Posted by Neil Wyatt on 25/09/2014 19:09:59:
I should have been a bit less uptight, Carl, and remember that every reader has their own perception of the magazine, and sometimes two people's views would suggest they were talking about completely different publications!
It is surprising just how often it has been covered, but not for a few years. I have a 1940s ME that covers the theory with respect to a theoretical plant layout for a stationary 'power station' type installation with no obvious resemblance to a 'jet engine'.
There has been a little debate about the 'experimental' in 'model and experimental engineering' (in context of the magazines, not SMEE). I think there's plenty more fertile ground for experimentation, and not just in new technologies.
Neil
Not a problem. We are all apt to be a bit uptight at times, me especially these days. Your comments on experimental engineering are interesting; I am a member of SMEE which bills itself as The Society of Model and Experimental Engineers. Their newsletter always makes interesting reading, and the dedication of the core membership is beyond question. That said, there is very little "experimental" going on. That is most probably due to the fact that nobody has ever written an article for the journal on anything that might fall into that category. This is no doubt due, in no small part, to the fact that the average steam engineering enthusiast, or what might be loosely termed "model" engineer, would have little interest in such things. And of course the vast majority of SMEE members fall into this category.
So, we are a bit like Great Britain and the United States – divided by a common language!