Pilot magazine - On Finals

[Remmington]

I know its been well aired over the last few months but the owner & editorial staff @ "Pilot" do not seem to have taken any notice of readers comments regarding the new format.
The February issue is the Pitts - do we really want Jim "zoom" Campbell hot from the USA or any of the other reprint features lifted from French etc. magazines.....
Its goodbye to my £3.25

[bluskis]

Pilot arrives late here, I have just finished the January issue, and thought it was a huge improvement over the previous few issues.

Now I am not looking forward to the February issue with such great anticipation

[High Wing Drifter]

I enjoy Pilot. Flyer's articles seems too trivial. Today's Pilot is also an excellent mag but the articles seem to be aimed at the more inexperienced pilot (like myself - still training). The aircraft reviewed in Pilot mostly seem to be more interesting than the typical fixed u/c bubble canopy, low-wing 120kt variety.

[BRL]

Got to say Pilot is not too bad at all. Indeed it went downhill for a while but its still a great read and appeals to everyone from the spotters to the pros and them in-between.
The interview with our good friend Nick Lappos is good too, pprune even gets a mention.!!!
Check out the beaver picture in the January issue where its pointing straight down. :)

[Prof Denzil Dexter]

The February edition is a big improvement on previous issues since James Gilbert departed as Boss, but I'm still not going to renew my subscription. Some good articles on the Turbulent, Old Buckenham, and the T67M.

If only Doug Bianchi, Neil Williams and Manx Kelly could return from the grave and do a 'Pilot special'!!!!!!

[t'aint natural]

Got my February copy this morning, took about ten minutes to get through.
It used to sit by the bog for a week.

[Evo]

Agree with BRL - it's nothing like it was, but it is getting better again. I just renewed my sub, after saying that I wouldn't... :rolleyes:


Check out the beaver picture in the January issue


Too many jokes, BRL... ;) :p

[bcfc]

Shouldn't that be Pilot - On Final?

[skydriller]

My January Pilot arrived 2 days ago....you guys have your Feb edition?? :eek: I know Im in France but its not the moon, why is it taking so long to get here? A Chrismas rush:rolleyes:

Must say that it was worth waiting for though, much better this last couple of months (Dec/Jan) than in the previous few. Dont know whether to look foreward to Feb edition now though....

Regards, SD

BTW - BRL, It has taken great restraint not to mention any Beaver jokes:D

[Aerohack]

Whatever may or may not be wrong with the way 'Pilot' is being run these days — and that's one oft-opened can of worms into which I have no desire to dive again — there can be no denying that standards of accuracy have fallen markedly. I understand that the latest issue has a lead news story headlined 'Rockwell in trouble', referring to Commander Aircraft seeking protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. bankruptcy code. Rockwell hasn't been in the General Aviation aircraft manufacturing business since 1981!

If the present writers/editors of 'Pilot Notes' didn't know that, may I suggest they either invest in some copies of 'Jane's All the World's Aircraft' for reference during the fact checking process, or — an easier and cheaper option — spend some time browsing back issues of 'Pilot' from the days when it was written and edited by people who knew their stuff and above all cared. I must leave it to others to decide whether I fell into the first category, but I'm happy to boast that I was always firmly entrenched in the latter.

[Fast Erect]

Another edition with a fair smattering of innacuracies and typos.
I'm quite sure Mr. Branson wouldn't have ordered the A340 if he knew it had an RTOM of 36.8 tonnes.:p

[Monocock]

Before I begin, can I say to BCFC........I was waiting for that comment from someone. If you hadn't I would have!!!

Pilot seems to have been forgiven very quickly for what seemed to have got our backs up last year. I must admit I read my new issue with surprise and felt it was scraping its way back to the Flyer realms.

But let me ask you one question.

Assume you are a standard PPL(A) and want to read about your hobby, just as perhaps a scuba diver would want to read about theirs........

Flick through and tell me how many of those pages are applicable/suitable/of interest to YOU. Approximately 60% I would say. Pilot stretches itself to the point of inelasticity to meet the demands of every pilot from Hanglider to Mig pilot.


Turn to Todays Pilot and Flyer. The topics, articles, letters etc. etc. are aimed at the "average" GA person. And they are aimed bloody well too....... Is Pilot trying to please all men? I fear so.

My point is this: Pilot is not sure whether to err on the pro pilot format or the "sport" pilot format so it attempts both (with about 12 pages of antiques in the middle). Flyer knows what the readers want and delivers it.

Co-op and Waitrose??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!


I rest my case

[High Wing Drifter]

Pilot is not sure whether to err on the pro pilot format or the "sport" pilot format so it attempts both
But that is what makes it a good read. Flyer and Today's Pilot articles seem to be extracts (not literally) of my Trevor Thom manuals with nicer pictures. Pilot seems represent aviation culture, not as well as in the past and hopefully better in the future, but better generally.

