This Forum

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

Carl;

Whilst my local club has had a well-earned international reputation of being stuffed with snobs, one either slowly works at them and slowly "softens the leather", or you form your own club. The better-looking JohnS wrote above:

1) With all due respect you are a loco guy, one of those that the clubs are built around and therefore you will fit in.

2) What about a beginner who approaches with an interest in say some new techniques like CNC ?

Ok, 1) is a real issue – the local club lost 80% of the non-locomotive members because of endless "operating rules" discussions, but those were because of new governmental regulations and behind the club now;

2) "CNC" – that's not a problem. Come over to Ottawa at the end of April and you'll most likely see a small CNC lathe churning out parts (probably cannons for a model ship!) in the club booth at the local model railway show. CNC is not an issue, as some of the old guys used CNC via paper tape before retirement, and others currently use it.

You see, I decided that leaving the local club was not the correct thing to do, so now I'm more involved (e.g., organizing said booth) and can thus bend the club in directions that I wish.

I also realized that most of these guys are introverts, but behind the gruff exterior is quite often a heart of gold.

Another JohnS.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Careful Graham, some will take great offence with your use of the word Trains and twice at that, could you please in future type T****s or use the acceptable term Locos

J

[Oompa LumpaParticipant @oompalumpa34302]

Posted by JasonB on 16/12/2013 18:37:17:

Careful Graham, some will take great offence with your use of the word Trains and twice at that, could you please in future type T****s or use the acceptable term Locos

J

LMAO! I take your point Jason

It can be a bit like that sometimes, I can be myself to be honest with regard to some of the things I am involved with. I was trying to convey the sense of "whole" rather than just referring to the actual engine. I am interested in all of this, the Loco's the rolling stock, even the points and track. I am interested in anything mechanical frankly and usually the first thing I do when I get anything home is to take it apart Big believer in learning by doing!

graham.

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

Ady, nice to know my father was shot at with British supplied weapons in Palestine. Still if not he might not have been in hospital to eventually meet my mother.

My Grandad was in Palestine too

The bullets missed… but the TB got him, cost him half a lung and 3 months in an Alpine Hospital, courtesy of the Army

———————

could you please in future type T****s or use the acceptable term Locos

Choo-choos bad, Locos good

Edited By Ady1 on 16/12/2013 20:01:23

[John CoatesParticipant @johncoates48577]

Posted by KWIL on 16/12/2013 10:17:02:

Overheard at the Sandown Park MEEX, that this Forum is populated by "Armchair Model Engineers".. Discuss

TBH this is said of many forums because someone can feign knowledge by Googling etc

I am a member of several motorcycle forums and the same claims are made. Posters can copy text and photos and claim they are their projects/work in progress. It is only the widely read or similarly capable researchers who can reveal such untruths.

I'm not a model maker. When my shed base is built and my shed purchased I shall enjoy hiding in my man cave making tools and tooling so I can make other stuff for bikes and the home. My initial enthusiasm for here has been reduced in my four year's membership to the point where I am a peruser rather than an active participant and that may stop when magazine subscription renewal time comes around next year.

Perhaps it is the real change the internet and computers have wrought. In the old days professionalism was measured by the depth of knowledge in one's head and the ability to apply it. Books were present but you were expected to know a lot more than now – instantaneous retrieval of facts have diminished this skill.

Instead of having a resource in the reference book which has gone through scrutiny and peer review, I am free to research the biased and opinionated scribblings of several thousand "armchair whatevers" on millions of subjects

Unrestricted choice is not always the best option

John

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Posted by Carl Wilson 4 on 16/12/2013 18:34:27:

Other articles promise much and deliver nothing. Don Allen's superb Union Pacific locomotive. Did we see it's internals or hear about how he overcame the various constructional challenges, and even what these challenges were? That would have made a subject for a follow up article. Likewise, we recently saw an excellent Tiger tank. The builder had gone on to construct a prototypical engine and transmission. The mechanism is the heart of the model, but we will not see it or read about how it was built.

So no, I won't be using the ME for research anytime soon.

Interesting, Carl, that you know what's coming up in Model Engineer. Perhaps you might like to draw up my flatplans for the next few issues.

The two articles you mention were clearly labelled as 'Exhibition Previews' and were published as exactly that. They were published as a 'taster' to entice folk to come along to the MEX to see two outstanding models and, as such, were successful.
In both cases, at my request, the builders have promised to give serious consideration to writing full articles on their work. I promise you that these will be published as soon as they become available.

Diane

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

Diane,

Thank you for taking the time out to reply to my criticisms. I am really pleased to hear that these two interesting models will be the subject of more in depth articles.

Whilst I appreciate that you can only publish articles based on the copy you receive, I would like to see a change to the usual diet of serialised construction articles. I doubt that anyone actually builds along with the article; there is never sufficient detail provided to do so. Added to which, there is not enough on the methods employed to overcome machining and other fabrication difficulties. So these offerings fail on two counts. They are neither build log nor record of technique.

I can only speak for myself, but based on the above, here is what I'd like to see:-

1) Outline descriptions of models with the main part of the mechanism – an unusual valve gear, a gearbox or other interesting feature described in detail

2) As above but with the major mechanical aspect featured in depth in the next issue

3) Interesting or new workshop techniques, tips and tricks, for example machining set ups, welding, brazing etc. Detail on a specific problem and how this was solved.

4) Studies of interesting prototypes that might make good models, not just locomotives. Good work has been done recently with the article on the Harz Mountain railway – even though it was on loco's!

5) Engineering principles – Again current good example is the article on combustion in IC engines.

6) Engineering curios – interesting and unusual devices or mechanisms that might make good subjects for models.

7) Design concepts – information on boilers say, materials and methods of construction, notable types, interesting departures from the norm. Steam valve gear might be another topic that could be described, along with examples in the modelling world. May be combined with (5) above.

8) Machine tools – home built and conversions, e.g. to CNC, 3 phase conversion and so on. Good example in current issue of single to 3 phase conversion.

9) Experimental – Novel or interesting devices constructed to test a principle or new idea.

It is my belief that a mix of informative articles covering engineering theory and practice would make for a far more readable and interesting publication. It would then become a repository for amateur, model and experimental engineering technique and principles. The magazine that it has the potential to become and a true research resource for the future.

Thanks again for replying to my earlier comments,

Carl.

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

I guess that'll be a no then.

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

Of the twenty or so home workshop enthusiasts that I have known in recent years zero people take the Model Engineer and one takes Model Engineers Workshop .

Statistically significant ??

[KWILParticipant @kwil]

Carl,

What you are asking for is a text book approach to writing and a detailed Manual of How to Do It. Very few if any of the contributors are professional writers and in addition would not have the time to set aside from their leisure periods to carry out such a task.

Article written in this manner would be most likely to bore the socks off many readers (even you find the extra long serialised ones tedious). Whilst it would be quite straight forward to give a verbal account of a particular setting up procedure and the whys and wherefore of a particular case, writing about it in an interesting and informative manner is another question.

I suggest that you try to write an article on a subject you understand and have a skill and interest you would like to put in print, the first thing you will find is that it takes a long time, you will fret about how much to include so as to not bore the socks off those who have some understanding and yet enough content to encourage those who seek to learn from the writings.

Lastly, although the financial return is not unreasonable per published page, the return per hour expended is somewhat lower! I have published a number of articles in the past, relatively few questions have been asked by readers, which tells me most understood what was written, or only a few bothered to make or find an application for the details supplied, or many had their socks off already.

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Posted by Carl Wilson 4 on 20/12/2013 00:05:03:

I guess that'll be a no then.

Carl – at risk of bleating, you cannot imagine the workload here just now. Your post requires a considerable amount of time to answer and it is on the 'to do' list.

Diane

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

Kwil, you beat me to it, my thoughts exactly, if you don't like how things are going, get writing, send it in, and if it's good enough I'm sure Diane will put it to print.

I'v put in a couple of articles, one on solenoid motors that I had built, I'd never heard of them up to that time, after that there were a number of articles about them, and I found further reading in some old copies of ME that came from a second hand bookshop. Ian S C

Started this post before I saw Diane's last post.

Edited By Ian S C on 20/12/2013 10:33:00

[Diane CarneyModerator @dianecarney30678]

Posted by MICHAEL WILLIAMS on 20/12/2013 09:04:40:
Of the twenty or so home workshop enthusiasts that I have known in recent years zero people take the Model Engineer and one takes Model Engineers Workshop .

Statistically significant ??

Speaks volumes, Michael. Thank you.
I was at the MEX for three days recently and only about 15 people stopped me to talk about the magazine, of which (without a word of a lie) about 15 said how much they are enjoying the new style, the content and the improved variety of subjects etc etc.

Statistically significant??

[Carl Wilson 4Participant @carlwilson4]

Hello all,

Diane:-

Thank you for your post. Reading my reply to your earlier post I now find it sounds somewhat petulant and for that I apologise unreservedly. I appreciate that you are extremely busy and so I am grateful for your time.

