It seems to me that if the ARRL applies the same standard to testing *all*
radios, well then it's fair test. It may not be "comprehensive", but all
manufacturers will live or die by the same results.
73,
Joe, W2RBA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Jim Reid
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 11:42 PM
> To: tentec@contesting.com; W1RFI@arrl.org; KH6DX@arrl.org
> Subject: [TenTec] Re: # 4 Argonaut V ARRL Review 3rd and 2nd IPs ?
>
>
> Stuart, K5KVH, wrote, in part:
>
>
> > Jim, The ARRL lab has a very limited budget and likes to do
> > tests some hams can replicate. The spectrum analyzer
> > Rhode and Schwartz uses is a professional probably $50,000
> > one, or more. ARRL lab has some good basic ones, but
> > probably not the ones that will do the high dynamic range of
> > todays new receivers, in fact, it is a problem for the $25,000
> > spectrum analyzers, for we face the same in our lab at the University.
>
> Well, if the ARRL cannot afford to do an accurate test, using
> the correct and industry standard method, then, I believe
> they have no business substituting some other method and
> publishing the results as accurate and meaningful!!
>
> Such "jury rigged" testing is not accurate and is certainly
> unfair to manufacturers who invested many bucks to bring
> new product to the amateur radio market! What is the point
> in doing "something" if it is not really accurate?
>
> 73, Jim KH7M
|