>
>on 5/30/01 6:52 AM, 2 at 2@vc.net wrote:
>
>>> Possibly a bit unfair, Rich, since the advertising is what pays the bills.
>>
>> /\ When George Grammar was QST's tech editor, he reportedly kept
>> advertisers in line. This seems to have been a major factor in people
>> trusting QST ads. My guess is that if an amplifier being lab-tested for
>> a 1950s QST review exhibited intermittent arcing, Grammer would have
>> likely have telephoned the manufacturer, described the problem, and, if
>> necessary, made them an offer they could not refuse. In the end,
>> everyone would have won. Customers would have wound up with a more
>> stable amplifier. There would have been fewer warranty-returns, and QST
>> would have eventually gained more subscribers and more advertisements. .
>> . Happy customers are like a snowball rolling down a snowdrift.
>
>Apparently, then, George never saw any intermittent arcing. Cause if he
>did, every amp on the market would now be of a different construction.
>
/\ My guess is that Grammar saw some intermittent VHF parasite-related
arcing in the 50s -- except for 813 amplifiers, of course. Actually,
such improvements should have taken place soon after ''Parasites in
Transmitters'' by G. W. Fyler appeared in the Institute of Radio
Engineers Journal. Sept. 1935. Perhaps Grammer was not aware of Fyler's
article?
>QST is still pretty tough on their advertisers. Until recently, antenna
>manufacturers could not publish gain numbers for their antennas.
>
/\ I enjoy the CB-rag ads for 3-element 11m yagis that have "12db
gain".
>>> To my mind, the greatest thing abt ARRL is the effort put into defending
>> amateur
>>> radio internationally - where it counts. If you've got no frequencies,
you've
>>> got no amateur radio. They do a poor job of blowing their own trumpet on
that
>>> though.
>>>
>> /\ I have heard this claim for at least 4 decades. It is spelled out
>> in no uncertain terms in the 1955 *Radio Amateur's Handbook*.
>> - A QST staffer told me that the biggest laugher in hamdom is the idea
>> that ARRL members think they control the League by voting for ARRL
>> Directors. . . Are you familiar with the term "shaking-hands money"?
>
>We don't "control" it but we certainly do have an influence.
/\ Three Directors who expressed concerns about the 9/94 Technical
Topics column were apparently made an offer that they could not refuse -
since all of them backed off in unison.
>I personally know my new division directory and he is a fantastic fellow.
/\ In Sept., 1994, QST's "Technical Topics" published the 6-person (Fred
Telewski, Tom Rauch, et al.) critique of the Jan, 1994 QST article "The
Nearly Perfect Amplifier" by yours truly. One of the ARRL Directors
read the critique, and noted Mr. Rauch's dissertation on why
resistance-wire (low-Q/low Rp) VHF parasitic suppressors could not
possibly work. The Director subsequently wrote to the ARRL (with a
copy to the author) and stated that he had stabilized his own
intermittently-unstable 8877 amplifier by using such suppressors. When
word got around locally about his success at stabilizing the once
problematic 8877 amplifier, other 8877 amplifier owners in the area
brought their amplifiers to him for retrofitting. Again, he was
successful. Unfortunately, the end of this story is Not: "and they
lived happily ever after".
My guess is that "shaking-hands money" was involved.
> Does he have
>influence at the ARRL? Sure. Did I vote for him? Yes. Do things go on in
>the ARRL outside his control and thereby mine? Yup. Same thing happens in
>Washinton DC! Yet I still vote for President and Congress. Might as well
>influence what I can.
/\ And would you be a tad suspicious if Congress counted our votes for
Congress?
>
>I'll agree with Peter that the league does a very good job at defending our
>frequencies and representing the interest of US hams worldwide.
>
/\ how do you know this? There are a number of super-rich hams on this
planet who have enough Gigadollars to influnce things. Another factor is
that current technology is such that HF and VHF is not as desirable as it
once was.
cheers, Jon
- R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.
end
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|