[Final 3 Greens]

It's interesting what's in a name.

Pilot, Flyer and Today's Pilot all seem to be (at least to some extent) lifestyle magazines about being a pilot, e.g. lot's of reviews of aeroplanes wiht loads of pictures.

I read Flying from the US, which is IMHO much more focused on aviating as the name implies.

I'm not knocking the three UK titles at all and the prior posts show that they are very popular.

It's just that I'd rather read a page of Dick Collins or Tom Block because they share not only their knowledge but an obvious deep love of flying - the same emotion that I pick up in the prose of Richard Bach's earlier books.

[Philip Whiteman]

Final 3 Greens: I love the idea of a 'passion for flying' test, which you might extend to magazine publishers, editors and contributors alike.

So, to keep to the original subject of this thread: Pilot, two years ago - publisher/editor a past aerobatic fiend and respected book writer of over thirty years standing, now flying company-owned aircraft; Pilot, as we know it now - publisher either a non-aviator or (depending on which story you beleive) a chap just learning to fly, and the editor a man with no aeroplane to his name (according to his own editorial).

Cue he who has no direct involvement popping up in instant defence...

This is all such fun (but I will stop, if people tell me I am boring them).

[javelin]

Got my mag - read it in one sh#t

Got my renewal letter - put it on the fire

Had an evening of warmth from the result !

[Prof Denzil Dexter]

Same can be said for the yachting mags.

Once great titles such as Practical Boat owner have turned to $hite........New editor, new ideas, loss of readers..........

[niknak]

Having read the Feb issue in the newsagent today, I would say that either the editorial team have had new ideas, or they have had a wake up call from the comments previously aired last year. It's definately improved, but there's still "that something" missing which would make it the well informed and broadly interesting magazine it once was.

[Hairyplane]

So Nik Nak - you are one of those immensely irritating people that have no shame in standing in front of the magazine displays spending - in my experience - a considerable time dog-earing the next bona-fide customers copy.

The audacity in complaining about something that you have no intention of buying - and have thus read at the publishers and bona-fide readers expense - is staggering.

Pilot - I suggest you 'bag' every issue.

This thread generally - and there are some notable exceptions - is, I suspect, being used as a forum by those with a hidden agenda.

Can I suggest that anybody slagging of Pilot -or any other magazine - declares an interest in doing so if that is the case?

All 3 make a great contribution. Aren't we lucky to have such a choice?

Do what I do and flick through a feature that doesn't appeal. We do it every day with newspapers?!

However, at least buy the ruddy thing before you feel qualified to comment.

As far as Dave Calderwood is concerned - why has his non ownership of an aircraft any bearing on his ability to do his job? He is a current, cautious pilot who flies as often as a man with a demanding job and a large family can.

He is as passionate about it as any pilot.


HP

[skua]

The Feb issue is a real curate's egg: Moroccan trip by Christina Belton is interesting, in typical "old" Pilot style, but then "Channel Hopper" by Eddie Vann just seems like a pointless waste of trees...

[Aerohack]

One of the reasons Pilot still has articles that bear the look of the 'old' magazine is that they're still using up material commissioned, written and edited by the editorial team that got dumped — viz 'recent' articles from Bob Grimstead and Pat Malone, who both decamped last summer. And yes, Hairyplane, happy to declare an interest here — I was deputy editor and worked on Pilot for 30 enjoyable years under James Gilbert's editorship, ownership and astute guidance. Of course those who lost their livelihoods last year feel aggrieved (at least I chose to walk rather than be kicked out), but the fact is that many people with no hidden agenda or axe to grind have used these Forums to point up the very obvious decline in standards at Pilot. Content is a subjective matter, and it may be that the present team is steering the magazine in the direction which its market researchers believe to be the correct heading (and may well be so despite the opinions of many PPRuNers), but the accuracy of reporting, fact-checking and proof-reading is not subjective. It's either right or wrong, and too many silly Bloomers in a magazine — any magazine — erode the entire package's credibility. As Prof Denzil said, Pilot is by no means unique in suffering thus. I can think of — but no longer buy — several titles in the fields of motoring, photography and aeromodelling that have followed the same route.

[Philip Whiteman]

Thank you, Hairyplane. I am happy to reveal my hidden agenda [rips off rubber Philip Whiteman mask to reveal... Philip Whiteman]:

All I want to do is make General Aviation so fine a magazine that people can cheerfully stump up for AOPA membership and forgo the usual news-stand monthlies. Thanks to Dave Calderwood and his publishers, I have been able to count on a wonderful wave of support from some of the best of 'Pilot's past contributors.

