A new editor for Model Engineer

[davidmew]

Hi There
The editorial teams of Model Engineer and Model Engineers' Workshop have been combined.

I am the new editor of Model Engineer (David Clark).
I will also continue to edit Model Engineers' Workshop.

Anyone who has supplied an article to Model Engineer in the last 3 years and has not seen it in print or had it returned is welcome to submit their article again. I won't promise to publish it but I will read it and reply to you.

Both magazines will keep their separate identities and we will move forward towards a better future for both magazines.
regards David Clark
Editor Model Engineer and
Model Engineers' Workshop.

[Myford Matt]

It's easy to criticise, but I am getting so close to cancelling my subscription to ME that I thought it worth offering a few personal points:

1. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
2. I am so tired of 'Letter to a grandson', it is toe-curlingly twee and tells me very little that I couldn't get from five minutes with google or Wikipedia.
3. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
4. The new section on choosing tools is dreadful padding – four pages on choosing a puller? Pull the other one.
5. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
6. Historically, ME magazine was a broad church, including horology, scale ships and goodness knows what else. Nowadays, there are half a dozen magazines for every possible interest. Stick to your core subject, do what it says on the tin and cover model engineering.
7. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
8. I have a lot of respect for Tony Griffiths, but what is the point of repeating his machine tool material – it's all out there for free on his website.
9. I'd rather have a good monthly magazine without the padding, than a weak fortnightly magazine with all the irrelevant stuff. Yes, you'll lose ad and subscription revenue in the short-term. In the long-term you'll have a viable high quality magazine.
10. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
11. I'm sorry to say that almost everyone I ask feels ME magazine is a pale shadow of what it used to be. MEW is, however, a good read, I hope you can apply the same editorial values to ME.
12. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.
13. Ditch three-quarters of the letters pages – mostly dreary waffle.
14. Above all it would be nice to have more 'model engineering' in Model Engineer.

ME is not all bad, but the increasing percentage of padding, waffle and irrelevant material is so diluting its strengths that I really question its long-term survival. It would be a great shame if it folded. It has been published since 1898, survived world wars, the great depression, oil shocks and more. The editorial team really needs to take a long, cold look at what it is for, who it is for and why it is bought.

Truly, I wish you the best of luck as editor

[Ansty]

David

Just a quick good luck wish for the editors job of ME.
I have to agree with Myford Matt about the content of ME, although not thinking of cancelling my subscription just yet.
I hope that you are able to give us a magazine that lives up to it's old reputation of the 50's and 60's and that hopefully will ensure the continued life of the magazine.

Once again good luck

Brian

[mutley]

I looked at a recent copy in my local WH Smiths and left witout buying. I dont expect ME to tell me about the diffrent BR standards and photo competitions when the winer has nothing to do with modeling. Myford Matt has it about right. That aside good luck.

Andy

[garethp]

I agree ME seems to be going through a bad patch, I get EIM, MEW and ME (Much to the wife's annoyance!) and ME gets the quickest read, purely because it doesnt seem to have much content of interest. On the other hand I think MEW and EIM are full of interesting stuff, I dont intend to unsubscribe yet as the older (1980's) EIM's dont seem that good to me and I guess any magazine can have its bad times.

Good luck David.

Gareth.

[alanstepney]

I suspect that, no matter what the content, some people wouldnt be happy.
There are some articles that I dont bother to read, but I accept that they may be of interest to others.

In fact, look back through old ME's, and one can see the same things repeated at regular intervals.
They might be old knowledge to "us", but may well be exactly the things that a newcomer needs.

As for the Internet, yes, there is a lot of information in cyber-space, but there are also a large number of people who either dont use the internet, or prefer the written word.

So, right now I will adopt a "wait and see" approach, and give it at least a year (for it is likely to be that long before any changes are apparent) before makign my judgement.

Meanwhile, good luck to David and I hope the new role turns out well.

[houstonceng]

There probably won't be too many more "Letters to a Grandson" in ME, since Maurice 'Jack' 'Monty' Hall Ellis - the writer of the series - passed to the Great Workshop Above on 05 October.

His obit was in Issue 4339 (21 Nov - 04 Dec) of ME.

