Trade Publications, what do YOU READ??

[PhantomFanatic]

Hi gang!

I want to share, with you all, two trade publications that I've discovered and I like. They are: Rotor Drone Magazine and Multi-Rotor Pilot magazine.

Both are in their infancy and are currently, 6 issues a year. Look on Google to find the subscription pages. Back issues can be had on Amazon and I took great advantage of that, buying all back issues!

Both magazines are great! Both have digital or print issues separately or, as I ordered, both digital and print issues. Another Rotor Drone's magazine arrived today and it has an article about a drone that just arrived! Great timing.

SO, please tell me about the RC magazines that you read. I also subscribe to Electric Flight as I still have RC planes and helicopters.

YOU?

 

[kitari]

I didn't even know they had magizines like that. Sounds pretty interesting though. Thanks for the share!

 

[PhantomFanatic]

I didn't even know they had magizines like that. Sounds pretty interesting though. Thanks for the share!

I didn't either until I did a Google search. They really are great magazines. I have stickies markers every few pages for articles I want to read or ads. A big plus, I've learned a lot. So, it is all good!

 

[gunslinger]

Hmmm... if this article is a representation of their credibility...

http://www.rotordronemag.com/ora-fpv-qu ... ready-fly/

I'll pass.

Whoever wrote this article is in no way shape or form plugged into the multirotor community. The article states that the company that manufactures this quad is called "Ora" when the company that purchased licensing for U.S. sales for this particular Quad is "Hobbico"... The name that Hobbico has given this quad is the "Ora."

The actual manufacturer of this quad is Hubsan. This is the LONG awaited Hubsan X 4 H109S Pro. It will be marketed in the U.S. as the Hobbico Ora. Much like the Hubsan Q4 is marketed in the U.S. as the Estes Proto, as Estes is licensed to sell that Nano under its own name...

-slinger

 

[SteveMann]

Hmmm... if this article is a representation of their credibility...

http://www.rotordronemag.com/ora-fpv-qu ... ready-fly/

I'll pass.

Whoever wrote this article is in no way shape or form plugged into the multirotor community. The article states that the company that manufactures this quad is called "Ora" when the company that purchased licensing for U.S. sales for this particular Quad is "Hobbico"... The name that Hobbico has given this quad is the "Ora."

The actual manufacturer of this quad is Hubsan. This is the LONG awaited Hubsan X 4 H109S Pro. It will be marketed in the U.S. as the Hobbico Ora. Much like the Hubsan Q4 is marketed in the U.S. as the Estes Proto, as Estes is licensed to sell that Nano...

-slinger

I am trending away from printed magazines because they are cover-to-cover ads, reviews written by the advertisers, and occasionally, maybe some useful tips. I get a lot more from the forums. What I want in a magazine can be reduced to one or two pages.

 

[gunslinger]

I agree Steve... Ninety percent advertisements. Also... It irks me when the media can't get their facts straight and disseminate wildly inaccurate information about any subject that I'm involved in. Since multi-rotors (excuse me... drones) are such a hot topic right now, it's hard to avoid the media's reporting on them... much of which leaves me wincing and shaking my head...

It's even worse when a magazine that's targeted directly towards a specific subject, be it paper or web based, has its head plugged directly into its nether orifice... These people are allegedly on point to enlighten the interested masses regarding news and information about a specifically targeted subject! That's just plain irritating... :evil: :evil: :evil:

-slinger

 

[knuckles]

I get the AMA mag with my membership. I got some magazine in the freebie bag at the LA expo but havent subscribed to anything. Most of my news comes from this forum, Facebook and Twitter on UAV related stuff

 

[gunslinger]

I get the AMA mag with my membership. I got some magazine in the freebie bag at the LA expo but havent subscribed to anything. Most of my news comes from this forum, Facebook and Twitter on UAV related stuff

I get the AMA mag as well and it IS loaded with advertisements, but there are also a bunch of interesting articles. When I first started getting it there were very few multirotor articles or ads... That's been changing nearly every month...


-slinger

 

[N017RW]

I listen to podcasts.

"The MultiRotor Podcast",
and the "UAV Digest".

I'm sure there's others, I just haven't search for a while.

