Stuart,
Thanks for your notes in the email. Just because I may disagree
with some of your comments, does not mean I am trying to be antagonistic
toward you. It's just that our opinions may slightly differ.
I have been a Life Member of the ARRL since they instituted Life
Membership. When the ARRL first announced they had a procedure for
testing amateur radio's, I requested and was mailed a complete copy of
their test procedure. In my opinion, what the ARRL does for amateur
equipment is just fine for amateur radio, but it certainly is not 'just
fine' for the industry electronics community. The problem I have with
their test is that they publish an international magazine with their
test results and then make the statement that their results do not agree
with a manufacturers test results. Obviously if Icom/Kenwood/Yaesu/Ten
Tec use the industry electronics community standards for testing and the
ARRL uses their own standards for testing, there is going to be a
disagreement. The ARRL may have a degreed engineer, but that engineer is
not a 'working' engineer, meaning the ARRL's engineer, due to where he
works, does not keep up with state-of-the-art technical interest (I know
that's going to bring a flame!). There is a difference between a degreed
working engineer and a degreed engineer. For an instance, how far behind
the curve is amateur radio equipment in DSP technology, or IT
technology?
I have read the entire test procedure produced by the ARRL lab
and I do think it's fine for amateur radios, but I do not think it's
fair to compare their results directly with manufacturers who produce
other equipment to MilSpec standards. As long as the ARRL's Board of
Directors take quarterly junket's around the country for their board
meetings, the statement that the ARRL does not have enough money to
afford 'real' test equipment that would allow them to perform test to
electronic industry and MilSpec standards just does not hold water.
Stuart, I am not making too many assumptions, I am speaking from
practical experience. So I can tell you that if one of my engineers
blindly allowed a technician to perform high level intercept testing,
that engineer would soon be looking for another job! I expect my
engineers to teach each technician how to perform test to our required
industry standards. The engineer himself performs all of these required
test during both the design phase and the pre-production phase and he
does not turn the testing over to a technician until that engineer is
fully confident that the technician understands what he is doing. And my
engineers stay in full communication with and is 'on-call' to QC until
the production phase is completed.
The above is not a requirement for the ARRL as they do not
manufacture anything. It is a requirement for our work because we
design, test, pre-produce, produce and ship products for the sole
purpose of pushing the state-of-the-art and MAKING MONEY! If we do not
ship quality products, tested to industry standard and MilSpec
standards, we do not get repeat customers and we DO NOT MAKE MONEY.
Standard business practices for any company that wants to continue
functioning.
It's not that I have 'so little faith in the ARRL', it's the
fact that over the past 53 years I have heard and read a lot of
information produced by the ARRL, as you probably have. My opinion is
the ARRL is a good amateur radio organization, but they have no business
comparing their own inclusive testing procedures to electronic industry
accepted standards. If I was not involved in the electronics industry,
then as an amateur radio operator, I too, would blindly accept
everything the ARRL says as being factual...after all, what other choice
would I have?
Tom/W4BQF
calderman AT cox.net
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Stuart Rohre
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 6:50 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Re: # 4 Argonaut V ARRL Review 3rd and 2nd IPs ?
Tom, you are making a lot of assumptions. For one about qualifications,
there are degreed engineers in ARRL positions. The other, is that
engineers
always make the tests. In no commercial company, nor many university
labs,
is that the case; technicians or students, make the tests and report to
the
engineers, who look over the test and write up the final results based
on
technician's lab notes, or computer spread sheets. (Or even have the
students do it in college labs!) (Part of their "learning process"). So
doing the tests does not take a degree; just care and attention to
detail
and documentation.
I don't know why you have so little faith in ARRL testing; unless it is
because you have not read the detailed testing in both QST and on the
ARRL
web site over the past several years. The methods are detailed, the
equipment described, and the findings. Even to such details that most
hams
are not interested in, yet are included on the expanded tests info on
the
ARRL web site. There was even an article on ARRL product testing in QST
within the last 10 years, maybe 5. Sorry, can't recall the issue off
hand.
But, maybe ARRL web site technical info service includes a web copy.
And although ARRL must be impartial, they must have some pride in that
one
of the own editors, was a principal designer of the Orion. I don't
think
they will trash the Orion in a review. Like all the magazines; QST
depends
on manufacturer good will for advertising dollars which pays the
majority of
the publishing costs. They have to walk a fine line, and work with the
manufacturers if there are performance issues during tests. But, they
remain objective, and express concern when it is justified. Sometimes it
results in a retest after the model has been checked and repaired if
needed
by the manufacturer. Less than perfect models slip thru any production
process and sometimes end up on the ARRL test bench. A number of
reviews
and follow on reviews have accounts of things that had to be fixed
before a
review could be completed.
73, Stuart K5KVH
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|