Otherwise, if People are paranoid enough to imagine that I am somehow orchestrating an anti campaign, well fine: the only contributor to this thread so far known to me is my great friend 'Aerohack'.

[Stampe]

Well guys have to say the last two issues of Pilot have been very good! .A lot depends on your own ares of interest but Pilot has always managed to provide a balanced spread.The other mags have been very good as well aren,t we lucky in the choice we have, lets not moan about it the freemarket is working.We may be looking with rose tinted specs at Pilots pastT.he whole arena of aviation publishing has improved dramatically.Especially good that the AOPA and PFA house magazines are excellent as well.There must be a lot of competition out there for what I would guess are much reduced advertising budgets in these difficult times possibly the reason for the turf wars!!.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

We did this subject to death a few months ago. My take on it has not changed, so for those who didn't see the last thread I'll repeat it here.

'Pilot' used to be owned and published by James Gilbert, a TAP (Total Aviation Person) who chose his editorial team and his contributers (of which I was a very occasional one) and fashioned the mag according to his own lights. He had no-one except his readership telling him what to do.

'Pilot is now owned by a large publishing company (by definition, not a TAP) and edited by one of that company's employees. I would be very surprised if the current editor has the total freedom to fashion the mag according to his own lights.

So the chances are that 'Pilot' will never again be the magazine it was, no matter how professional the editorial team. Perhaps the days of the indepdant owner/publisher have gone for good. If so, that is our loss.

But I still think it is marginally ahead of the rest, but slowly losing to 'Flyer' (especially now they have John Farley on board).

SSD

[Prof Denzil Dexter]

Hairyplane,

I am happy to tell everyone that I have no hidden agenda, just a healthy regard for the state of aviation journalism in the UK, which is why i am so concerned that Pilot, since being sold/taken over/re-managed, seems to be on a slippery slide.

As we speak though, I am happy to report that reading the February edition has taken me a good two days, instead of the 10 minutes in the loo of previous editions. AND, I have a subscription, so can't be accused of thumbing through in the local shop for local people.....But not for long, as it runs out in March.

Anyone seen the PFA magazine this month? I picked it up and thought I was reading 'Sport Aviation' (the EAA magazine), there were so many US articles inside!!


Aerohack,

maybe you could pen an article on how and why the Pilot magazine we all know and love went tits up and all the good writers were kicked out/sacked?????? What's the story there?

[Oscar Duece]

Not connected in any way. So IMHO

As a GA pilot and aviaiton lover. Pilot was the top dog. Plenty of interesting and varied articles. But has slipped back, as the likes of Todays Pilot have improved a great deal. Never really liked the format of Flyer. But yes it is good to see three good publications for our community.

Some good things about the last two issues of pilots / what I like at least. The airfield articles are very good. Giving an insite into who, how when and why they are what we see today. Also the aircraft reviews do seem varied which is what we want. (Beaver,Turbi, Alloutte) Even if we will never own one.

Whats not so good. Well the simple mistakes or lack of depth to some of the smaller articles / foot notes. If I didn't know any better I'd think they had just been reading some of the crap on here instead of either knowing the subject or researching it.

There was the first footnote about the old shorts belfast a couple of months ago, stating Lionair cargo had bought it etc. We all know what sh*t that was. Again we had a mention about it this month, but without much depth. Who will operate it, any comments about Caa issues etc. Just a couple of more line would have made it really. As for the 'Rockwell in trouble' headline. I think they may have to print a rather large retraction on that one.
It's just a bit poor.

Anyone want to know a good little secret. If like me your a PFA member. We now have a rather excellant bi-monthly magazine called 'Popular Flying'. Which has really come on in leaps bounds over last year. Where once it was just a club newsletter I now find it take a day or two to read properly. Some good aircraft,field and trip articles. I even heard they are hoping to make it monthly. So for just £45 pa member ship (you also save on the rally entrance). You get a good read and are supporting fun flying.
Visit www.pfa.org.uk to find out more and subscribe....

[A and C]

I dont think that Pilot is getting worse it is the rest of the pack getting better Flyer being the most improved.

Ten years ago an airtest in flyer slagged an aircrafts landing charicteristics , those of us who flew the type spotted that the aircraft was loaded out of the front of the C of G limit !.

This was the sort of error by the other mags made Pilot stand out from the crowd , but no more Flyer have got the act together and now produce a well writen mag without the silly errors.

[Rob_L]

I have to agree with skua on the content of the current pilot.
Chris Beltons article and photos are wonderfull especially as we sit deep in a wet and soggy winter. An article such as this which inspires people to get out of circuit has to be worth every penny.