 

[PhantomFanatic]

Well, being the only one here who has read these magazines, there are many more articles than ads.

But, what the heck! I was sharing my discovery with all of you. If you don't subscribe, sorry, but I won't lose any sleep!

 

[PhantomFanatic]

Hmmm... if this article is a representation of their credibility...

http://www.rotordronemag.com/ora-fpv-qu ... ready-fly/

I'll pass.

Whoever wrote this article is in no way shape or form plugged into the multirotor community. The article states that the company that manufactures this quad is called "Ora" when the company that purchased licensing for U.S. sales for this particular Quad is "Hobbico"... The name that Hobbico has given this quad is the "Ora."

The actual manufacturer of this quad is Hubsan. This is the LONG awaited Hubsan X 4 H109S Pro. It will be marketed in the U.S. as the Hobbico Ora. Much like the Hubsan Q4 is marketed in the U.S. as the Estes Proto, as Estes is licensed to sell that Nano under its own name...

-slinger

Okay, they screwed up! All magazines do that. I've read Popular Science since age 8-10 and I've read it since. They have quite a few retractions.

Another assessment is magazines have more ads than articles. It does seem like that is true. Popular Science is getting thinner and thinner, with little content, so are sister publications. PS dropped the one thing that readers voted on (after being asked) that was their favorite part of the magazine. It was the section called: "What's New." It was my favorite part too. But, they dropped it and the magazine is dying a slow death.

Maybe this magazine will burn and crash, too. But Polular Science was a great magazine for many decades. Here it is: The Rotor Drone magazine is fantastic. I have marked so many articles, drone reviews, FPV, the Year's Best Gear, etc. If it wasn't for this Mag., I wouldn't have the amazing drone that is sitting next to me. And, when I have funds, I will buy another one, that was an ad. I've posted about both drones.

I've learned a lot here, but I have learned more from these magazines in the few weeks that I've had them, than the forum. I really enjoy these magazines. That is why I shared them with my friends here. I'm a bit shocked by a few of you.
I brought these to your attention, because I consider you friends. If you don't want to order one back issue, or a digital version. Then that's fine. But, going searching for something they screwed up on, is not a fair assessment of the magazines as a whole.

I did want I wanted to do. What you do is your business, but don't trash the magazine without giving it a fair chance. Buy, a back issue on Amazon. Or, don't. I don't care. I shared a good thing with my friends, mission accomplished.

 

[gunslinger]

Hmmm... if this article is a representation of their credibility...

http://www.rotordronemag.com/ora-fpv-qu ... ready-fly/

I'll pass.

Whoever wrote this article is in no way shape or form plugged into the multirotor community. The article states that the company that manufactures this quad is called "Ora" when the company that purchased licensing for U.S. sales for this particular Quad is "Hobbico"... The name that Hobbico has given this quad is the "Ora."

The actual manufacturer of this quad is Hubsan. This is the LONG awaited Hubsan X 4 H109S Pro. It will be marketed in the U.S. as the Hobbico Ora. Much like the Hubsan Q4 is marketed in the U.S. as the Estes Proto, as Estes is licensed to sell that Nano under its own name...

-slinger

Okay, they screwed up! All magazines do that. I've read Popular Science since age 8-10 and I've read it since. They have quite a few retractions.

Another assessment is magazines have more ads than articles. It does seem like that is true. Popular Science is getting thinner and thinner, with little content, so are sister publications. PS dropped the one thing that readers voted on (after being asked) that was their favorite part of the magazine. It was the section called: "What's New." It was my favorite part too. But, they dropped it and the magazine is dying a slow death.

Maybe this magazine will burn and crash, too. But Polular Science was a great magazine for many decades. Here it is: The Rotor Drone magazine is fantastic. I have marked so many articles, drone reviews, FPV, the Year's Best Gear, etc. If it wasn't for this Mag., I wouldn't have the amazing drone that is sitting next to me. And, when I have funds, I will buy another one, that was an ad. I've posted about both drones.

I've learned a lot here, but I have learned more from these magazines in the few weeks that I've had them, than the forum. I really enjoy these magazines. That is why I shared them with my friends here. I'm a bit shocked by a few of you.
I brought these to your attention, because I consider you friends. If you don't want to order one back issue, or a digital version. Then that's fine. But, going searching for something they screwed up on, is not a fair assessment of the magazines as a whole.

