[Amps] QST

[John E. Cleeve]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John E. Cleeve" <g3jvc at jcleeve.idps.co.uk>
To: "Bruce Lanning" <belanning at verizon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] QST


>I am still using an amplifier, built to a design, published in the ARRL 
>handbook  some thirty years ago, which, I presume, originally appeared in 
>Qst, and it worked first time, from switch on.  Does the recent thread 
>regarding the technical integrity of recent Qst articles, imply that the 
>errors are likely to be carried over with the articles into the annual 
>handbook publication ?    regards, John. G3JVC.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bruce Lanning" <belanning at verizon.net>
> To: <amps at contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 3:17 PM
> Subject: [Amps] QST
>
>
>>I read the various listings about QST articles and could recall my
>> frustration for the same reasons. I have been a member of the ARRL since
>> 1950 with the exception of a few years when I cancelled my membership for
>> the reasons stated in previous posts.The latest QST is a very good 
>> example.
>> Enough of my dribble.
>> Bruce W1GBS
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Amps mailing list
>> Amps at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
>> --
>> This email has been verified as Virus free
>> Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net
>>
>