Is it just me?

[Gary WoodingParticipant @garywooding25363]

I was profoundly disappointed with issue 207.

"CNC in the (Model Engineers&#39 Workshop" was almost all about general milling with only a very small section about CNC, and even that was misleading. Comments on each line of the G-code would be helpful.

"Crossing Out using a Rotary Table" was a rather trivial example of using a rotary table.

"Coordinate Drilling of Holes" was really an insult to anybody who has ever seen graduated hand-wheels. If somebody using a milling machine doesn't know how the graduated hand-wheels are used then they really shouldn't be left alone with such a machine. The rest of the two-part article was more of personal history than anything to do with using a workshop.

The other articles were OK.

I guess I'm alone.

[Gary WoodingParticipant @garywooding25363]

[LambtonParticipant @lambton]

You are not alone Garry.

I find that MEW is becoming less and less relevant to the things that I am interested in. I am sure it must be time to have a separate magazine for CNC users then full justice could be done to this important topic. I know this has been suggested many times in the past but it needs doing sooner or later.

Eric

[jason udallParticipant @jasonudall57142]

Not just you

[martin perman 1Participant @martinperman1]

Gentlemen,

I have been in engineering all of my working life and have been involved in Robotics, CNC machine tools in all forms and various other sections of mechanical/electrical engineering, I have only been reading MEW for about three years and enjoy the magazine immensely as regardless of the topic there is always something interesting to learn even though I may have done it a different way previously, if I have any sort of critisism then there is more articles of CNC that I would want but you cant please everybody al the time. I've never understood why somebody would want a CNC machine at home because 95% of any work required would be one offs and a total waste of an individuals time.

Martin P

[Stephen BensonParticipant @stephenbenson75261]

I thought this issue was tailor made for me when I read the contents on here but  I was very disappointed very simplistic. The coordinate drilling did not mention toolmakers buttons as I was expecting but went on about reading standard dials and the 9+ pages of Chesters Generic Chinese tools just made it worst.

The only thing that was not simplistic was the milling for absolute beginners which contained no pictures or diagrams at all, I liked the nice picture of a clock on the front cover.

 

Edited By Stephen Benson on 05/09/2013 19:42:14

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

…I've never understood why somebody would want a CNC machine at home because 95% of any work required would be one offs and a total waste of an individuals time

Martin!

Obviously, you are not making a 4-8-8-4 centepede-tendered locomotive! (or, a 7 cylinder radial, or are a part of a team build, or want to keep progressing whilst having to wash the dishes and walk the dog after dinner)

I, at times, go through making batches of 20 to 100 bits for my model building, but recently have been making some more bits for my Worden T&C grinder, and silver soldering boiler(s), and it's all manual machines.

Another JohnS.

[John ShepherdParticipant @johnshepherd38883]

In the past I have always accepted that some issues may not be of too much interest to me but even then I have usually found something worth reading. Recently though the less interesting issues are becoming the norm and the reading less enjoyable.

The editor may defend his position by telling us it is the quality of material submitted but he and the publishers should remember that we are paying for a commercial magazine and not for voluntary contributions, yes I know payment is made for articles but are any actually commissioned?

After subscribing from issue 3, I am seriously considering saving my money and buying the odd copy when (and if) there is something that interests me. Not only has this latest edition made me think this, but some of the strange things that have been said and done by the editor and the publishers on this forum have given me cause for concern for the future of MEW.

John

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Count me amongst the disappointed.

I was pleased to see another instalment in the StepperHead series; but much of this issue seemed to lack substance.

MichaelG.

[John Stevenson 1Participant @johnstevenson1]

I think we need more articles to keep the Luddites happy

 

How to mine your own iron ore and a spin off into charcoal manufacture should fit in well 

Edited By John Stevenson on 05/09/2013 21:11:29

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

Nonsense John, we need a twelve page analysis of the effects of clock jitter on surface finish.