I am at pains to stress that I am not attempting to pan the magazine. In my criticism above I have tried to include current articles that I think fit in with the themes I've outlined. I should add that I have just become a subscriber to ME, after several years of being an occasional reader.

Despite having had a workshop for several years my occasional bouts of "dipping my toe in the water" of the ME led me to believe that it was not aimed at me; Several other workshop owners of my acquaintance feel the same way. That said, I decided a month or so ago to take the plunge and give it another try. My comments are based on my previous intermittent experience and my more recent joined up one. I think that the magazine would be improved by a spread of articles as I have outlined and I would not be surprised to learn that the early ME followed such a model. I would not want to offend with my criticisms nor would I wish them to be entirely one sided. I have tried to remark on what I see as good points. Overall I would hope that my words are part of an overall healthy democracy.

KWIL and Ian:-

Thank you for your comments and for taking the time out to post. I am not seeking to turn the magazine into a "detailed Manual of How To Do It". Having worked in engineering all my life I have never yet come across such a thing, words only go so far and there is no real substitute for actually doing it. Whilst I'm not against seeing serialised construction articles completely disappear, I do think that it would be better to take the salient points out of these that concern technique and describe them in more detail.Obviously, a certain amount of background knowledge has to be assumed here.

I can tell you from my own experience in training people that the beginner in any subject will simply be intimidated by complex process descriptions that gloss over the detail. If the details of the process are described then the beginner is more likely to read around the subject and come to grips with it; the more experienced reader will not need to do this, and can enjoy reading about what may be an interesting technique.

I have written articles on servomechanisms and governors for another publication and so I have some idea of what it is like to make a piece understandable by the uninitiated and yet not "bore the socks off" the more experienced. A lot of the people I've associated with over the years have had an interest in engineering, some proffessional, some amateur and some both. All have always been deeply interested in discussing and speculating on any novel or intriguing engineering concepts and so I don't think that what I propose would bore the socks off of too many.

Your comment that if I don't like it I should write is a fair point and well made. If you would be interested in seeing something I have written you can find it here:- http://www.britishreactionresearch.blogspot.co.uk

Ian, I have seen solenoid engines (or, I suppose, electric motors) in another publication and very interesting they were too. I will have to try to find out what issue your article was in and have a look. I suspect you are a bit of a genius on the quiet.

Best wishes for the season,

Carl.

[IanTParticipant @iant]

As a former Newsletter Editor (for some seven years) I'm afraid the reality is that (stating the blindingly obvious)any publication will be limited (in what it can publish) to that material which it receives for publication.

It was also true that some of our most gifted Members/Modellers also seemed to be the most reluctant to put pen to paper, be that from some form of misplaced modesty (a belief that no-one else would be interested in their work), a seeming inability to string a few words together (unlike their ability to 'mangle' metal) or simply that they were unwilling to give up any more of their remaining precious 'free time' to do so (and this is not a criticism of that attitude by the way – you can't buy more time for yourself).

Of course, ME does pay it's contributors but (as someone has already mentioned) the hourly rate is probably effectively below the minimum wage and I therefore suspect that Diane's ability to commission specific specialist articles is fairly limited. Those willing to give up their time to put pen to paper and document their successes (and maybe the odd failure) for us, generally do so because they want to share their work and interests rather than to gain some fiscal reward.

What I used to tell Members (when they voiced similar thoughts to those above) still seems to holds true here.

The Newsletter (or Model Engineer) will be what our 'community' makes of it. If you are unhappy with the NL (or ME) contents and want to see something different in it, then do something about it. Write something yourself or persuade someone who can to do so. Otherwise, we will just have to be content with what we receive, which (in the case of ME) I think is generally already pretty good.

Regards,

IanT

[KWILParticipant @kwil]

Blog read with much interest, however I think this style would not be "suitable" for an ME article, unless it could be better explained to the reader who is not aufait with the principles.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi Carl, please don't take this the wrong way, as I'm not trying to put anybody down. While your list of ideas could be a good thing, I don't think that it is all within the scope of a hobby magazine with a wide variaty of interesrts, without employing professionable people, which would push the cover price up which may well be detrimental to its existance.

Take welding that you mention, you could write a magazine on many different ways of doing a technique for the same job and there are thoushands of different types of jobs with differant standards and tolerance levels, not to mention the different skill levels needed. There are available many books of the majority of the techniques used in Model Engineering, the "Workshop Pactice Series" springs to mind.

Many people who can do almost anything with metal, don't have the ability to explan in writing how to achieve a successfull end result. I've been making and repairing metal stuff all my working life, but would struggle to write about it with any definitiveness to include some of the points you have made.

Regards Nick.

[Author]

Posts