[spamcanman]

ME has survived for so many years due to selling copies and this mag is the cheapest on the stands (cost of a cup of coffee) so there is nothing more irratating than people reading mags for however long then putting them back. I bet some have read every issue this year without buying, shame on them

Good luck David

[denis M]

For my 2p worth.

Can we have less about the M.E Exhibition at Ascot, it seems to run on for months. Can we have less of the bright colours in the reports as my old peepers struggle to read it and could we possibly have more about societies etc, perhaps featuring one ever month or so.

Having said that all the best David.

[baggo]

I for one hope that ME continues for as long as it has been going already. I still look forward to it arriving every fortnight, even though some weeks there may not be that much in it to attract my attention.

The subject of content has been discussed before and as Alan says, you will never please everybody!

I have no doubt that the problem facing any Editor is lack of suitable material to publish. If the material isn't there, you can't publish it! Most of the regular contributors of times past have now long gone and there seems a lack of similar contributors to take their place. As has been mentioned before, the future is in our hands!

John

[kingsteam9]

I understand and partly agree with Matt's view, but Baggo has hit it on the head - ME's content depends to a great degree on whatever contributions are submitted to the editor (by m.e's like us) so we perhaps need to be rather more constructive about the whole issue of content. That said, my sole contribution was over thirty years ago so maybe time for me to do something towards it.

Having taken ME now for just on fifty years I've no plans to relinquishing my subscription in the foreseeable future. Good luck to you David, - you'll have my full support.

Robin

[alanstepney]

Lets look at it another way. When was ME at its best?

I suspect many would say in the late 50's - 60's.
But, if LBSC was to publish his designs today, many would be critical of the lack of adherence to scale and prototype.
Others would bemoan the emphasis on "old technology" with never a mention of CNC etc.
And, loco build articles running for two years?
Many would find that too long to keep their interest, and those with no interest in that specific model would complain about the waste of space.

Although I feel that ME was at its best when run by enthusiasts rather than accountants,
and especially when Percival Marshall was at the helm, times change as do the expectations of the purchasers.

[brozier]

Hi Dave,

Good luck with your new job(s).

I take MEW and ME and feel MEW has started to improve since you took over.

I have a complete run of MEW and have all but one issue starting from vol 100 of ME. I find the back issues are a great reference and quite enjoy reading the old ones.

The content in ME is pretty light, I find the exhibition reviews take up way to much room. Though I understand they are important for the medal winners.

I don't mind the Tony Griffiths stuff - I only use his website for reference and wouldn't sit and read through it all, whereas a small chunk every two weeks is interesting.

I think it should have more 2.5" gauge stuff as this area is one seeing a lot of growth. Is the 2.5" gauge society doing any more work following on from Ayesha 2?

I'd like a regular feature spotlighting the different clubs and their tracks around the country being new to the hobby I have only seen my local track (NW Leicestershire) and Guildford for the show. Every track is different and every club is different I'm sure.

In terms of new contributors there are a lot of people doing top quality work and generating interesting web sites you need to pro-actively approach these people to publish their work.

I'd include people like our very own Baggo (www.baggo.copperstream.co.uk/me/meindex.html) and Dr John (www.dr-john.org/)

This guy in Japan does brilliant CAD though his English needs a bit of editing. mokei-jouki.hp.infoseek.co.jp/e-Wiltop.htm

I refer to Erik-Jan Stroetinga's site all the time members.chello.nl/e.stroetinga/index.htm

You've already missed Jan-Erik Nystrom (www.saunalahti.fi/~animato/steam/) as he now writes for Live Steam Magazine in the USA.

Hag thought of approaching some of the second hand dealers for tips on refurbishing old locos?

Cheers
Bryan

[brozier]

Another issue that really annoys me is back issues. Most MEW/ME articles refer back to previous issues.

YourHobbyStore actively pursues people who publish old ME articles on the web and yet provide no legitimate way of getting access to them. Only providing a year or two as back issues.

Why is there no on-line reprint service? How come you don't publish your own on-line index?

Cheers
Bryan

[ron]

I'm afraid I cancelled my subscription a few months ago, even though it is a cheap magazine compared to most I didn't find a lot in it to hold my interest, I more or less agree with what Myford Matt posted. It's hard to see this thread being anything other than negative but I think the criticism is justified and I hope with the changes that have been made it regains it's former glory.
Ron

[Laurie_B]

I subscribe to M.E.,and though I do find the content of the magazine disappointing at times,but I feel it deserves our support,otherwise the magazine may be lost altogether.
One of the problems M.E. has had over recent years has been several changes of ownership,which hasn't really helped the situation.

