> I will let you judge for yourself on who was correct and who was not, but
> as a result subsequent articles submitted by Rich to QST for publication
> were rejected by the editors of QST, including his rebuttal to the
> Technical Correspondence disputing his article.
The rebuttal was rejected because it contained no technical
information and included comments such as "people who clean
toilets at Eimac can be called engineers".
Reid Brandon, in the list Phil posted, is an Eimac engineer.
I have a copy of the "rebuttal letter" if anyone questions the motives
behind QST rejecting it.
73, Tom W8JI
w8ji@contesting.com
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
|