I did want I wanted to do. What you do is your business, but don't trash the magazine without giving it a fair chance. Buy, a back issue on Amazon. Or, don't. I don't care. I shared a good thing with my friends, mission accomplished.

I am NOT trashing this magazine specifically at all. I'm trashing lazy/inaccurate reporting in general. I stated that the reporter didn't know what he was talking about, which is the absolute and honest truth. And that does absolutely and honestly piss me very seriously off. DO YOUR JOB!!! is all I'm saying. This particular individual decided he had enough knowledge to complete his article. He didn't.

-slinger

 

[jflyer3]

I am NOT trashing this magazine specifically at all. I'm trashing lazy/inaccurate reporting in general. I stated that the reporter didn't know what he was talking about, which is the absolute and honest truth. And that does absolutely and honestly piss me very seriously off. DO YOUR JOB!!! is all I'm saying. This particular individual decided he had enough knowledge to complete his article. He didn't.

-slinger

I'm with you, slinger. I picked up Rotor Drone (Winter 2015) at the LA Drone Expo. While I enjoyed some of the articles, I was surprised at the inaccuracies and lack of fact-checking. As a satellite orbit analyst, I cringed when I saw this picture and caption on p.28:

"Illustration of a NASA Global Positioning System satellite in Geosynchronous orbit above the earth".
http://www.rotordrone-digital.com/rotordrone/Winter_2015/?lm=1417618388000&pg=28#pg28

Fact-Check 1: GPS is not a NASA program. It is a US Air Force program.
Fact-Check 2: GPS in not in Geosynchronous orbit (GEO, 22,200 miles altitude). GPS is in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO, 12,600 miles altitude). If it were in GEO the signals would be too weak for our receivers to pick them up.
Fact-Check 3: The illustration further confuses things by showing the GPS in low earth orbit (LEO), a few hundred miles above the earth. They are actually almost 13,000 miles above the earth.

C'mon RotorDrone! A 2-minute read on wikipedia would have caught these. I can't even remember the last time I bothered to contact a magazine, but this was so blatant I sent the editors of RotorDrone an email. Didn't even get a reply. :? Sheesh.

 

[gunslinger]

jflyer... yup. That's the kind of thing that makes my head hurt. A lot of what I do for a living involves detailed research. I've been doing it for a very long time and I find it so much incredibly easier to accomplish with Google, Yahoo, etc... Like you said... A couple of minutes on wikipedia would have fixed all of that... Incredible what gets green lighted for publication...

-slinger

 

[PhantomFanatic]

To be fair, DJI has made a lot of screw ups too. You would think they would have resolved their major (from my experience) customer service problems., then, there is the Inpire. It still has bugs, yet they are hinting about coming out with a new product.

I do agree that there is no excuse for not checking facts. But, I can relate to the effort required to get a new business off of the ground. How does one find knowledgeable,drone experts who are also good writers, researchers, etc.? They may end up crashing and burning. Or, they may recognize their shortcomings and improve. We're it my business, I wouldn't allow such mistakes to continue.

But, what the heck, I enjoy magazines filled with interesting articles and I enjoy the ads. I'm getting to see new products, that I wasn't aware of. I recently posted, asking for suggestions for an all around good battery charger. I got one answer.
This current issue evaluates about 10 power supplies with just a few pros and cons.

FPV is another interest of mine and there are articles reviewing goggles, screens, etc, along with an informative article on FPV. The Gear Guide issue was a dream come true. I can do my research on Google after learning about it in the mag.
Heck, my subscription was worth it just for the advertisement of the VTOL plane. Yes, I could have found it via Google, if I knew to look for it.

I won't say anymore about these magazines, other than I can't remember a time that I put SO many page markers in a magazine. Not one issue, but all of them. Usually magazines are a too quick of a read and they go into the trash. I don't know if I can find the time to read all of those articles, but not one of those magazines have gone in trash. Yet, my NRA, Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, Ham magazines, Make magazines, etc. don't stick around long.

Over and OUT!