And as pointed out-the content is often supplied by model engineers,but there aren't as many model engineers around nowadays,as used to be the case.

Though the coverage of exhibitions is interesting in a way,there could be more 'follow-up' articles on some of the more eye-catching and unusual exhibits that do appear at the model engineering shows.For example,the recent coverage of Tim Cole's ingeniuos 5" gauge model,'GT3' could have provided readers with a more technical update of this project.Incidentally,one of the builders plates from the original GT3 locomotive sold for £5,000 recently!

Let's hope that the change of editor and the last change of ownership,sees improvements to the magazine.

[Noddy]

Congratulations!

I get ME, MEW and Engineering in miniature on order from a local newsagent (when your imcompetant Irish distributer (Eason / EM News) can be bothered to deliver them).

ME costs me €4.50 a shot (that's two large cappucinos served by the gorgeous Agnita, and EIM currently has better content, so your competition is tough).

The other guys have covered most points already, but I'll disagree with Matt on one point (we normally disagree on many more!).

I love the letters page!

There are some amazingly knowledgable readers, willing to take the time to put their knowledge and experience down in a carefully considered letter, and YOU are able to save us from seeing most of the spam (but please, no more letters from old men with aspergers ranting about the health and Safety implications of what Dave Fenner's very nice daughter is wearing). That is something which the immediacy of t'net can't compete with.

My dislikes:

The layout is appalling!

Banner titles take up far too much room, which could be better used for larger photos.

photos are to often sized by someone who does not appreciate which ones need to be large to show detail.

There is too much white paper left unused. The small format 1950's ME managed to convey much more info in a lot less space.

How about having a cover photo that relates to something inside that issue?

Good luck, If you can do with ME what you've done at MEW, We'll all be happy
Keith

[davidmew]

Hi There
I will try to answer all comments in one go so this post may be a bit long.

First, Myford Matt.
Yes, it would be nice to have some model engineering in Model Engineer. I look forward to receiving some articles from you Matt!

Not everyone has Internet access or the skills to do research.
I have about 25 letters that may be published. Monty was quite popular but perhaps a longer period between publication of individual issues may be called for. Say every 6 weeks?

This type of review of tools has been chopped, this was a total waste of good editorial space. Tool reviews may happen in the What's In Store section (thats a blast from the past) but 4 pages?
I don't think so.

I will stick to the core subjects but will expand on the types of models covered. Boats have their own magazines but I will still publish steam engine type articles for steam boats. Where are all the tram modelers? Clocks will continue to be covered with 2 more construction series promised for next year. (1 series may not be till the end of 2009.)

I think legitimate railway scales are from gauge 1 upward including the 16mm narrow gauge scene but will restrict articles to metal based models, no plastic kits.

My immediate first instinct was to stop publishing Tony's machine tool articles but after talking to Mike Crisp, he says they are popular with readers' who have no web access and also some readers' prefer to read his articles in the magazine rather than on the web.

I will ask about this type of article when I do the reader survey.

We have no plans to publish monthly. If we did, the price would increase to the same as Model Engineers' Workshop and I expect Engineering In Miniature would raise their price by £1 as well.

Having looked at many of the older Model Engineer mags. from the 50's, 60' and 70's they still contained items I found boring but no filler material was used.

I use the best of the best of the material I have for Model Engineers' Workshop hoping that more material will arrive to replace what I have used. I will do the same for Model Engineer.

Model Engineer will not fold. I will improve it beyond recognition but I do need articles, get writing Matt. I am increasing the minimum page payment rate by 25% for any magazine published after January 1st so you could have a nice little earner for a bit of effort.


Hi Mutley
I totally agree with you.
I would not buy a magazine without looking at it first to see if there is something of interest in it. One of the reasons Model Engineers' Workshop sells so well in the newsagents is that there is something worth reading in every issue.

My first issue is 4341 on sale 19th of January. It still has some articles that might not be popular with everyone but it has no filler material either.

Alanstepney
It can't take a year to change. I want to see results within weeks.
Everything repeats, different authors and methods will help to improve the magazine. An awful lot of people have no Internet access.

