> --- Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com> wrote:
>> As the author of that "harsh" criticism, I stand by it. If the guy wants
>> to implement a "universal" automatic antenna switch as a learning
>> exercise,
>> that's fine, but should QST really spend 8 pages on a design that is ...
>>
>
> Given that QST, like most hobby magazines has no significant paid writing
Most of the other hobby mags with which I am familiar such as aviation,
photography, and even Amateur radio do pay although not enough to get rich.
So I guess, no significant writing is not all that far off.
> staff, most technical articles are contributed by people who have decided
> to write about something they've done. QST will pay a few dollars, but
When did QST start paying? It used to be any article printed was for the
*prestige* <:-)) Been there. OTOH CQ magazine paid a whopping $35 for two
pages. (This was a while back<G>)
> nobody could make a living writing articles for QST etc. Even the paid
> staff
> doesn't earn what engineers make.
>
Engineering is not the highest paid profession either<:-)) Having been a
project manager it's been my experience a *typical* engineer turned loose
goes way overboard and designs a $5,000 controller to do the job of a $2.00
variable resistor. Maybe that's why the Navy had those expensive toilet
seats and hammers?
I spent half my time as a project manager getting engineers to simplify
their portions of projects to do what we wanted, not what they wanted. I
only met one who knew what internal documentation was when it came to soft
ware and he avoided it when ever possible.
The point is, *most* and I emphasize the most engineers write for engineers,
or worse, for themselves.
There are some notable exceptions who seem to be able to put technical
subjects into plain language.
> Have you contributed something better for them to publish? I doubt they
Even had a cover photo. They didn't pay for that either<:-))
> pushed aside a whole stack of much more interesting, well written and
> germane
> articles to print that one.
QST takes what is submitted. Hopefully they get enough to pick and choose,
but most hams are neither writers or inclined to write up their own
projects. Most of us come up with something that works for us, but doubt
any one else would be interested in cobbling something together.
There are so many facets to ham radio any more that it consists of many
narrowly specialized fields. Locally the PIC controllers have caught on, but
that is something that leaves me completely cold.
> However you value this antenna switch article, it would have to rank above
> 8
> pages saying:
>
> This page left blank because Pete said what we had wasn't worth the ink.
>
For me that would be a difficult call on the antenna switch<LOL> and I'm
interested in some *practical* antenna switching.
For QST articles to be interesting to me they really need to be a bit
lighter on theory and calculations.
IE they need to be from a particle approach to what ever. I say that having
taught every thing from beginning electricity to digital logic circuit
design.
My degree is in computer science with math and art minors (I'm a whale of a
lot better artist than mathematician<G>). I'd like to see an article
devoted to the actual aspects of controlling my radio with a computer
including the whys and where fors of using the specific control codes and
just how each system works. I can imagine there might be another 3 or 4
hams interested in the same thing to that depth. I'd like to see articles
devoted to the practical aspects of calculating wind load on systems like
mine. We might even find 30 or 40 for that one.
The first QST I ever saw had an article on the design and building of a 20
tube (think it was 20 tubes) receiver. That was back in the late 50's or
maybe 1960. I think there was a lot of interest in the receiver, but again
I doubt more than a couple hundred were deeply interested. Me? I wore out
the magazine, but I never did build it.
Roger Halstead (K8RI and ARRL 40 year Life Member)
N833R - World's oldest Debonair CD-2
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
> Darrel AK6I
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
> Weather Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with
> any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|