Extreme Rocketry has lost its mojo....

I told you so :)

Ironically NAR's SR does an above average job on HPR as well.

NAR encourages its young.

Jerry

You were doing pretty well, then you had to add that last paragraph, which totally negated any points you may have made. If elitism is rampant anywhere, it's amongst the modroc community. "High horse" and "keep your mouth shut" indeed.

So what if a few guys don't like SR? The thread started out (and continues) bashing ER, quite a few HPR bashes got tossed in as well.

FWIW, the only one I read anymore is SR, and that is only because it comes with the membership. No interest in "West Coast Extreme Rocketry" or wasting money for "Non Existant Used To Be An Awesome Rocketry Magazine for Tripoli".

Extreme Rocketry always comes out and is the size that you have deemed to be "correct" for a magazine.

As for content, I'd take ER or HPR over SR any day. That's not a complaint per se, it's just a matter of personal taste and marketing issues. I don't care about the history of the Mars Snooper, egg lofting, 1/4A anything, kiddie launches or competition. But apparently enough of the NAR membership does care about those things to warrant producing a magazine about them.

Why, because I've had a few submissions published in ER? That wouldn't stop me from criticizing the mag. I'd like to see some of my work published in SR someday too, but I'll probably hold off until they can afford to do color again.

Here's my opinion of the content and style of three rocketry mags:

Extreme Rocketry: The best designed, by far. ER presents the hobby in a very sophisticated and professional way. Content sometimes suffers due to being a lower priority than design -- material that doesn't fit the design format either gets edited or rejected. Generalized tips seem to be favored over in-depth, step by step instructions. Content focuses mostly on high power and EX, with some smaller stuff thrown in occassionally.

High Power Rocketry: Amateurish, inconsistent design. Original content is generally very good, with lots of detail. Some issues suffer from excessive use of unoriginal material or material that has only a tenuous connection to the hobby. Original content leans heavily to high power, EX, and political/regulatory issues affecting the hobby.

Sport Rocketry: Design is consistent and fairly competent but a bit dull and badly outdated. Content varies considerably due to covering so many different aspects of the hobby. Content includes high power but leans heavily to low/mid power and competition. No EX content that I know of.

Yes, it's still in publication.

It's been at least 2-3 years since I've seen ANY of the rocketry mags in book stores. As far as I can tell the only way to get HPR, ER or SR is by subscription/membership, or in some cases you may be able to get them from a rocketry vendor.

Hmmm, I might have said that consistently since 1990.

EX is a Tripoli abortion term.

Yep. Talk about blowing a good thing.

You can subscribe to it. Sometimes it has good articles but the physical size of it is very small & it doesn't have much in it. I don't think NASA article reprints are going to be in there anytime soon. It's always late. Don't subscribe unless you are a VERY tolerent person & don't mind if you don't get what you pay for.

Here's a link -

At one point I like everyone else believed Bruce when he said he'd fix it. You had the opportunity to do it before I did. Now we can agree that at best Bruce is a liar.

I have no issue with SR's design. Also, it utilizes it's available space way more efficiently that ER.

Altough you might thing ER is well designed within the rocketry community, it is not a well designed magazine. All the wasted space and wierd formatting you mentioned doesn't happen when the editor knows what he is doing.

Not necessarily -- many magazines INTENTIONALLY avoid edge-to-edge space utilization. It's a design philosophy, and while some will prefer one way, others will prefer another.

Take, for example, Smithsonian, where almost every article begins with a two page photograph, and the content itself has some pretty hefty margins and there are a fair number of pictures.

There's an entire industry around graphic design.

-Kevin

Seems you missed the point. I didn't negate anything. Let me say it one more time, support all aspects of rocketry and what few publications we do have. Support everyone's interest and not just your own, even if that means saying nothing. Being negative about any aspect of rocketry doesn't solve anything. If you want to make it better, offer suggestions, like Bunny fully welcomed. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

-Digger

Proximity to Offutt depends on where you are -- you cannot launch in Bellevue city limits. LaVista, on the other hand, has no such rules, and the field we launch from in LaVista is to the side of the approach to Offutt's runway.

-Kevin

Personally, having seen Frank's standard "launch attire", the fewer photos of Frank I'm surprised by, the better.... 8-}

If there are people you think would make good interviews, suggest them to Brent. If there are topics you'd like to see articles on, find someone with the knowledge to write them, and have them submit them to one of the magazines -- the magazine of your choice.

All three magazines are dependent upon submissions -- can't publish what they don't have. If you think SR is "too low-powerish", help get them more high power material. If you think ER isn't "extreme enough", help Brent get more "extreme" material.

As far as interviews go, since I offered to help Brent do them over a year ago, I've been trying to get a variety. I'm open to suggestions, although just because you suggest 'em doesn't mean I'll want to interview them, or Brent will want to publish it.

-Kevin

I'm not "talking smack" about it, just expressing an opinion.

No pictures of Bob ?

I guess my Issue I got this evenin' in the mail is safe to open then.

"opening,,, opening... reading.. reading...."

Wow, great coverage of Naram, I didn't get to go this year due to LDRS and this mag is full of color content and Ads.

Kudos to Tom and Mark.

did Rachel find the missing rover ? hope she had fun Bob !

Better yet, one that participates.

Randy

SR is an all around good Mag I feel and comes with NAR membership and can be found in better hobby store shelves. Lots of Color Photos again now too.

ER is very west coast, and it's Smithsonian style seems too, wine and cheese sometimes for my tastes. I like to read a good technical journal to relax, not a coffee table book. It has some of the greast quality photos I've seen however, and is impressive for a first time BAR to see large rockets. It's the long term thing, after a few issues of great looks, one tends to yurn for a more meaningful intellectual relationship.

ER might now be opening up to east coasters if others do the reporting, like LDRS 23 had to be done for them. And, Peter is a Midwesterner, in Michigan, so they might be opening up more to Midwest launches I sure hope so.

Now, HPR is actually existent now. I personally liked the articles on the Aero-spike and the scale data they provided on that rocket. Yes, if you look, that aerospike article contains all the data needed for sport scale, ironic huh ? The last issue I got on project liberty seems to have twice times the number of advertisers HPR had before, so something's up.

That's right but when you consider the page counts of the two and looking at a ration of text to graphics, I think you'll see what I'm talking about. It would be an improvement if there were more pictures that aren't as big. Assuming the magazine is supposed to communicate via pictures and text. With the low page count, a bunch of full page pictures doesn't support that objective.

Also, Simthsonian checks spelling & grammer. (I wish this news reader did)

It might happen if Brent had ever bothered to respond to emails I've sent him. As it is, he can read my opinions here.

Kevin - I do like the articles you've written. I'll suggest a few interview victims offlist.