[TenTec] Re: # 4 Argonaut V ARRL Review 3rd and 2nd IPs ?

[Alderman, Chester]

The ARRL is not a professional engineering company and does not have the
means nor the technical expertise to test equipment and publish their
findings against that of trained professional engineers. The unfortunate
fact is they take the liberty to do so. And the unfortunate fact is that
most hams will believe the ARRL test before they will believe the published
facts of professional engineers. In same cases it is warranted, such as not
publishing figures of gain of antennas that some manufacturers produce. 

When I was in design engineering, Jim's procedure was always used, and by
every microwave company that I dealt with, to measure intercept products.
Fortunately we did not have an amateur enterprise testing our manufactured
gear, we had other professional engineers do the testing. And since the test
were industry standard, there was very seldom any disputes.

In my opinion, the ARRL should use their system (if's that's all the test
equipment they can afford) and use it to publish comparative results for all
manufactures of ham gear. They should NOT compare their test results to that
of trained professional engineering concerns.

It's up to us hams to realize the amateur status of ARRL published
information. The bottom line is ONLY when we hams get a piece of gear on our
desk and use it for several months, is the final (individual) decision made.

I just have this feeling that the ARRL will tear the Orion apart with their
published 'test' and I feel sorry for those who will wait to purchase an
Orion until 'the ARRL test results are published'. WE test radios, not the
ARRL.

Tom/W4BQF
LM ARRL

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Reid [mailto:jimr.reid at verizon.net] 
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 11:42 PM
To: tentec at contesting.com; W1RFI at arrl.org; KH6DX at arrl.org
Subject: [TenTec] Re: # 4 Argonaut V ARRL Review 3rd and 2nd IPs ?

Stuart, K5KVH,  wrote,  in part:


> Jim,  The ARRL lab has a very limited budget and likes to do 
> tests some hams can replicate.  The spectrum analyzer 
> Rhode and Schwartz uses is a professional probably $50,000 
> one, or more.   ARRL lab has some good basic ones, but 
> probably not the ones that will do the high dynamic range of
> todays new receivers, in fact, it is a problem for the $25,000 
> spectrum analyzers, for we face the same in our lab at the University.

Well,  if the ARRL cannot afford to do an accurate test,  using
the correct and industry standard method,  then,  I believe
they have no business substituting some other method and
publishing the results as accurate and meaningful!!

Such "jury rigged" testing is not accurate and is certainly
unfair to manufacturers who invested many bucks to bring
new product to the amateur radio market!  What is the point
in doing "something" if it is not really accurate?

73,  Jim  KH7M


_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec