Middleton V4

What happened to the Middleton V4 article in ME4552.

On page 149 the first section talks about setting the metal in a four jaw chuck with a 15mm off set then says make sure it's running true and turn to 45mm Dia.

Fig 9 on page 151 bares no relationship to the text.

The fly wheel on the same page suddenly goes off at a tangent talking about scribing the the steam passages on the side of the cylinders.

What happened to proof reading ?

J

Edited By JasonB on 16/01/2017 13:44:50

Thing of the past I suspect

Eric, look at your previous Middleton thread, I added a post yesterday that answers some of your queries.

Edited By JasonB on 16/01/2017 12:30:08

What happened to the Middleton V4 article in ME4552.

On page 149 the first section talks about setting the metal in a four jaw chuck with a 15mm off set then says make sure it's running true and turn to 45mm Dia.

Makes perfect sense to me. It's not the way I would personally do it but I can see what the author is suggesting and that would work.

Fig 9 on page 151 bares no relationship to the text.

See above post

The fly wheel on the same page suddenly goes off at a tangent talking about scribing the the steam passages on the side of the cylinders.

Yes another heading after the first paragraph may have been a good idea

What happened to proof reading ?

If you want the cost of teh mag to go up then I'm sure a proof reader can be employed, Diane only has so much time that has to be spread over teh whole mag that things will slip through. If you had seen the original article as submitted then you would be praising her for making it into its present form.

J

Edited By JasonB on 16/01/2017 13:46:30

Edited By JasonB on 16/01/2017 13:48:49

Agreed, the spacer is to allow you to get an exact offset after turning the outside concentric. As Jason says not the way I would do it, but perfectly valid.

I think elsewhere I posted an explanation of how an article gets read an average of seven times before publication. If it needs a fair bit of editing there is a danger that you get to where you don't notice some types of issue simply because you are so familiar with the text.

Neil

Yes; reading what you think you see is a definite hazard.

One method I have met is to read the text backwards. My own version of that is to read it upside down. Bonkers, really; but an interesting exercise, especially when you discover the brain is still able to read what it wants to see instead of what's really there.

Marcus

Interesting. I'm glad I wasn't the only one to be confused.

Saying we ought to do without proof reading in the magazine we choose to buy is like saying that we ought to buy cars without Quality Control.

Cheers, Tim

Tim you must have also missed Neil's comment that the avarage article gets read 7 times before you see it. My comment was about employing a full time proof reader not that the articles weren't proof read. You comment about quality control is interesting, the quality control on say a Duster is not the same as that on a Roller nor is the price.

J