Neil

[martin perman 1Participant @martinperman1]

All,

I'm far from a Luddite and I can understand the desire to convert machines to Automate them but it seems impractical to me to make a model factory style, where is the fun it that.

Martin P

[keithmartParticipant @keithmart]

Hi

I was also dissapointed wth this mag.

One of my gripes is the long, waffling articles over many issues, and other overly simple short articles.

Where is the happy medium we used to hav?

Regards

Keith

Leeds UK

[julian atkinsParticipant @julianatkins58923]

im 100% with martin on this. i have very basic antiquated equipment and have no interest whatsoever in building things with modern methods. precision isnt difficult to obtain with basic machinery, and if i was interested in computers (ie CAD and CNC) i wouldnt spend most of my spare time in my workshop. the reward and satisfaction for me is making stuff using methods and skills that are not found in a modern machine shop.

cheers,

julian

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

Julian;

I'm most certainly NOT going to disagree with your message above.

Maybe CNC is a bridge to help younger people join the hobby?? Was just showing off model engineering at a maker faire, and, MANY younger people came up to our display very knowledgable in computers, 3D drawing, 3D printing, but not ever having touched a lathe or mill. To them, this was like some lofty goal – machine shops have been out of our school system for about 2 decades.

Personally, I'd love to get a few new members for our club every year, and wish that they'd be closer to 20 than 90.

Another JohnS

[Anonymous]

I very much doubt that there would be a sufficiently big market in the UK for a CNC only magazine.

Regards,

Andrew

[RobboParticipant @robbo]

Another John S

I know you're in Canada, but what the h**l is a faire?

All,

Also disappointed in recent MEW, to the extent will probably end subscription. Have them all from No 1 (which didn't have a number – was that pessimistic?) and modern ones don't compare.

Handle twiddling was a relief from computering at work, and is now a relief from the ludicrous modern world.

Despite Andrew's post, I can see MEW becoming "Computerised Mechanics" and the old style MEW articles returning to ME from whence they came – as has already started.

Phil

Edited By Robbo on 06/09/2013 09:55:43

[Gordon WassParticipant @gordonwass]

If I had a shop that sold MEW any where near me I would cancel my sub. Not so much the content but the endless pages of puffery ( is that a word ?) just to fill somebodies pocket I presume.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Gordon Wass on 06/09/2013 10:03:06:

… puffery ( is that a word ?) …

.

Gordon

Yes it is a word [with a meaning in English Law]

Have a look here, and be sure to follow the "Carbolic Smoke Ball" reference.

MichaelG.

.

Edited By Michael Gilligan on 06/09/2013 10:28:44

[Gray62Participant @gray62]

I concur with all complaints on the content of the lastest issue.

3 pages to describe making a fixed steady !! – ludicrous

3 pages on crossing out clock wheels!! – How hard can it be?

6 pages as part 2 of an already done to death subject on improving what can only be described as cheap drill vices! – I for one wouldn't waste time or money on vices like that – You cannot make a silk purse from a sows ear!

And just how many parts is it going to take to describe building a vertical slide? That could have easily been covered in on 4 page concise article.

And yet and interesting (to me at least) article on converting a taiwanese lathe to CNC gets one page and 'to be continued'.

I think it's about time the editorial process was reviewed.

Are the editorial team really this strapped for content?

This magazine is rapidly going down the pan and if the trend continues, my subscription will not!

CB

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

A year ago the thought of the demise of MEW would not have entered my head, now though I am beginning to see an increase in dissatisfaction of the readers (or at least the ones that post here) so unless there is a sea change I'm sure MEW will eventually disappear.

The world is changing, paper publications are becoming uneconomic. this is just a fact of life and it affects the whole industry not just our hobby magazines. Publishers no longer have the facilities or the staff to create their own articles so rely on external contributors who (especially in the case of this magazine) get little encouragement.

