have to say the cover is the best bit. The piccies inside all seemed blurred rahter than sharp, I guess its a style but it didn't appeal and the content wasn't wildly different from what all the others are serving up. I have to say based on this and SAM's latest issue i'd go with SAM although those editorials don't show any sign of not grating.

Maybe I was expecting Air and my expectations were high, but i'll be back to check it again next month.

Edited November 22, 2009 by gcn

[Test Graham]

20 pages on how to put a model together? Is that really necessary? Doesn't it come with an instruction sheet? Certainly a magazine I shall avoid, if that's your main idea of an attraction.

What I look for in a magazine is information I have not got anywhere else. As far as news, this is obviously difficult if it is restricted to the "here it is" style. However, if a reviewer/builder can say something about the model, whether how accurate it is (the one key bit of information) or how well it goes together, what the options are in parts/variants/colour schemes; then it can be valuable. When a new kit comes out, show what can be done with it other than what comes in the box.

Pictures of someone's made-up model are generally valueless. He's a better modeller than me: OK, but I knew that already. And if he isn't, so what? It doesn't matter. Such pictures are padding and generally provide nothing useful. It is probably a scale I don't model in anyway.

I look for information that doesn't date: a good historical article that goes beyond the depth of an average Wikipedia piece, aimed at a particular model or models, will attract my attention. I can go back to that next week, next month, next decade. A critique of a model that describes its shortcomings, with advice on how to modify the kit or use specific aftermarket parts to achieve the builder's aim, that is useful. Where possible, a comparison of different companies' approach to the same subject - that can be really interesting and informative.

I used to get a wide range of modelling magazines, but have shrunken down to MAM nowadays. The rest are full of pretty pictures but empty words: too ephemeral.

[Spence]

Hey everyone - thanks once again for taking the time to post some thoughts on MAW. They really are of value to us and we'll take into account everything that you've written!

Now it's back to that Mossie!

Spence

[keefr22]

Hi Spence,

I generally like the new mag, though also mourn the loss of the mixture of aircraft & armour articles in MIS - I can't afford to buy both every month.

One plea I would ask if possible - could you do something about the miniscule photo numbers - I can see the print in the articles well enough, but need to put my reading specs on to see which photo is which! Just a number on each in font size twice as big would do, I don't see that photo's need to be labelled as such, do they??!!

Keef

Edited November 22, 2009 by keefr22

[nubrawarriors]

Like one of the previous posters I go to Smiths to browse through the aircraft modelling mags and only buy if it interest me. I think this new mag makes 5 monthly and 1 quarterly on aircraft related subject matter.

I browsed it at Telford and in my local Smiths. Sorry but nothing for me!! Hoping for better in the future.

And all those Airfix adverts!!!! Oh dear.

Regards Phil

Edited November 22, 2009 by nubrawarriors

[Van]

20 pages on how to put a model together? Is that really necessary? Doesn't it come with an instruction sheet? Certainly a magazine I shall avoid, if that's your main idea of an attraction.

What I look for in a magazine is information I have not got anywhere else. As far as news, this is obviously difficult if it is restricted to the "here it is" style. However, if a reviewer/builder can say something about the model, whether how accurate it is (the one key bit of information) or how well it goes together, what the options are in parts/variants/colour schemes; then it can be valuable. When a new kit comes out, show what can be done with it other than what comes in the box.

Pictures of someone's made-up model are generally valueless. He's a better modeller than me: OK, but I knew that already. And if he isn't, so what? It doesn't matter. Such pictures are padding and generally provide nothing useful. It is probably a scale I don't model in anyway.

I look for information that doesn't date: a good historical article that goes beyond the depth of an average Wikipedia piece, aimed at a particular model or models, will attract my attention. I can go back to that next week, next month, next decade. A critique of a model that describes its shortcomings, with advice on how to modify the kit or use specific aftermarket parts to achieve the builder's aim, that is useful. Where possible, a comparison of different companies' approach to the same subject - that can be really interesting and informative.

I used to get a wide range of modelling magazines, but have shrunken down to MAM nowadays. The rest are full of pretty pictures but empty words: too ephemeral.

Pretty strong opinions...but perhaps not everyone shares your view of what is of value or valueless. Ascribing value is subjective by nature. If pictures of completed models are "valueless" then I guess you think that all the pictures posted by members of this site for others to appreciate and enjoy are in that category? I think it comes down to the fact that some like looking at pictures of assembled models, and others don't.

