> >With todays measurement equipment, it's accuracy and ease of use, we
should
> >expect an organization like ARRL, to promote the state of the art and to
be
> >a leader in characterizing the performance of the equipment we use.>
>
> And is the ARRL
> willing to run the risk of alienating the manufacturer of the Whizbang
3000
> by giving it a "poor" rating on anything? They had a hard-enough time
> bringing themselves to run comparison tables on various transceivers and
> other units.............> 73, Pete N4ZR
The reality is that we can not expect the ARRL, or any other such
organization, to wade into the politically charged battle to give us a
better product for 160 meters.
Most HF'ers are more than satisfied with their late model rigs. The 160m
rig performance problems begin to surface when we get into big pile-ups or
contest situations where monster signals overpower the receivers.
In a perfect world we could carry our concerns to the governing body, the
end result being that most of the manufacturers would comply to our demands
for better performance. In the real world, manufacturers may only respond
to a decrease in their sales, if then.
Probably the only solution for Topbanders is to modify our own equipment, or
innovate add-on equipment, to diminish these problems. Smaller, more
directional antennas, would also work wonders for most of us.
The above require innovation, determination & advanced technical knowledge,
to say the least. Most Topbanders already posess these to varying degrees.
To me, these are the essence of topbanding, and what makes the topband the
Magic band. Lets do it!
73, Doug / NX4D
|