I have had some interesting private emails sent to me regarding this thread.
They will remain private.
THERE IS A VERY SIMPLE WAY TO CONCLUDE THIS THREAD AND MAKE "EVERYBODY" HAPPY.
REALITY CHECK:
> Hans compiled a list of results of ARRL tests and published them to his web
> page
> Some radios on the list were tested differently than other radios on the list
> People on the Ten-Tec reflector are unhappy with the implied conclusion from
> viewing the list (i.e. because of the position of the Orion 2) BTW, I'm one
> of the unhappy campers.
> ONLY 3 transceivers on the list were tested under the old procedures (Orion
> 2, FT-9000C, and Icom-7000)
> Anyone seriously interested in these specifications will not be looking to
> buy an Icom-7000
> The FT-9000DX was tested later under the new test methodology, and it is
> probably fair to assume that the FT-9000C would fair quite the same if it
> were tested under the new test methodology.
> THE BIG UNKNOWN IS, HOW WOULD THE TEN-TEC ORION 2 FAIR WHEN TESTED WITH THE
> NEW METHODOLOGY?
SOLUTION TO MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY: ARRL TESTS THE ORION 2 AGAIN WITH LATEST
TEST METHODOLOGY
They don't have to run an extensive test. Just run the tests using the 3 Hz
filter in the Spectrum Analyzer.
The Orion 2 is still a very actual transceiver.
It is still offered for sale as the top of the line transceiver from Ten-Tec.
People interested in purchasing today want to be able to evaluate transceivers
on an equal basis.
It makes all the sense in the world for ARRL to do this.
Joel, you can make this happen.
It shouldn't be a problem to get an Orion to do this. I'm sure you can borrow
one.
I think in this case, the club will excuse the ARRL if they "borrow" a
transceiver for this test, rather than purchase one like they normally do.
Just publish a disclaimer.
IMHO, this and only this will finally put this thread to rest.
73
Rick, DJ0IP
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|