What should Airfan expect from the specialised press.

Don’t get me wrong here, i’m not on a personnal vendetta despite having made a reputation for myself eslwhere as a hard nosed fanatic….

Well, i was grown in it, i flew Piper Cubs and Rallyes 30 years ago, worked on AdA weapons for Mirage IIIE at B-A 102 Dijon shortly after, logged 11 static jumps from AdA Cessna and Broussdards, logged even more hours as co-pi or dual in gliders. But i never, ever stopt learning.

My main flight Instructor was volunteering his lessons by pure passion, he was an AdA three star General, Commander of the third Air Region (Transport) but also and more importantly, the Chief Test pilot of Bretigny CEV.

I was very fortunate to be lessoned from guy such as him, they gave me the bug and thought me some and then some more, often far above the requiered level fo my private licence or totally of subject like doppler effects or flutter on fast jets:

Here are the two main lessons i get from them:

The turkey are those who stop learning, and assumption is going to kill you pronto if not sooner.

If you don’t know, learn it’s satisfying and saves life.

Youn derstood that this was for the fighter pilots not for the 15 years old trainee i was at the time.

So now i wonder why should any specialised writer assumes that what he writes in not either:
a) understood,
b) already known,
c) known to be innacurate,
d) known to be incomplete in its content.

If the position of relative power enjoyed by some privileged members of the press allows them not to care about it, i wonder if there is no and what to do to change the facts.

So my questions to you guys are:

Should the readers respond to any appearent abuses?

Should we participate actively and get on the phone to the editors?

Should the editors take our suggestions/complaint into account?

Do we really have the “droit de reponse”?

I hope we’ll have a nice and constructive topic here. A vos marques.