Furthermore, many people might find a 20 page guide on how to assemble a model useful-instructions are not always that clear. It is somewhat analogous to picking up a car workshop manual and starting a maintenance task versus having the manual and an illustrated guide to accomplishing the task-the kind you might find in any number of classic car or bike mags. The task is often made easier having the guide to hand. For example Aeroclub's guide to assembling vac form models is a very helpful and far better than the instructions accompanying most vac form kits I have seen.

I guess you don't like the magazine, but please don't dress up your views as an objective assessment.

Van

[Seahawk]

Hi Spence,

I generally like the new mag, though also mourn the loss of the mixture of aircraft & armour articles in MIS - I can't afford to buy both every month.

One plea I would ask if possible - could you do something about the miniscule photo numbers - I can see the print in the articles well enough, but need to put my reading specs on to see which photo is which! Just a number on each in font size twice as big would do, I don't see that photo's need to be labelled as such, do they??!!

Keef

Well said, Keef. Had exactly the same experience myself.

Nick

[Nick Millman]

What sells it for me is the respect shown to older kits, both in terms of featuring them kitography style and building them. Also, a run through the magazine suggests that the editing is very good indeed. One of the most useful features in older style magazines were the feature round-ups of the available kits to build a particular aircraft type, their individual pros and cons and how they could be improved. This type of feature is especially useful nowadays with so much diversity in available kits. I was reminded of this by Graham Boak's mini round-up of Hurri kits elsewhere.

By way of contrast in a recent issue of another well-known magazine there is a brief photo feature on dry brushing cannon. This shows the technique very clearly but makes absolutely no mention of which paints are used - not even the generic colours! You can just about guess from the appearance of the colours in the pics and the partially visible paint bottles and jars - but come on - you shouldn't have to! OK, the base colour is acrylic matt black but is the drybrushing enamel iron, steel or something else? It's supposed to be a modelling magazine not a puzzle book. This sort of information is essential and the glaring ommission should have been picked up in editing.

[stringbag]

Pretty strong opinions...but perhaps not everyone shares your view of what is of value or valueless. Ascribing value is subjective by nature. If pictures of completed models are "valueless" then I guess you think that all the pictures posted by members of this site for others to appreciate and enjoy are in that category? I think it comes down to the fact that some like looking at pictures of assembled models, and others don't.

Furthermore, many people might find a 20 page guide on how to assemble a model useful-instructions are not always that clear. It is somewhat analogous to picking up a car workshop manual and starting a maintenance task versus having the manual and an illustrated guide to accomplishing the task-the kind you might find in any number of classic car or bike mags. The task is often made easier having the guide to hand. For example Aeroclub's guide to assembling vac form models is a very helpful and far better than the instructions accompanying most vac form kits I have seen.

I guess you don't like the magazine, but please don't dress up your views as an objective assessment.

Van

My sentiment exactly Van.

Chris.

[Test Graham]

Pretty strong opinions...but perhaps not everyone shares your view of what is of value or valueless.

If pictures of completed models are "valueless" then I guess you think that all the pictures posted by members of this site for others to appreciate and enjoy are in that category?

I guess you don't like the magazine, but please don't dress up your views as an objective assessment.

Van

Oh dear, strong opinions - is that bad? Do you prefer weak opinions or no opinions? There is no "perhaps" about it. I'm well aware that not everyone agrees with me. Why should they? I do however suggest that my opinions, as a long term model magazine buyer, may be just as relevant those of as any other individual's.

You have exactly understood my opinion of the posted pictures. I don't bother with them. You are free to.

I haven't seen the magazine to like or dislike, though the initial comments did put me off, for reasons explained. I described what I was prepared to spend my money on, and what I wasn't. I don't believe they were dressed up in any way.

[Van]

Oh dear, strong opinions - is that bad? Do you prefer weak opinions or no opinions? There is no "perhaps" about it. I'm well aware that not everyone agrees with me. Why should they? I do however suggest that my opinions, as a long term model magazine buyer, may be just as relevant those of as any other individual's.

You have exactly understood my opinion of the posted pictures. I don't bother with them. You are free to.

