Jim, I don't think you are correct in your
assertion that the reason for limited space being devoted to soaring is the lack
of columnist. You are kidding aren't you, or haven't you seen Darwin's by
line. If you haven't you aren't even up to speed on this topic.
Sometimes opinion before knowledge gets foot in mouth.
I have spoken to Bob Hunt. He tells a
completely different version than yours. Somehow I think he probably knows
the reason. He told me that it was the fact that soaring represents a much
smaller segment of the hobby than some of the other activities that are reported
on. Additionally, soaring is segmented further by the different
disciplines. Thermal duration, slope, electric and on and on.
About the only thing I think you had right was that
Bob Hunt does not single out soaring for special treatment either pro or
con. Yes, I do agree that it SEEMS like control line maybe gets more
attention than it deserves based upon participation but since I don't have any
concrete numbers at hand I'll trust that Bob wants to do right by all
segments.
Check out Darwin's column. I think you'll see
that he's doing a great job. He had a hard act to follow with Mike Garton as his
predecessor.
Ed
|
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Darwin N. Barrie
- [RCSE] Model Aviation Control Line??? Bill Swingle
- RE: [RCSE] Model Aviation Control Line??? George Voss
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Control Line??? Bill's Email
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Control Line??... Michael Conte
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Control Line??? Erica and or Rob
- [RCSE] Model Aviation Jim McCarthy
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Darwin N. Barrie
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation James V. Bacus
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Ed Berris
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Mark Miller
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Pat McCleave
- Re: [RCSE] Model Aviation Mark Miller