Mind you I have a sneaking suspicion that she uses a Learjet and just poses on the 150. After all who can believe that all this is achievable in a 30 year old spamcan.!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Taildragger]

Philip.... Not quite true in the strictest sense... you have met me - once from memory - but as I am only an 'umble Pilot subscriber, and got myself bollocked last time I posted on this thread, I think I will keep my head down this time. Dammit...NO...I WILL have my say.... I did talk to the Editor over at Flyer to have a chat, purely as a lover of Aviation magazines, and here's the thing, he was kind enough to take a long time out of his busy day to talk to someone he had never met before but who was interested enough to give his views on what he wanted in an aviation mag. In other words, Customer Service. Oh....by the way (again), I have no connection with Pilot, and no connection with Flyer....just Joe Aeropublic.

[Philip Whiteman]

Taildragger: I ought to say hello again! Please drop me a line and I will rake through the memory - otherwise much over-stocked with useless facts about aeroplanes, old cars and cameras - to try and connect name and face. (The nice thing about e-contact is that no one sees me sitting here, mouth just open, eyes unfocussed, trying to work out just who and where.)

Just to give the one other flying monthly editor the credit he's due, I should add that Dave Unwin (Today's Pilot) is a very likeable dude (to use one of his favourite expressions. With all those zillions of gliding hours, and his own K6E, amongst other shares, I would always count him as one of us.

When I was editing... er, wassitcalled, I thought the title of Dave's magazine sucked. These days, I think that is very funny too.

[formationfoto]

Aerohack and Philip

Having been lured into jumping to the defence......

Just proving that people connected with PILOT are still listening. Thank you for the comments on accuracy which will, of course, be noted and dealt with appropriately.

Must respond to the assertion that no-one at PILOT has much of an interest in aviation though. Say something often enough and it will start to be regarded as fact but this is simply not true. Most of those involved have an enthusiasm and passion for the activity. The Editor is an active PPL and fully understands the issues facing a typical PPL with a shortage of time and money. The Deputy Editor is a skilled aerobatic pilot with a good feel for 'grass roots' flying. The publisher is a regular flyer in small aircraft and is aiming to get a PPL (he even camped for two days under canvas at the PFA rally). The contributors are all enthusiastic about their flying and this shows in much of the magazine content. Two members of the senior executive team at the company which owns the title (Archant) are active GA pilots (one flies most weekends, has shares in a number of aircraft, is an active flying club member, and is highly interested in seeing the magazine improve).

Personally I am in the 'we are lucky to have a number of excellent GA magazines in this country' camp and I include those magazines which come as part of an association membership package.

It is right that we should pick up on inaccuracies and that we should keep our magazines on their toes but this can be achieved through positive support and encouragement. Being just a boring large company grey suited manager I have learnt that coaching and carefully constructed feedback can deliver positive results.

Oh - and none of the above should be read as complacency, a desire not to listen, etc. etc.

For the purposes of open identification (as requested elsewhere in this thread) the poster is Ian Davies, a Director of Archant Specialist - the publisher of PILOT.

[Taildragger]

Ian.... This reader is going the other way. My long time PFABuddies did NOT camp under the wing this year.
20 years of that plus advancing years put a stop to that so it was B&B for the first time for us and it was luvverly.
The big Red, White and Blue Taildragger had to make do on it's own this year with nobody peeing over the tail in the middle of the night. (Stops corrosion.....or is it the other way around.??)
Beginning to ring a bell phillip.??
I have to agree a bit with the poster who said that the other mags are getting better. certainly when I scan the pages of Flyer, I get a feeling of what Pilot was in the past.
having said that, my sub issue of Pilot is still getting to me after the newstand. :rolleyes:

[Aerohack]

Ian/formationfoto: Wasn't trying to lure you, and I don't doubt the present 'Pilot' team's commitment to aviation. But you do have a serious problem with accuracy — and thus credibility — which has nothing to do with commitment, piloting ability or aircraft ownership. It has to do with the lack of the broad range and depth of knowledge and experience of both aviation and aviation journalism possessed by James Gilbert and the editorial team he assembled. As an experienced media man yourself you will know that anything that appears in print is likely to be taken as gospel by those who know no better. And why should they? — it's reasonable for them to assume that those who write for magazines as editors either know what they're on about or have taken the trouble to check. In trying to maintain 'Pilot's' previous high standards and opposing the 'dumbing-down' which they seemed to favour, we now-departed 'old guard' tried to explain this to your management colleagues on numerous occasions. Who was right? Who was wrong? Only time will tell. Good to know you're on the case, though — 'Pilot' deserves better.

[niknak]

Hairyplane
I realise that it must be irritating for publishers when people read their magazines at the newsagents and don't buy them, but I subscribed to Pilot for 10 years until late last year, and watched it go downhill for at least 12 months of that time span.
The only way I will know if it has/is improving is to read a copy first. As I said, it is improving, but has a long way to go before I would consider buying a single copy, let alone subscribe again.

I pretty sure I'm not the only person who feels this way.