Michael Tope wrote:
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> Even if there is one radio out there with a problem,
> I would think that the product manager would want
> to know about it, especially on a new product
> release. Granted it is only one data point, but
> if I were Scott I would want to know. Maybe the
> problem that Earl observed had something do with
> AGC programming as W4ZV mentioned. In any
> case, Doug Smith seems to be a really good RF
> engineer. If there is a problem with the design,
> I am sure he can correct it. If its just Earl's rig,
> Ten-Tec has a reputation for good customer
> service. If its operator error on Earl's part, then
> they can improve the instruction manual. In any
> case, I can't imagine that they wouldn't want to
> know about a customer problem like this.
If there is one radio with a problem, that does not equate to a design
problem. I pointed out that my results were in direct contradiction to
Earl's results. Earl's results even contradict themselves if you take
what he wrote to the TT reflector and compare it to what he later wrote
here. I wrote my comments to balance Earl's 'rankings' and your comment:
"It would be a shame if the radio is a complete dud
that can't be fixed as the IMD/BDR and phase noise
numbers on it looked so good compared to everything
else out there."
I don't see any indication that the Orion is "a complete dud that can't
be fixed" and I'm hoping that folks aren't going to base their thinking
about the Orion on what may be a fellow grinding his ax for an audience.
I find the idea of ranking rigs, some of which aren't even in the shack
at the same time more than a little peculiar.
> As far as ulterior motives go, I can't comment.
> You'll have to ask Earl about that :)
If one has ulterior motives, one is unlikely to reveal them. ;-)
Dave K8MN
|