Dennis M
Publishing articles about the MEX is traditional but I agree it should not be overdone. Coverage should certainly be finished within 4 months maximum. I also think that publishing entry forms and entry instructions every fortnight for 4 months prior to the exhibition is over the top.

Baggo
Yes, you are right. I have very little material to publish unless I turn ME into a clone of MEW. Anyone who has contributed an article to ME in the last 3 years and has not seen it in print or had a negative reply should submit it again. I won't promise to publish it but I will look at it and say yes or no. (More often than not it will be yes.)

Alanstepney again
I have no intention of printing CNC articles in ME. Certainly not before a readers' survey anyway. I think the place for CNC is in MEW. I will be putting about 6 to 8 pages of tooling type articles into ME.

I do want to publish an ongoing locomotive construction series. Live Steam stopped publishing long running series I think and is the poorer for it.

Yes, MyHobbyStore is run by an accountant, Owen Davies but he will listen to his editors.

Brazier
I will be contacting the 2 1/2in. gauge society about more articles but I expect they may prefer to run them in their own magazine.

I will bear in mind club visits. What do the rest of you think?

Yes I can approach people who publish construction projects on their own web sites but then we get into the Jan Ridders situation where we are using second hand material.
4340 has Jan's Pop Pop roundabout in it. Why? It is available on the Internet, it has just been published in the Dutch magazine De Model Bouwer.

Alanstepney again
Photocopies of back issues are available from customer services. The price is below what is was a good few years ago but we still get complaints about price.


Well that is most of your queries answered, most individually.

I hope I have reassured you all? Model Engineer will reclaim its position as the premier Model Engineering magazine in the world.
Watch this space.

regards David
Editor Model Engineer and
Model Engineers' workshop

[standardsteam]

It's true that ME is lacking a little in "thickness", but I suppose that wouldn't matter too much if it was made up in quality. I'm not into IC engines myself but I appreciate regular contributers like "Nemet" and how they follow on from the late greats like E.T.Westbury.

Over the years it's these regular contributions from LBSC, Don Young, Martin Evans, Tubal Cain, Spenlove et al. are what I felt made up the core of the magazine. Peter Rich's drawings are excellent if some engines he describes aren't necessarily of any interest to me.

I feel that when MEW became regular it took a lot of the interesting machining content with it. I feel that a good crossover would be to run a machining/tooling article in ME and expand on it in more depth in MEW for more skilled/more specialised readers of MEW. ME really need to be re-introducing notes for amateur machinists - even if it means repeating some content that was published a while ago. How many newcomers to model engineering have a machining apprenticeship or even had the opportunity to study metal/woodwork at school?

I'm fascinated by clockmaking even though I'll never do it and the fact it's "full size" engineering and not model engineering. I've learnt a lot from the stage-by-stage illustrations in clock making.

Maybe ME should produce a battery electric design for those that can't afford large copper boilers. After all LBSC was describing the Britannia whilst they were making them in locomotive workshops! Why not a modern design? I'm still a steam enthusiast but I'd be interested to follow a design of a 66, 125 or Eurostar for example, we all seem stuck in the 1950's.

How about more scale stock? Everyone concentrates on the head of the train, my interest is equal in the train itself. This itself is stating that ME has always been focussed on locomotives although had a fairly reasonable contribution of boats at one point, those items such as flash steam which would be of interest to model engineers.

I'm sure readers of this board can come up with a multitude of idea that they'd like to see even if they don't have time to produce the copy. What I suppose we have to resist is the constant gripes of the never-satisfied brigade. After all we all have a choice of whether to buy the magazine or not, and if you get the mix right then I'm sure the magazine will sell itself.

Good luck.

[davidmew]

Hi There
I don't think the basics in Model Engineer and expand the article into Model Engineers' Workshop.
I may be wrong but there are probably more experts reading ME than MEW.

I agree, lack of machining content helped undermine Model Engineer. That is why I intend to reintroduce it for a few pages per issue.

Beginners are firmly in mind especially schools. The problems with beginners and most youngsters are that they are only familiar with metric dimensions. They have no idea when it comes to imperial dimensions. This is also a problem with MEW articles.

While we can't change all articles to metric drawings, I will be looking for someone to do a series for schools and beginners with metric drawings.

regards David
Editor Model Engineer and
Model Engineers' Workshop