Well, Yuri, some of the members of the group are certainly evangelical enough.
A few are downright rabid. And a truely independent rig test is certainly a
commendable goal.
However much I quibble about testing methodology and testers preferences
showing up in the end result, the ARRL tests have general acceptance due both
to their long history and the fact they reflect the tastes or prejudices of so
many hams. Warts and all, it will be extremely hard to provide a series of
tests that will be generally considered the equal of, much less be superior to,
the ARRL tests.
Perhaps a completely automated series of tests, with the best available test
equipment calibrated to NIST standards at the beginning of each test, would
satisfy the technically oriented part of our community. It would certainly take
actual rig comparisons by active contesters to make much of an impression on
the "CQ Test" portion of the group - and the testing organization would have to
be prepared to ship some of the test rigs out on major DXpeditions to impress
that segment of the group. And of course, the rigs should be bought off the
shelves at a dealers, or ordered under a nom de test for that equipment without
a dealer network.
I doubt that at least for the first few years of testing anything less would be
more acceptable to the performance minded among us than the "general
impressions" found in other Amateur equipment reviews.
73 Pete Allen AC5e
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|