Demise of another decent title…. how many more?

I never understood why they changed AI to Classic; it made no sense. AI was an excellent publication, that covered all facets of aviation, and was a useful all rounder. Classic was fundamentally no different to Flypast or Aeroplane.

Bruce

Yes, that (IMHO) is when it all went wrong for “AI”.

AI (as was) provided a good all round coverage, a good balance of news “snippets” and in-depth articles on civilian and military subjects, and decent photographic content, and I happily subscribed to both AI and Flypast as I saw them as ‘complimentary’ rather than competitive. But, once AI became “Classic Aircraft”, it was all too similar to Flypast or Aeroplane Monthly.

As soon as I saw “Classic Aircraft” had been acquired by Key, I guessed it was only a matter of time…. 🙁

I continued my long-established subscription (since 1974 IIRC!) for a year or so after the name/content change under the former owners, but then decided to opt out and stick with FP (only) as the two were so similar in content.

I have since struggled to find a good “all round” aviation mag that covers all areas – e.g. historic and current scene, civvie and military, in anything like the same depth and quality as did AI :(.

Currently I read “Aviation News”, which is the best all-rounder I have found, lots of nice photos etc, reasonable news coverage, its longer articles are okay, but it seems to lack the feel of editorial “authority” and “depth” of the old AI magazine :(. Still, it may improve….?

While I can understand that many enthusiasts have quite specific areas of interest within the wider aviation sphere (e.g. only interested in Civil Airliners, Military Ops, Historic, Current etc) to the near exclusion of all else, I am equally certain there are a number of enthusiasts, like me, who are interested in pretty much anything that flies (has flown in the past, will fly in the future, civilian or military, large or small etc etc)? I feel publishers are either ignoring a large “general aviation enthusiast” market, or are cynically hoping they will persuade us to buy two (or more) of their monthlies in order to cover the whole breadth of our interest?

In times when the limited pounds in my pocket are stretched ever further, I cannot really justify (or find) £10 or more to spend on magazines every month, so I start to buy occasional copies when they contain articles of interest to me. If others follow the same approach, this then probably contributes to the drop in annual subscriptions, or regular monthly sales per title, and could see a few more titles merge/vanish over time.

My fear is that we are starting to see youngsters from the “internet generation” reach levels where they believe that no-one wants hard copy anymore, and that everyone lives with their face continually in a PC monitor or “hand-held device” screen, a world where no-one has an attention span of more than a few minutes or more than a couple of dozen words, and where no-one ever sits down and enjoys a “reading experience” anymore.

Maybe I’m showing my age, but the idea of spending an hour “lost” in an armchair with a good-quality book or magazine, with a decent pint (or cup of tea/coffee) for refreshment, is far more attractive than browsing the bloomin interweb via yet another digital screen, where half the content is at best ill-informed, and at worst completely inaccurate! (“Old man”‘s Rant over :D)

(P.S. must echo what others have said, FP currently seems to be less attractive than in the past, with to my mind, most articles focussing on aircraft “types”, usually military, and few in-depth articles on old airlines or old airliners, or on old aircraft manufacturers etc….)

Paul F

Hi Dmac,

As you zoom-in on Google earth, the image sometimes changes from a satellite photo taken from directly overhead to an image taken from an oblique angle and possibly taken from a much lower altitude.

I noticed it the other day when looking at/zooming-in on a location in Spain, and I think the same thing happens on the image of Luxembourg airport.

So, if the oblique photo was taken from the north, any aircraft directly over the runway might appear to be displaced to the south of the runway, due to the perspective and angle of the photograph.

As you say, the shadow suggests the aircraft is actually flying quite low – about to touch down I would guess.

So, I believe the aircraft is actually directly above the runway about to touch down rather than off to the left (south) as it first appears, or that it has maybe started a missed approach/go-around, and that the oblique angle of the photo makes it look like it is not over the runway.

The curious optical “rainbow” is probably the sunlight being reflected back off the propellor, and/or due to raindrops/moisture in the air?

Paul F

Having been involved in a similar situation where my F in L ended up being put into a care home after M in L died suddenly, I can see both sides of the argument.

My wife and her siblings had to make some hard choices, and although we all agreed that the care of F in L took precedence over any thought of “preserving our inheritances”, we did wonder how other families with smaller savings would cope.

F in L had worked all his life, paid his full NI all the way, but by hard work and scrimping and saving he had built up a reasonable savings pot, and was fortunate enough to have seen his one property rise in value during his lifetime. We could therefore sell the former family home to generate the cash needed to fund his care. As a result he had “funds” that meant he did not qualify for care funding from the state.

We therefore funded his care out of his “estate” as his condition required 24/7 nursing care, whilst we knew others who had made little or no effort to save during their working lives, and had built up no savings pot, would see their care funded out of our taxes (and out of any inheritance taxes due on M in L and F in L’s estates).

Its a tough decision for HMG – free lifelong care for all who may need it means anyone in work will have to pay more income tax. No access to state funded care for anyone means the less well off may be left high and dry.

Somewhere between the two lies the optimum?

I would advise everyone to plan ahead, including working out how/who will pick up any care costs you may incur if you need care at any stage. Costs are not insignificant!

I am sure many of us might hope to leave a “little something” to our family when we pop our clogs, whilst others might take the view that they are happy for some /much/all of their accrued “wealth” be used to fund their own care rather than expect the state to pick up the tab.

Whatever happens, forward planning (by all legal means such as “tax efficient” Wills, tax efficient gifts to loved ones etc), and open and honest discussion with the family as to what you and they want to happen if care has to be funded means that there is more chance you and yours will be better able to cope, and to preserve inheritances as far as is legally possible (if that is your wish).