Whilst thinking about the declining readership I wondered why I was happy to subscribe and avidly read some journals for 20-30 years without ever getting tired of them. The reason is quite simple really, they were mainly to do with electronics which was (and is) constantly evolving. There was always something new, new ICs, new components, new circuit concepts, new computers, new software etc, etc. Some of these magazines had regular articles written by the editorial staff, (nowadays they might be called a blog) that were interesting to read in their own right. I cannot speak for ME as I dont take it, but MEW has a miniscule amount of text written by the editorial staff, without it the magazine will ever develop a 'personality' that will attract and involve the readers, all it will be is just be a collection of freelancers contributions collated to act as a vehicle to sell subscriptions and advertising.

As a magazine about engineering, home or otherwise, MEW carries hardly any product reviews, compared to photographic, computer, aeromodelling or DIY magazines that seem to have no shortage of comparative reviews and discussions of the latest products and techniques. Since MEW started many newish technologies have become commonplace but we have have had no general (editor written or editor inspired) articles on laser cutting, additive manufacture or in fact anything even things like photoetching. I know these subjects have been covered in the past but mostly as part of a constructional article and usually not in any detail.

I dont want a magazine full of reviews or full of any one particular subject, I do want information (fresh, and freshly presented) and a variety of articles and types of article. I used to enjoy reading readers letters but these recently seem to be letters addressed to the editor personally. Its a while since a readers letter generated follow up replies although I suppose that is now superseded by the online forum. An event diary and club news never excited me but even those have long gone.

MEWs problems (it cannot be denied that it has some) must stem from the MTM management, the editor probably has little say in the matter, and even that is diminished by the fact (if I have deduced correctly) that the editorship is only a part time employee.

I know there is a limit to how many times the magazine should cover a Stent or an improved vice before readers get turned off, however gardening magazines seem to flourish in spite of the predictable, repetitive, and seasonable nature of the subject but the actual reason for their success is a mystery to me.

I really don't want to see MEW go the way of AutoTrader but in my opinion unless it bucks its ideas up it will do.

Ian P

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

Gary, there is a simple way of getting the subject material you want to see in MEW, write it , and send it in, I think it will be accepted with thanks, it's us out in the work shops that are the ones that know what's wanted. Ian S C

[Gary WoodingParticipant @garywooding25363]

Ian, I've had two articles published in MEW, and submitted a third one way back in February; as far as I know it hasn't been rejected, but I've heard nothing more about it.

[Ian PParticipant @ianp]

Posted by Gary Wooding on 06/09/2013 14:02:13:

Ian, I've had two articles published in MEW, and submitted a third one way back in February; as far as I know it hasn't been rejected, but I've heard nothing more about it.

That is the sort of thing I meant when I said 'little encouragement'.

Some time ago I wrote most of an article with the intention of submitting it but lost heart when I read a thread on this forum from contributors who felt they were not appreciated.

One of my pet hates with MEW is that many of the articles have too many large but completely pointless photographs. I am not having a did at the writers as they should submit a surfeit that allows the editor to use the most apropriate. As just one random example, page 60 of MEW 207 has a picture titled 'The Stepper Motors'. The motors themselves (unmounted) occupy maybe 2% of the picture area adding precisely nothing to the value of the article.

Ian P

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

Lets turn it upside down .

(1)Find out what subjects people actually want to see articles about .

(2)Find and encourage suitable authors .

(3)Write a new set of contributor guidelines .

(4)Set payment rate at a level which will attract some authors from professional backgrounds . Not to the exclusion of amateurs at all but enough to raise the quality standard and interest level a few thousand percent .

(5) Ban all articles from great experts and sad nutters .

(6) Re unite the magazines as one general interest publication and have a few specials a year on particular subjects like CNC .

nb:

(a) I gave up reading the magazines on any regular basis back in the 1980’s .

(b) Of all the many Model Engineers that I have known in recent times almost zero number read the magazines on any regular basis .(The one exception was Neville Evans who read the magazine to check his own articles).

(c)There are large numbers of people out here who could become regular readers again given the right encouragement .

Regards ,

MikeW

[Author]

Posts