1. Home
  2. ⚙ Stationary Engines - UK
  3. SEM does it again!

SEM does it again!

Another submission reduced to virtual gibberish. Here's what I wrote:-

Hi Patrick,

Once more SEM has landed on the door mat, plenty to read as usual but I found the ID&ASST piece from Nick Rowland particularly interesting and hope I can add some information

1) Lowne atmospheric engine. I attach a picture and description of a similar engine which is reproduced in hot air engine helpline advisor Bob Sier's book 'Hot air caloric and stirling engines'. It's not easy to see the burner, but is does look like a fairly simple cyclindrical 'bunsen' type much as Nick has already constructed. I guess you'd need to contact Bob for permission to use the material in SEM. 2) Hardy and Padmore 'style 1'. I attach a picture of what I believe to be such an engine taken at this year's 1000 engine rally. Note that it is built to Southall's, rather than Southwell's, patent and is certainly rather different to Nick's charming model. 3) 'Leek' engine. It has often been observed that no two of these engines are alike as most were amateur built using, as I believe Charles Hudson put it, "the parts of the moment". So it is quite in order to use any carburettor which looks the part. I am particularly fascinated by what I take to be the governor; presumably as it rotates the two pieces of chain fly out into a catenary curve which tightens with increasing speed - ingenious!

Apart from the general mangling, they managed to transcribe 'catenary' as 'centenery' (corrected my typo on the word cylindrical though!). Sometimes I wonder if I can really be bothered submitting stuff any longer :-(

Nick H

Reply to
Nick H
Loading thread data ...

Nick,

And I was going to congratulate you on submitting yet another article on the basis that when ever I send anything I don't even get an acknowledgement that they received it, therefore I gave up years ago. Yet they still ask for stuff.

Martin P

Reply to
campingstoveman

Tell me honestly Martin; am I being over sensitive, does it in fact read fine if you don't know what it 'should' have looked like?

Nick H

Reply to
Nick H

Nick,

I have read it and found no problem apart from the addition of the word "with" in the first part and "centenary" in the last part, I then found 404 and read the original letter and it all still made sense.

Martin P

Reply to
campingstoveman

Speaking purely as I find, if I send stuff in it gets published. I always start by e-mailing GW & giving him a photoless headsup on line. He always acknowledges this & we often have an e-mail exchange, his replies always being brief but polite and cogent. This I follow up with a disk in Word

2000 accompanied by a hardcopy print out indicating where the photos go and what the captions are. This seems to work. We'll soon see as I'm about to send in a new ABC article that might well run on into two editions.

A while ago I had a bit of a go at GW over the terrible muddle that the classified ads were getting into. Whether it had any effect I don't know, but things are certainly better.

Anyone notice the Lister D lighting set for £550??

No "must have" toys to drag me across the country this month ;o))

Regards,

J. Kim Siddorn, Regia Anglorum

This e-mail and attachments are intended for the named addressee only and the information in this message and/or attachments may contain protected health, legally privileged, or otherwise confidential information. If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you may not further disseminate, distribute, disclose, copy or forward this message or any of the content herein. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may or may not indicate the established policy of Regia Anglorum. It is the society's principal to rely solely upon hard copy communications in dealing with contractual matters.

This computer is protected with daily updated anti-viral software, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure their incoming mail is virus-free.

Reply to
Kim Siddorn

I've sent it by email and post and have not received any response back so I gave up trying, now I take pictures purely for my entertainment only. If I did not know a lot of the contributors personally I would suggest it a clique but as I say I know different as a number of them are friends.

Reply to
campingstoveman

Well, I think you've answered my question there Martin. If it reads ok then I guess it's just a case of trying to divorce the finished item from what one wrote and accepting it at face value. Apologies to all for 'going off on one' (again!).

Nick H

Reply to
Nick H

"Kim Siddorn" wrote (snip):-

In the dim distant past I remember submitting articles with typed copy and 'real' pictures by post, but I think with the limited number of round tuits I have at my disposal I'd average about one a decade if I still had to go through that drill - it's supposed to be a hobby and as soon as it becomes a chore, the whole point is lost.

Nick H

Reply to
Nick H

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.