Are there moderators here? We are getting a bit far afield of Elecraft topics. :)
Tom NY4I 727-437-2771 P.S. Drowning in email? I use SaneBox to instantly clean up my Inbox: http://sanebox.com/t/gdaz7 > On Jul 1, 2015, at 5:13 PM, Fred Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jim hits a resonate cord. I do appreciate the League trying to keep costs > down but sometimes you get what you pay for. > > Years ago I wrote the author of a QST published construction article > pointing out an error. He sent me his original schematic. QST had redrawn > his schematic using multiple ground busses using the pitchfork ground symbol > and thereby combining busses. I wrote the editor explaining these errors > were doubly wrong since the EU bands the use of the pitchfork symbol for any > use other than a safety ground (green wire terminals). I got a reply > ignoring the fact the circuit was changed and stating they didn't follow > European standards. In fact they made their own standards. How about > adopting IEEE or some other standard electronic symbols? > > If they are going to make their own standards then, they should not be in > contravention of existing standards. For instance QST frequently draws a > differential amplifier as an op amp. Granted the same ICs can be used for > either an op amp or a differential amplifier but use determines the proper > symbol and rarely are op amps (analog computing) used in ham radio. Other > inconsistences abound like using both square and triangles to represent a > linear voltage regulator. Make up your mind and stick to it. > Probably the most annoying abuse is the standard of drawing circuit flow > from left to right. QST draws schematics so they best fit on the paper. Not > for clarity. This makes understanding even more difficult but I do > appreciate the effort to economize. > > 73, Fred, AE6QL > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Elecraft [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ross > Primrose > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 12:12 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K3 FD report in high RF (K3 vs Flex 6xxx) > > On 7/1/2015 12:06 PM, Jim Brown wrote: >> Yes, ARRL Labs tests are damning, though you would never realize it if >> you only read the text. When is ARRL going to assign technically >> competent authors to these reviews? >> > > Right after they stop taking advertising revenue from the reviewees (is that > even a word ;) ) > > 73, Ross N4RP > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[email protected] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [email protected] ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [email protected]
