[TowerTalk] Antenna Switching - Complexity for its own sake?

[Pete Smith]

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:

-- unduly expensive and complex - how many potential users have all 3 major brands of transceivers, two of which have BCD band data available on the back panel.

-- requires polling the transceiver for frequency data, thereby probably interfering with the use of the CAT port by other logging or transceiver control programs.

-- Only switches 5 antennas (though you could slave 1 more of the same big, expensive units and get 10.

I don't want more beer can or plumbing pipe antenna designs either, nor do I care to see yet another goofy CW paddle design.  I'd also just as soon never see another Winlink/Echolink/"isn't the Internet wonderful" story.  It just seems to me that QST's editors are out of touch with a large segment of their audience, when it comes to technical articles.  And yes, I have directed such comments to the editors, and gotten brusquely blown off.

Speaking of which, and while I'm ranting, what's with a review of so-called "new generation" rotators (September 2005) that compares such apples and oranges as the AlfaSpid, the Ham V (really a Ham-IV with an expensive, older-generation digital controller), and the Yaesu G-800DXA?  To frost the cake, they didn't even address one of the most frequent issues on Towertalk, which rotator will fit which tower; and when it came to computer control, they ignored the availability of after-market units that will do a better job for much less cost than the factory stuff.

All done now.  73, Pete N4ZR

At 11:20 AM 9/23/2005, Roger Parsons wrote:
>There was some fairly harsh criticism last week of the
>automatic antenna selector unit design published in
>this month's QST. I only just received my magazine so
>wasn't able to read the article until now.
>
>The author explains his reasons for using a
>microprocessor, and for not using the band information
>available from some transceivers. Whilst his
>implementation is not the way I would (have tried to)
>have done it, it seems to me that it was an infinitely
>better use of QST space than showing us another way to
>make a 2m j-pole from beer cans and coat hangers.
>
>73 Roger
>VE3ZI
>
>
>
>                
>___________________________________________________________ 
>How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday 
>snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>
>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 at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk