Model Aviation World To Cease Publication...

[Edgar]

One question (that I note nobody else seems to be asking) is, what happens to you, Spence? Do you get merged, or bounced, or can't you say, at present? Subscribers, and purchasers, can pick and choose, and move over to other publications, but editorships are a bit thin on the ground.

Edgar

[Neil Lambess]

well in New Zealand Ill cancel my sub as i really liked MAW and didnt buy MIS for the simple fact i dont build tanks....and didnt want to buy half a magazine that is completely useless to me.

damn shame as down here MAW was my second favorite mag after Scale Aviation Modeller...... ill miss it

[eng]

As a couple of people have mentioned Spence, firstly I hope you fair well out of this, and secondly I have to admit to prefering MIS in it's old guise, so for me this is great news.

With yourself at the helm, I have to admit that although I have a stronger tendency to aviation modelling, the old MIS ticked all the boxes and I would buy it every month without fail. I was somewhat sceptical as to how "another" aviation mag would sell given there was already SAM, SAMI, MAI and Aviation Modeller, and quite surprised when MIS went down this road. I didn't enjoy MAW or MIS as I already purchased SAMI and MAI most months and the armour only MIS lost it's appeal.

I'll certainly be back to buying MIS every month again.

I'm currently seeing a great change in our workplace, and guess what........it's all stuff thats been done before and they said "it doesn't work, lets change it" and within 6 months we're back to the old ways that work!!

You know how the old saying goes - "You can't please all of the people all of the time,.........."

Good luck with things from here on in, will be looking forward to my first copy of the new MIS.

Rgds,

Eng

[Spence]

Thanks a lot guys - I look forward to taking MIS forward and trying to get the best from it over the coming months. Hopefully I will be able to create a great magazine that you will all enjoy and I look forward to all of your comments (good and bad!) that will help me do just that..!

All the best and thanks once again - Spence

[davidelvy]

As with everyone else, Spence, I wish you the best of luck. It is a shame MAW only had a little over a year to establish itself, but that is the way of things.

I thought the press release was a bit of a "Four legs good, two legs better" statement dressing up what may be a return to the old order as a step forward. However, I always liked MIS in its old form. I am primarily an aicraft modeller, but one or two good aircraft related articles would draw me into the magazine and I would then learn something about vehicles from the other articles.

[Dave T]

will our exisiting MAW subscriptions automatically cease or will we be getting MIS in the post instead?

I've just had a letter hit the doormat with this news, and as i've only just renewed my subcription, i was straight on the blower.

If you are a subscriber, then a Catch-22 situation has arisen as the lady on the phone pointed out.

With a cut off date of 23 October, option 1 is to do nothing and if they haven't heard from you by that date, they assume you'll be happy to continue with the new 50/50 magazine for the remainder of your subs'. Option 2 is to contact them by 23 October to cancel and obtain a refund.

But... the first issue due 11th November (which is gratis for subscribers to trial) appears after the cut off date of 23 October.

In summary, if you subscribe, you need to contact Traplet and let them know either way, especially if you'd like to trial the first issue.

.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Dave T

[Spence]

I've just had a letter hit the dorrmat with this news, and as i've only just renewed my subcription, i was straight on the blower.

If you are a subscriber, then a Catch-22 situation has arisen as the lady on the phone pointed out.

With a cut off date of 23 October, option 1 is to do nothing and if they haven't heard from you by that date, they assume you'll be happy to continue with the new 50/50 magazine for the remainder of your subs'. Option 2 is to contact them by 23 October to cancel and obtain a refund.

The first issue due in November (which is gratis for subscribers to trial) appears after the cut off date of 23 October.

In summary, if you subscribe, you need to contact Traplet and let them know either way, especially if you'd like to trial the first issue.

.

Thanks Dave for explaining all of that so well!

Spence

[Dave T]

Thanks Dave for explaining all of that so well!

Spence

That's how it was explained to me.

I assume it's correct ?

.

[seawings]

Well, the 12 or so issues I have had since it's inception I personally consider to be the finest I have EVER had from a model magazine..! And, Yes, I'm old enough to have had them all, still got a load of them........SAM, Scale Models, SAMI, Airfix etc etc But, MAW set a new 'bar' for me. Apart from Spencer, I do hope that Alan Firbank will be ok as well?

I never did buy MIS simply because it never contained exactly what I wanted to read about, but now I think I shall have to give it a go. I might even buy a tank kit and try some of the weathering!

MAW amongst other things reflected the quality of the two gentlemen charged with looking after it and to them I'm very grateful for all their hard efforts.

When, one day in the future at a Metropolitan University somewhere in the UK, the students enrolling on the course 'How to produce the perfect model monthly' will be handed a neat, bound cover containing the set of 12 copies of MAW and the Lecturer will tell them, "Now, this is how you really do it, 'cos you aint gonna better that".

Well done, Spencer and Alan.

See you in MIS in a months time!

[AnonymousFO98]

I love PR people - the way he's made that press release sound like a marvellous new idea - when it's really 'just let's go back to how it was'!!!

It made me laugh

The spin not so long back was in the opposite direction.

Does this count as a googlie?

Hope things go well for you and the contributors Spence.

Good luck old thing!

[Coors54]

The other thing to remember chaps is that a new magazine launches that month - the new Airfix mag from Key Publishing which will cover all genres of interest - armour, aircraft (mil & civil) and ships. I would bet that a mag with the word Airfix on it will be a good seller given the huge publicity Hornby have put in over the last two years and the competition needs to prepare itself for that.

Just my thoughts.....

Dave

[Matt Roberts]

Part of me is almost glad about this, most of the time when I bought the previous conjoined version of the magazine it was when a good armor article shared space with an aircraft I was interested in. I'll probably be more likely to grab the odd issue I see at Barnes and Noble over here

Just a hint if Spence has any sway with the armor side.....please there have been vehicles built since WW II and some have even seen action since 1945! THough I imagine I will grab the issues with Valentines and Churchills in them. I've never built either and once I get back to work I'll probably grab a couple for the stash.

Being unemployed is another reason that I have not been buying many magazines lately, Brit mags can be upwards of $10 each Stateside (SAMI is the least expensive at $8).

Matt

[pigsty]

I've just had a letter hit the doormat with this news, and as i've only just renewed my subcription, i was straight on the blower.

If you are a subscriber, then a Catch-22 situation has arisen as the lady on the phone pointed out.

With a cut off date of 23 October, option 1 is to do nothing and if they haven't heard from you by that date, they assume you'll be happy to continue with the new 50/50 magazine for the remainder of your subs'. Option 2 is to contact them by 23 October to cancel and obtain a refund.

But... the first issue due 11th November (which is gratis for subscribers to trial) appears after the cut off date of 23 October.

In summary, if you subscribe, you need to contact Traplet and let them know either way, especially if you'd like to trial the first issue.

.

Did they say anything about what happens if you currently subscribe to both MIS and MAW? I assume the enlarged MIS can be continued under the existing sub, and somehow I doubt that the price of the MAW sub will pay only for the extra 16 pages.

[spike7451]

Personally,I'm not suprised & I'm sure the will be a few more folowing suite.In the past year I've bought about 3 modeling mags.I cancelled my order at my newsagent a few months before that.Reason is the price of them,each around £4.50,added to the would be probably 1 or 2,maybe none,of the articles that interest me so they don't make financial sense to me.

In my opinion,they are no longer value for money anymore,being overpriced for their content,especially considering the information available online.

[Dave T]

Pigsty,

If you subscribe to both already, they say they will add the two together. I presume (?) that means if you have 5 months left on one and 10 months left on the other, you won't receive a renewal notice for 15 months ?

No mention of a shelf price or subscription price rise (or reduction), thus....

.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Dave T

[Fifer54]

Bugger!!

My subscription to MAI expires with the next issue, and I was going to move it over to

MAW. I'm not interested enough in Targets armour to take up a mag half-devoted to it.

I did think that MAW was the best of the aviation modelling mags currently available. Publishing

has changed so much in the past few years that it's hard to make comparisons with mags in the past,

but SAM in its heyday (after Guideline took over, but when Alan W Hall was still editor) was brilliant!

[Deon]

works for me! I liked MIS and MAW but couldn't afford them both. Tamiya / Max modeller have wide coverage- but too wide, laves too little of real interest. Air and armour together, with a mix of scales, lots of nice profiles (of both air and armor) will probably find its way onto my coffee table. Good luck Spence

[Paperback writer]

Thank you for those kind words and the support that we have had for MAW over the last year.

I will continue to work with Spencer on the aviation half of the revised Military In Scale. I hope all the friends we have made will continue to support us when we are all back under the one roof again.

All the best

Alan Firbank

[Tony C]

I can only echo everyone's sentiments over the loss of MAW, as I has written before, it was becoming my favourite magazine.

I have now received my letter confirming the MiS and MAW and note that it is intended that there will be "a roughly 50/50 spilt between aviation and armour" and that word 'roughly' bothers me and wonder if the split is likely to learn more to the armour side of things than to aviation?

[seawings]

Having had more time to myself than I can ever remember this past few weeks, these posts struck a chord with me and caused me to look back and through model mags of the past 30 years in my collection. Being of a certain age now, I have had every Airfix Mag from Dec 1969, Scale Models from No.1, SAM from No.1, SAMI from No.1, Military Modelling from way back when, FSM for 10 years +, Tamiya Mag as and when something caught my attention etc etc.

Christ, add the retail prices of that lot up, I've spent a small fortune! This was the 'hay-day' of the modeling mag and it was great being there at the start of it all

But, what do I find today in 2010?

My own, personal opinion is this:

SAM: Compared to issues of the past - no contender. For the pound in my pocket at WH Smiths, again no contender. Great paper, but what is printed on it is probably the worst of the bunch. No detail, no decent length coverage of anything, layout trying to be a website in a magazine, dosn't work for me.

SAMI: Great catalogue, it does try, but paper no better than Exchange & Mart. Biggest failing: too small images and much too small text font size and too feint; can't read it that small without a struggle.

MAW: Got font right, got subjects spot on, got image sizes about right, got depth of detail perfect; for me got it all right, but now gone!

Tamiya Mag: Great mag, good in-depth detail in articles, images right but contains subjects that I just don't want to read about: cars, bikes, robots etc. Also, far to thin for the money, needs to be twice as thick to give me value. The articles by Coughlin, Creighton & others (Chesnau?) set the standard for others to aim at. Easily readable. Learnt a lot.

MIS: Well, I used to get this one as article depth was superb (still is) but as it was split between a/c and armour, I used to read the a/c bit and sort of glance over the armour. If you are not particularly interested in a subject, why waste time reading about it. It received as much attention as last night's curry would grant me in the small room, no more than that. But, still a good mag and the one that I'm now going to have to check out first with the demise, sorry incorporation, of MAW.

None of the above are on my 'hold' list at WH Smiths. Not one. Go back a few years and I would pick up out of my folder SAM, SAMI, FSM every month. Now, I am a 'floater' you know one of those guys giving each mag a thumb through at WH Smiths before I commit money. I don't get any mag now each month regularly, well now that MAW has gone, I don't. And it's not because of the internet either. They simply are not worth the cover price for the content.

The funny thing is there are now other places open to me to obtain these mags; the main town I live near has a big indoor covered market under a car park, permanent structure, open every day of the week. In there, there is a huge area selling magazines, new ones that are 'overs' from the previous months titles. If I hit the place right on a Saturday I can pick-up FSM, Air Modeler (the one with the £6.00 price tag) and either SAMI or SAM for .60p each.! All brand new and un-touched. From time too time I get Tamiya, Flypast, Aeroplane - ther'e all there. Now that's a bargain. Move to another town, mine oor the one next to it and there is a place selling the same thing there as well. Often pick up between 1 & 3 at the first one and at least another one in either of the other two and I havn't spent a fiver yet!

Yes, I know. There are screams of outrage at why I'm not supporting the modeling press etc etc . Simple answer is that for the content and reasons above, most of them are not worth the cover price. Mind you, I have very niche interests now in my time of life, but I still enjoy reading about something that is not nessecarily on my radar and that is where MAW won hands down.

So, where does this leave me? Well, I for one can't wait for the new Airfix Mag. Why, if they have done their homework over the past year or so, trawled the comments on the forums, read and re-read the mags that are out then they should, in my humble opinion, eclispe anything on offer today. They should be able to clean-up, totally each month. After all, the very mag that would have given them a run for their money has just been stopped and the rest are at best average. Again, for me, there is nothing like siting on the sofa with a coffee and biscuit reading this months mag, even in the small room. Sitting reading something on a pc just somehow dosn't give you that 'cozy feel'.

No, I have a good feeling about this; I don't know who is involved with it (who is involved with it....???) I don't know who the Editor is likely to be, I know nothing. What I do know is the very pleasant surprise I got at Telford last year to see MAW and chat with Spencer and Alan. If anything, the likelyhood of Airfix Magazine making an 'historical' comeback is something I really want to be there to see. (How sad is that..!)

