Modelmaking threatened in MEW in issue 189 :-(

If there's already a thread on this topic somewhere, then my apologies.

Having bought every MEW issue from 20 to 189, which has just arrived Down Under, I've thoroughly enjoyed the halcyon years when Harold Hall's delightfully informative articles, and Peter Rawlinson's wide-ranging technicalities made MEW the world's premier workshop magazine. Currently, new bandsaw tweaks in 187, rotary broaching in 185, the interesting single-tooth broach in 184, all the recent Al casting articles, the Accurate CNC Axis in 175-182, making a custom tap in 182, the hydraulic press in 183, and the Hot-Wire cutter in 184-185, are current gems amongst the "How to put new belts on a myford", "Renovate yet another Raglan", and "How to paint a myford" style background filler, which provide ambience, without ever needing to be read.

What has been bringing this reader back for decades is thoughtful writing on _What_ is being done overall and at each stage, and insight into _Why_. It is timely for the long series of Tom Senior endplate drawings to taper off as the more varied Stepperhead drawings come on stream. Alan Jackson's use of the "Overview" box to actually give something of an overview of his goals, what we're in for, and how it might be utilised, is so much more informative than the average "Non-Overview" sometimes provided there.

The place for regular beginner articles over the years is well understood, and more welcome than another "How to oil a myford." Workshop tips are a winner, I think, and prior appearance in ME is no obstacle, because we haven't seen them.

But compensating for the dwindling stock of workshop articles by filling the magazine with modelling hoo-ha, is the bitter end. That's when I seriously rethink my decades-long standing order which has been passed from owner to owner at the local newsagent over the years. Or is it the case that ME also lacks sufficient articles, and the magazines need to be merged to survive? Cannibalising ME readership by beginning the process in MEW would seem to just bring on that outcome.

So please put me down as a "No" vote for losing the plot. (Even slightly, just for now.)

Hi Erik

We have not run out of articles for ME or MEW.
The suggestion of models in MEW was from readers. However the majority don't want models so no models will be published.

Stepperhead was held back for many months until Tom Senior was nearly finished.
regards David

Definitely no models in MEW, that is why I buy ME, that's where I expect models to be, I only ever want to see workshop related articles in MEW, tooling, techniques, the odd article on someone elses worksho setup (that just encourages me to go have a clearout and tidy LOL ).

Articles on models of workshop equipment are ok, such as those built by the likes of Barry Jordan.

CB

Hi

Its only this post and "digital edge finder" that are wider than the adverts, the rest are within the adverts, Windows XP professional using Internet Explorer , I dont have a problem with other sites so It cant be me.

Well as the magazine is titled Model Engineers' Workshop rather than Model Engineers' Toolkit, I don't see anything that would make me think I wouldn't see some model related articles in there. Where has this 'no models rule' come from?

I don't buy Model Engineer magazine because it seems to be aimed at the steam & ic engine enthusiast and that's not my main interest, but I doubt I'd bother putting pen to paper if a steam related article were to appear in MEW, after all, it is engineering.

Do we also take from this debate that no tooling submissions should ever be printed in ME - even the mundane like how to sharpen a drill bit?

Martin.

Hi, I believe the concept of the MEW magazine from day one was to focus on tooling and equipment for the workshop rather than models. Wasn't there a discussion about the position of the apostrophe that denoted that it was about the workshop of the Model Engineer rather than the models that one would build in them.

Regards Nick.

As I commented elsewhere some time ago, the position of the apostrophe suggests a workshop shared by several model engineers. It would be more logical to call it Model Engineer's Workshop, or perhaps Model Engineers' Workshops.

Good mag though, one of my two favourites of all the (too many) magazines I have bought regularly over the years.

David

I think the word 'workshop' kinda defines the focus of MEW, I don't think there's any hard'n'fast rule but from what I have seen in past issues, the focus of MEW has always been on workshop techniques and workshop equipment rather than the models produced therein.

I started subscribing to MEW because it focused on the disciplines of workshop tooling etc, if this became diluted with articles relating to models, I think I would terminate my subscription.

I subscribe to ME for the same reasons!!

I have no particular allegience to any magazine but I do think they should keep to their own disciplines as any stray from that will only serve to detract from their primary content goal.

CB

My point is that Model Engineers make Models in their Workshops, so if you want a magazine with no mention at all of models, - and that must include models of lathes etc - why have have that word in the title?

Engineers Home Workshop sounds more appropriate to me, but that's just going over old ground.

