Something of a dead horse, I know, since I have made these comments before, but I think it's still worth pointing out how the UK LAA's magazine is much more about ordinary folks and ordinary budgets than the EAA's magazine here in the USA. That point is vividly exemplified by this month's cover articles in the two magazines.
Light Aviation's cover story is a seven-page feature and flight test review of a VW-powered Falconar F9 (Jodel D9 derivative) completed in 1970. Today you could build that same plane for $10,000-15,000 or so. Sport Aviation's cover story is a ten-page feature a customized Carbon Cub EX-2 kit that quite literally *starts* at ten times that amount $100,000-150,000. While the builder did do the airframe and covering himself, at least some of the work (electrical, painting, possibly engine installation) was contracted out.
Personally, while I might occasionally pick up an aviation or boating magazine to read about fantastically expensive aircraft or yachts that I will never own, I prefer a magazine that is supposed to be dedicated to the hobby of building and restoring airplanes to focus on projects within reach of most of its readers.
Light Aviation's cover story is a seven-page feature and flight test review of a VW-powered Falconar F9 (Jodel D9 derivative) completed in 1970. Today you could build that same plane for $10,000-15,000 or so. Sport Aviation's cover story is a ten-page feature a customized Carbon Cub EX-2 kit that quite literally *starts* at ten times that amount $100,000-150,000. While the builder did do the airframe and covering himself, at least some of the work (electrical, painting, possibly engine installation) was contracted out.
Personally, while I might occasionally pick up an aviation or boating magazine to read about fantastically expensive aircraft or yachts that I will never own, I prefer a magazine that is supposed to be dedicated to the hobby of building and restoring airplanes to focus on projects within reach of most of its readers.