I haven't seen the magazine to like or dislike, though the initial comments did put me off, for reasons explained. I described what I was prepared to spend my money on, and what I wasn't. I don't believe they were dressed up in any way.

I like strong opinions, but not when they claim to be anything other than what they are. You said:

"Pictures of someone's made-up model are generally valueless. He's a better modeller than me... Such pictures are padding and generally provide nothing useful"

Here, you present your opinion as fact. As I said before, pictures of models are not of value to you, but they are of value to many others. There is no dispute as to the value of giving opinion. It is a bit like accepting the opinion expressed by some, that "all modellers are geeks and anal retentives and who never got past playing with toys"-as "fact" . When we know that that is not true...

Van

[Spence]

Oh dear, strong opinions - is that bad? Do you prefer weak opinions or no opinions? There is no "perhaps" about it. I'm well aware that not everyone agrees with me. Why should they? I do however suggest that my opinions, as a long term model magazine buyer, may be just as relevant those of as any other individual's.

You have exactly understood my opinion of the posted pictures. I don't bother with them. You are free to.

I haven't seen the magazine to like or dislike, though the initial comments did put me off, for reasons explained. I described what I was prepared to spend my money on, and what I wasn't. I don't believe they were dressed up in any way.

Hi Graeme. It should be explained that my estimation of twenty pages covers the building and painting of the model, as well as some artwork and lists of materials and references used during the build and thus will be published over two months. It isn't really a 'follow the instructions and glue A to B' narrative, but rather the story of how the model was assembled and painted and the techniques that I used to get the best from the parts supplied by Airfix. Hopefully, modellers who read it and obviously check out the pictures will be able to use some of those ideas themselves to improve what they can do with such an involved kit. That said, I have to agree that if you're not interested in learning any new techniques, you'll probably not find the article of that much use beyond revealling many of the hidden aspects of the kit. I hope that this explains my reasoning behind the production of my article...

Well said, Keef. Had exactly the same experience myself.

Nick

Hey Fella - please be patient on this. I've spoken to the design team and they will look into dealing with the size of the numbers so that they are easier to read...

I hope that this helps!

Spence

Edited December 14, 2009 by Spence

[Fea]

Ayup All...

Just had a quick Browse through in Smiths to see what was what and all I saw was the 'New' SAM MK II. not very Interesting really. you can see collaboration in every page. In subject matter And layout.

Personally, I think it's a Swizz charging the same price for 'Half' of what MIS was before, which wasn't bad because I liked MIS for the 'How to' Build Articles, even though I don't build Armour, and its quite good Aircraft Builds, even if they're done to what I call 'Magazine Formula'. Just like the Mossie Build.

BTW, I DID buy Fine Scale Modeller, as usual. Great Mag.

Edited December 14, 2009 by Fea

[keefr22]

Hey Fella - please be patient on this. I've spoken to the design team and they will look into dealing with the size of the numbers so that they are easier to read...

I hope that this helps!

Spence

Certainly does for me Spence! Helps the old tired eyes too.....!!!

Keef

[keefr22]

BTW, I DID buy Fine Scale Modeller, as usual. Great Mag.

There you go, horses for courses - I haven't bought FSM for at least 10 years - about the time I realised that I'd read just about exactly the same articles in it, over & over again! And what's more the quality of modelling wasn't particularly good either. Same went for the other Kalmbach title Scale Auto Modeller - same articles, just slightly re-written, over & over again.

So, you can please some of the people, some of the ..... etc.etc !

Keef

[Spence]

Ayup All...

Just had a quick Browse through in Smiths to see what was what and all I saw was the 'New' SAM MK II. not very Interesting really. you can see collaboration in every page. In subject matter And layout.

Personally, I think it's a Swizz charging the same price for 'Half' of what MIS was before, which wasn't bad because I liked MIS for the 'How to' Build Articles, even though I don't build Armour, and its quite good Aircraft Builds, even if they're done to what I call 'Magazine Formula'. Just like the Mossie Build.

BTW, I DID buy Fine Scale Modeller, as usual. Great Mag.

Thanks a lot for your comments! And I'm glad that you like FSM - it really is a great mag eh..?!

Spence

[Fea]

Thanks a lot for your comments! And I'm glad that you like FSM - it really is a great mag eh..?!

Spence

Ayup Spence...

And that's why I keep buying it. And all the Specials too.