As for special provision for ex-servicemen and women…. thats a toughie, as some have “volunteered” knowing the risk, others were conscripted…

As ever, there is no easy “one size fits all” answer 🙁

I totally agree with everything you have said Tony – the problem is “trial by Jury” seems to be fast being replaced by “trial by media”, and we’ve all seen recent cases (Sun’s retraction of it’s headline accusing Liverpool fans of causing the Hillsborough disaster) where the media are found to have been incorrect in the conclusions they drew based on lack of the full facts.

Child abuse is not acceptable, but nor is a “kangaroo Court” approach.

And, given JS has died, what purpose does the current “bandwagon” approach serve – even if he is “proven” guilty. There is no way any sort of credible “prosecution” or “trial” can happen.

Even if “found” guilty beyond all reasonable doubt by the new investigation, the guy cannot “do his time”, and his charitable works will effectively have to be “erased” from public memory, rather than being seen as evidence that even unacceptably-flawed characters can do some good as they pass through this world.

If the accusations go against him, will charities feel public pressure demands they return the cash he raised for them….

Whatever happens, lessons must be learnt that prevent a repeat of this unfortunate mess.

Organisations must never again feel they can “cover up” accusations that are distasteful, or that may reflect badly on their systems if proven, nor must “celebrity” status be allowed to cloud organisational decisions to investigate any such accusations of wrong doing.

That said, given the earliest accusations hark back 30 – 40 years, I suspect a “cover up” of a celebrity’s wrong-doing would be less likely to be allowed to go unchallenged these days anyway – or is that just wishful thinking?

Paul F

how insecure in their beliefs must they be if they are so frightened by a fourteen-year-old girl whose only ‘crime’ was to try to get an education?

Not insecure in their beliefs – after all they firmly believe this is the right course of action. If they were “insecure in their beliefs” they may not have questioned the need to do it?

But yes, they are “insecure” inasmuch that they believe that education may lead to women (and others) challenging some of the medieval patriarchal values they currently manage to maintain by force. Of course, what they cannot see is that education might help improve their whole way of life and standard of living…

The problem is they are taught (indoctrinated) that this way of fanatical thinking is correct by the preceding generation of equally narrow-minded fanatical “teachers”. They have been taught that education will lead to a decadent lifestyle in which “God” is likely to be ignored or dishonoured as materialistic greed takes over as the driving force behind their society. They are not taught that free thinking and education/learning are to be encouraged as a means to improve their world.

The advent of modern information technology is leading to many starting to question these antiquated values and beliefs, as they see other women around the planet enjoy a more liberal, and more fulfilling lifestyle.

The good news is that the modern “news web” also ensures that attrocities like this are now seen more widely round the globe, and other may see the that the “old ways” are no longer acceptable…but such a major change takes time (many generations?).

Don’t forget, it isn’t all that long ago (relatively speaking) that women in Britain had no right to vote, and even more recently that they were (theoretically at least) given truly equal rights to pay etc.

I agree such behaviour in the name of any “religion” is abhorrent, especially in the name of religion which is actually based on “respect” and “peace” towards others, but lets not forget we are only a few steps further on down the path to “equality” and “educational freedom”… 😮

On a day to day basis those of us in industry see huge advantages in homogenized regulatory bodies rather than each country having their own.

That might be the case in your industry Derekf, but in mine the imposition of EU-driven regulation has been, and continues to be, mainly negative in terms of the ability of UK brands to develop innovative products, even in light of clear research to show their benefits to many consumers.

The “pre-EU” UK market (and those in a few other EU States such as Netherlands) allowed consumers far more freedom of choice (and posed no more of a risk to consumer health or safety) than in one or two other large EU States, but those two large States had far more restrictive rules – based on the “Nanny-State knows best” mentality, whereas UK was firmly based on a safety-based approach to regulation.

During the lengthy debate over “harmonising” regulations in my industry, the UK and the a couple of other more “liberal” States were in a minority, and so the process used to develop EU-wide regulations tended to result in the majority view getting their way, and thus ended u formulating rules and regulations that restrict the previous freedom enjoyed by the UK market, whilst having little if any effect on the market in most other EU states.

Many in my industry would no doubt agree that IN THEORY, a harmonised set of rules and regulations should benefit an industrial sector, but as seen in our area of business, it does not always work this way due the way EU Legislation is “harmonised”. The majority view generally tends to hold sway, and one or two vociferous States can “influence” a number of smaller States during the drawn out debates, and so swing votes in their favour. This can have a major impact on individual markets who have previously operated to a very different set of National rules than those in those two “noisy” States. In my industry the EU Directives have tended to drive things downwards towards the lowest common denominator, simply because that is the way the two large States have chosen to regulate their individual markets in the past, rather than impose safeguards yet still leave room for innovation.

So your comment that “those of us in industry see huge advantages in homogenized regulatory bodies rather than each country having their own” is not applicable to all industries. It may have worked well for your area of industry, but it has not been the same experience for all 🙁 .

..And no I don’t read the Daily Mail :diablo: my views are formed based on 15+ years of “hands-on” experience trying to help ensure EU Legislation does not have a negative impact on a small UK industry sector – and of seeing UK views get steam-rollered by one or two particular EU States on far too many many occasions (no names-no pack-drill, but you can probably guess which States they are 😉 ).

And the costs (financial and environmental) involved in meeting these ever changing, and ever-more restrictive, pieces of Euro-nonsense in my industry are significant.

Paul F

First night shots of the memorial I have ever seen. Stunning.

Thanks.

Moggy

Ditto, just so atmospheric.. especially the close up shot of the “crew” figures.

Brilliant shots Cornish’….

Nothing wrong with those pics Kev – they look fine to me.

I really must get to OW next year, its been a few years since I was last there, 2005or 2006 I think …:o