Paul wrote, in part:
> Notwithstanding the ARRL's procedure for accepting an
> article for publication in the first place, a professional journal
> would have dealt with this issue in a true professional
> manner...
(and would have)
>
> The League's review board, functioning as an unbiased
> mediator would, much like a court trial, review all evidence
> presented by both parties and decide what, if any action
> should be taken to correct any technical inaccuracies or
> deficiencies based on prima-facia evidence.
>
> Instead, the League decided to form an ad-hoc review board (the
> "contributors") without disclosing their rationale for selecting these
> individuals. Several contributors were far from being financially
> disinterested.
This sort of action smacks of what happened to Walt Maxwell's
material and his reputation as a result of an approach to the
ARRL by a famous former Collins Radio amplifier engineer.
This person asserted that Maxwell's material was all wrong.
That actual SSB power amplifiers wanted to see high output
SWR to be most efficient, and that Walt's claims that a
conjugate match, applying the Conjugate Matching Theorem
was all wrong!
I, of course, thought it was the job of the typical Pi-L
matching network to "match" the high Z from the
amp to the low Z of the feedline coax; and from that
terminal on, the Conjugate Match theory would be
applicable....as I presume does Maxwell, but this
belief is not shared by Maxwell's detractors. This
former sentence is my thought, not anothers!
The result was the removal of Maxwell's material from ARRL
publications, and semmingly without printed comment about
the removal in QST or any other publication, so far as I know.
Evidently, in Maxwell's case, not even an "ad hoc" review
board was consulted before just dropping Maxwell. Only the
single complainer, with reputation, seemed needed.
Also, the League did not reprint Walt's book, "Reflections".
There has remained quite a market demand for the book.
It is now about to be republished, as a new edition, by a
different organization.
Further, Maxwell has prepared material in support of his
positions and has submitted same to the "new" QEX
publication/editors. It would seem that, so far, he is
still being "overlooked" by the ARRL!
It really is too bad that Maxwell's material was not also
peer reviewed in a professional manner rather than just
evidently dropped and judged henceforth to be worth only
ignoring.
73, Jim, KH7M
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|