To all with interest in preservation

I think though that for many machine your recent comparison with Inca (was it Inca?) pottery and other archaeology is not especially relevant. I doubt if we have any working drawings, or other written documentation on how these machines work. For many computers such as the IBM 1130, the PDP-8 and even the ICT 1301 we have copious documentation, drawings, records, photographs and software. We understand the technology and contraction of these machines in intimate detail. Given sufficient funds we could, as with the Manchester Mk1 (Baby) produce modern replicas of these machines. Some such as the IBM 1130, would be expensive to replicate as it used IBM SLT "Hybrid" circuits and cartridge disks, but I am sure there is enough information available to clone the thing. Given this what on earth can we hop to learn by leaving the thing in a corner to decay. I would concede this point if care was taken to preserve machines that were not run. However in my experience machines that are not used, and considered as "un-useable" are often not looked after either. This neglect may take the simple form of not being kept in climatically controlled conditions, if on display they may not be well protected from tampering by museum visitors. I personally have observed that the exposed parts show signs of rust, or if made from one of the alloys used in die-casting, corrosion. I would expect any exposed copper to show similar signs of decay. All too often "preservation" is equated with "do not touch at all". I believe that it needs to be an active process and the condition of the artefacts must be monitored and recorded, and if decay occurs action taken. Dave