Martin

A lot of years ago i subscribed to Model Engineer after seeing the series on the construction of a Triple Expansion Marine Engine, at that time there were also the excellent article by George Thomas and the like, but having no interest in steam locomotive models it became less attractive and Model Engineers Workshop had just started so i subscribed and have been reasonably content with the articles, i have to admit that i now only give it a cursory glance when it arrives and file them away for later consumption, i might be off the mark here but i don't think it is the scope of the magazine to have to explain basic engineering and tooling.Anyone that is interested in the hobby can gain the basics from other publications. in the current issue 192 six pages were devoted to the Beginners and this is the 11th of such articles, i purchase MEW for ideas modifications new ideas to enhance my knowledge and workshop equipment.

Mike Kilpatrick Stainton with Adgarley

Things change [and of course they should], but it's worth reading the Editorial in Issue_1 of MEW.

... The scope of the new magazine was specified there.

Personally, I would much prefer MEW to concentrate upon more demanding projects for the Workshop. The current "StepperHead" series is a superb example and [assuming there are no problems with Copyright], I would suggest a reprint of some Geo. H. Thomas articles.

If there is a need for change then it would be better to "spin off" the simpler articles into a supplement [maybe published quarterly] which is a "give-away" with MEW: After a quick read, this could be passed-on to youngsters and newcomers; who would doubtless be encouraged to subscribe to MEW in due course.

Striking the right balance in a "Technical Hobbyist" magazine like MEW must be an Editorial nightmare [keep up the good work, David]; but if you allow the core content to be diluted too much then you will lose the more experienced readers.

MichaelG.

Martin,

I think the reason was because the new magazine was a spin-off from the magazine called  "Model Engineer".

... If true, then the apostrophe in the title is probably misplaced.

MichaelG.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 05/07/2012 07:48:50

Calling it 'Model Engineer's Workshop' has always sounded a bit like a veiled threat to me, considering what the coverage is stated as being. It's almost like saying, "well we could put something about a model in it, but if you behave yourselves, we won't"....

I'd vote for the coverage remaining as it is, and a more appropriate, less threatening, title!

As it is, it works fine, because I have MEW on subscription, and assuming that somebody hasn't thoughtlessly wrapped ME in a plastic bag, I can have a look at it in Smiths, and purchase it if there's something of interest in it. I think I've done that at least four times, now - in the last 20 years.

Should also say though that if somebody wants to illustrate a technique or whatever using a model build in progress, I have no objection to that, even though it isn't ideal.

Edited By Steve Garnett on 05/07/2012 09:38:01

Hi There

It is Model Engineers' Workshop i.e. for many Model Engineers.

I have suggested a title change but the office said we might lose readers. There is a distinct possibility of calling it something else in the USA though.

regards David

What if you've never made a model of anything...?

Martin.

Presumably that makes you ineligible to read it

MichaelG.

I would agree whole heartedly with the idea of a Quarterly "special" devoted to the absolute newbie, the plethora of how to cut a piece of metal and choose this or that tool is becoming counterproductive (Sorry Mick).

Articles like the Stepperhead are thought provoking even if in some instances you disagree with a principle or practice or two.

The suggestion in Scribe a Line, that Authors should (or even a hint of must), provide a line by line, hole by hole, cut by cut explanation of how to do it, ignores the number of hours necessary to write such an article. If you do not agree with this, just try writing an article or three and you will find out for yourself. What ever I am making, I tend to photograph everything on the basis that one day I might just write another article, but I do not think it will be that simple to make.

There has to be a balance in all of this. If it is a simple project, likely to be undertaken by a reader with lesser skills then OK, but once the skill level of the project is higher such as "Build your Own Lathe" then surely this is not one that would be attempted by a newbie and such detailing is totally unnecessary.

Edited By KWIL on 05/07/2012 11:12:50

Then you wouldn't have ever made anything at all, would you? I make models of items, certainly - but the scale is invariably 1:1...

Well said KWIL.

I have to strike a balance.

I learnt my engineering by reading Model Engineer in the school library (and other hobby type books).

I taught myself by reading relevant books and magazines. I had no one to teach me but I learnt.

Today, I don't think people know how to learn. They want everything handed to them on a plate and if it is not instant gratification, they simply move on to something else.

When finally let loose in a factory, I learnt by trial and error. This appears to be the main missing step nowadays, no one has access to industrial machines.

And yes, I still have all 8 fingers and two thumbs.

regards David

Hi David

Forgot to mention in my previous post that i think you are doing a grand job regarding the general content, and you are also sympathetic to us old *arts that would like to investigate CNC.

I am a time served Fitter Turner from the Shipyard In Barrow and although the title implies Turner this was only covered very briefly during the apprenticeship and i only started to really learn the fundimentals when i purchased an Elliot Emcomat 7L in 1975 (still have it in my shed) thern i went with Chevron Tankships and they had a Combination Machine Lathe/Mill/Shaper so got familliar with this bit of kit(standard equipment on all the boats in the fleet) so like yourself i am really self tought and all the better for it.