I just hope that I don't end up buying it from the market in 2011.

Just imagine it; popping down to WH Smiths and cruising through the store like an exocet heading for the 'hold' folder drawer and opening it to reveal this months Airfix Mag in all it's glory! Paying the nice lady and running home with it to sit on the sofa for hours reading it....!

Makes you feel like a kid all over again..!

[ForestFan]

Sorry to hear that Spence, I will continue to support the revised MIS

ForestFan

[Colin @ Freightdog Models]

Good luck Alan and Spence, I look forward to buying the MIS when it hits the shelves, and will support as best I can.

Colin

[Seahawk]

My own, personal opinion is this:

SAM: Compared to issues of the past - no contender. For the pound in my pocket at WH Smiths, again no contender. Great paper, but what is printed on it is probably the worst of the bunch. No detail, no decent length coverage of anything, layout trying to be a website in a magazine, dosn't work for me.

SAMI: Great catalogue, it does try, but paper no better than Exchange & Mart. Biggest failing: too small images and much too small text font size and too feint; can't read it that small without a struggle.

MAW: Got font right, got subjects spot on, got image sizes about right, got depth of detail perfect; for me got it all right, but now gone!

Tamiya Mag: Great mag, good in-depth detail in articles, images right but contains subjects that I just don't want to read about: cars, bikes, robots etc. Also, far to thin for the money, needs to be twice as thick to give me value. The articles by Coughlin, Creighton & others (Chesnau?) set the standard for others to aim at. Easily readable. Learnt a lot.

MIS: Well, I used to get this one as article depth was superb (still is) but as it was split between a/c and armour, I used to read the a/c bit and sort of glance over the armour. If you are not particularly interested in a subject, why waste time reading about it. It received as much attention as last night's curry would grant me in the small room, no more than that. But, still a good mag and the one that I'm now going to have to check out first with the demise, sorry incorporation, of MAW.

None of the above are on my 'hold' list at WH Smiths. Not one. Go back a few years and I would pick up out of my folder SAM, SAMI, FSM every month. Now, I am a 'floater' you know one of those guys giving each mag a thumb through at WH Smiths before I commit money. I don't get any mag now each month regularly, well now that MAW has gone, I don't. And it's not because of the internet either. They simply are not worth the cover price for the content.

Think I'm in a similar space, though some of my collections go back further and I haven't even seen returns being sold off cheap. Can't believe just how much hard, dense content there was in the older magazines but there were no alternative media and relatively little competition back then. Of the current crop, MAM was the pick - and my last surviving "must buy" - until the departure of Neil Robinson and its subsequent nosedive. Of the rest, I liked the writing style of SAMI but it seems to be having a wobble at the moment. Don't understand or like this "no unfavourable review" policy either: I like to think I'm buying unbiassed informed balanced opinion.

Agree that the demise of MAW leaves an even bigger gap at the top of the market. For me, the big question is whether the new Airfix magazine will emerge unscathed from the pernicious attentions of the design people, whose sole purpose in life seems to be to minimise actual content in favour of blank space, BIG PRINT and silly gimmicky design features. Such people wrecked Scale Models overnight in the 1980s (or was it the 90s by then?), have done the same almost as dramatically with SAM in recent history and my heart sank when I read in the Sep SAMI "we have shaken up the format a little bit to accommodate the demands of the marketing department while at the same time trying to ensure a good rounded overall modelling experience": well, that tells us where the priority lies then!

So condolences to Spence and Alan for a brave attempt launched at an unfortunate time (as the songs says, "it's just that the times was wrong") and fingers crossed (but no breath held) for the new Airfix magazine.

[Spence]

I can only echo everyone's sentiments over the loss of MAW, as I has written before, it was becoming my favourite magazine.

I have now received my letter confirming the MiS and MAW and note that it is intended that there will be "a roughly 50/50 spilt between aviation and armour" and that word 'roughly' bothers me and wonder if the split is likely to learn more to the armour side of things than to aviation?

Hi Tony!

The split is 50/50. We decided that up to the centre pages it would be armour and after the centre pages, aircraft - the regulars being split between the two sections.

I hope that this reassures you!

Spence

[Paul Brickles]

Hi Tony!

The split is 50/50. We decided that up to the centre pages it would be armour and after the centre pages, aircraft - the regulars being split between the two sections.

I hope that this reassures you!

Spence

Why not a double cover version ? means it can be displayed as both?

Paul