Keef may say that the same articles are just re-hashed in FSM, but TBH, in that case, it's the same for MOST of the Mags. Only the models change. Except in the case of SAMI which is a Listings Mag with the odd build in, and MAM with its History Content. but in FSM, they keep coming up with Articles about different techniques and finishes I've NEVER seen, so i either missed a lot of stuff in my modelling Hiatus of 27 years, or I didn't know a lot to begin with AS a kid, which was probably the case.

But FSM (and Ted Taylor), are mainly responsible for getting me started Airbrushing, and also Decalling PROPERLY which is no bad thing, as I really enjoy the 'Stickers' part of our hobby. And it's good to have a mini-guide which i can physically refer to as a reminder as I actually WORK.

The only other Decent, 'Recent' Magazine for me in terms of Layout and Content Is actually Model Aircraft International. which you all try to copy now. And I DID like MIS, until it was halved in size for double the money. I'll bet it was trebles all round on the afternoon THAT one was thought up, EH? !

The bottom Line though, whether I 'like' Your Mag or not, is that i Used to buy ALL the Mags every month. Now i only buy 3. 'Yours' Isn't one. That's bad for you if more people start to think like me and decide the content's too little for the same money, however 'Well' written, and whoever your contributors are, and when their £5 Telford special offer runs out...

Edited December 14, 2009 by Fea

[Spence]

Ayup Spence...

And that's why I keep buying it. And all the Specials too.

Keef may say that the same articles are just re-hashed in FSM, but TBH, in that case, it's the same for MOST of the Mags. Only the models change. Except in the case of SAMI which is a Listings Mag with the odd build in, and MAM with its History Content. but in FSM, they keep coming up with Articles about different techniques and finishes I've NEVER seen, so i either missed a lot of stuff in my modelling Hiatus of 27 years, or I didn't know a lot to begin with AS a kid, which was probably the case.

But FSM (and Ted Taylor), are mainly responsible for getting me started Airbrushing, and also Decalling PROPERLY which is no bad thing, as I really enjoy the 'Stickers' part of our hobby. And it's good to have a mini-guide which i can physically refer to as a reminder as I actually WORK.

The only other Decent, 'Recent' Magazine for me in terms of Layout and Content Is actually Model Aircraft International. which you all try to copy now. And I DID like MIS, until it was halved in size for double the money. I'll bet it was trebles all round on the afternoon THAT one was thought up, EH? !

The bottom Line though, whether I 'like' Your Mag or not, is that i Used to buy ALL the Mags every month. Now i only buy 3. 'Yours' Isn't one. That's bad for you if more people start to think like me and decide the content's too little for the same money, however 'Well' written, and whoever your contributors are, and when their £5 Telford special offer runs out...

Again, thanks a lot, it's always good to recieve feedback on what we do!

Spence

[pacificmustang]

have just subscribed for 12 months to give it a go, Did the same for MIA when it was first released, and kept renewing, although gave the business to Spence this year instead!! Bit miffed though that Traplett here in Australia chose to start my subscription from Feb. when I paid in November. Thought I would be starting from Issue 1 Was looking forward to the Brisfit article and the Jindavik article. Have not seen it at any papershops here yet

Bruce

[Spence]

have just subscribed for 12 months to give it a go, Did the same for MIA when it was first released, and kept renewing, although gave the business to Spence this year instead!! Bit miffed though that Traplett here in Australia chose to start my subscription from Feb. when I paid in November. Thought I would be starting from Issue 1 Was looking forward to the Brisfit article and the Jindavik article. Have not seen it at any papershops here yet

Bruce

PM sent...

Spence

[Phil]

Having just had a look at the website, it's a little frustrating not being able to find an article list for the previous issues.

Which Bristol Fighter kit is the cover article about?

[gcn]

Having just had a look at the website, it's a little frustrating not being able to find an article list for the previous issues.

Which Bristol Fighter kit is the cover article about?

IIRC its the Wingnut Wings F.2b

[richellis]

TBH i have forun issue 2 better than issue 1. Not sure why but there was nothing wrong with issue 1!

It is going in the right direction and as I dont buy model mags, and Im going to subscribe to this one says it all.

[Blue Monday]

Are Eason's in Ireland going to carry this magazine? They have MIS in stock but not MAW. I wouldn't mind seeing the Storch article.

BM.