Talk:Hot air engine

Re. 18:29, 17 April 2008 Mikiemike (Talk | contribs) (6,778 bytes) (user:pv=mrt is trying to give a history lesson rather than just say what the cycles are. He deleted the cycles without any reason. I put them back in.) All I did was add some refs and replace limited number of cycles mentioned in intro with a link to the more expansive 'thermodynamic cycles' section later on in the article. What was wrng with that?Pv=mrt (talk) 20:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No response recieved either here or on Mikiemike's talk page. Therefore I am again removing the cycles from the intro on the basis that they (and other, though by no means all, possible hot air engine cycles) are amply covered by the link to the 'thermodynamic cycles' section later in the article. Pv=mrt (talk) 10:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Savery et al.[edit]

recorded from as early as 1699 [citation needed]

Google shows several sources. There is some relevant out-of-copyright material at http://web.archive.org/web/200708/history.rochester.edu/steam/thurston/1878/Chapter1.html It appears that Thomas Savery built on the work of Edward Somerset (second Marquis of Worcester) and obtained a patent for a steam engine in 1698, then demonstrated it publicly in 1699. A citation or two would improve the entry. (Please feel free to delete this item once the citation is added.) --JH Jh213153 (talk) 17:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why is a laundry list of thermodynamics cycles unrelated to hot air engine here?[edit]

the list of cycles includes the one behind steam engine and internal combustion engines, neither of which are hot air engine. This list should go into the appropriate article Thermodynamic cycle (in fact it's already there) which we can link to here. 76.119.30.87 (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hot air engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926022555/http://www.mech.canterbury.ac.nz/documents/sc_intro.pdf to http://www.mech.canterbury.ac.nz/documents/sc_intro.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vague or opinionated writing.[edit]

Ericsson built his third hot air engine (the caloric engine) in 1833 which excited so much interest a few years ago in England; and which, if it should be brought into practical operation, will prove the most important mechanical invention ever conceived by the human mind, and one that will confer greater benefits on civilized life than any that has ever preceded it. For the object of it is the production of mechanical power by the agency of heat, at an expenditure of fuel so exceedingly small, that man will have an almost unlimited mechanical force at his command, in regions where fuel may now be said hardly to exist.

This comes across as either writing from Ericsson himself. a critique from another author, or the writer is making bold and unnecessary claims about the value of this technology.

It's obviously quoted from something written at the time. I've put it in quotation marks but should really be cited properly. --Roly (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]