DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=OM207AKon0jySR6LYJFNODh+RZeD1MLEyRhC+YWPq3B1I+XnLa4lyaj/EofX7b3tfsLjpfb2koVPpxULK85K6v4Q2TDyaCs1vb+H+wVYIN0+7vI+svwpJOdub7sI7DaWKQhH61T9oqorb+bN0dwa5igSeKBvE/G0O6iiUiNGMFY=
Message-ID: <fc7eccec0710290438of09147fk4fbfd909df2251ea@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 11:38:33 +0000
From: "Andy Talbot" <andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
In-Reply-To: <4725B785.80101@telia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <8E8D23D235D70840B6582917DF27898006935B1D@temps153538.tms-ltd.com>
	 <731EB49F88B309428FFDDD2423F810E41A88BC@HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk>
	 <20071029081429.3f942f6b@lurcher.twatt.local>
	 <47259D0F.4883.798AED@dave.davesergeant.com>
	 <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710290918250.19480@lurcher.twatt.local>
	 <4725B785.80101@telia.com>
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: RADCOM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Don't be put off by the need for house styles etc - if you do look at
the articles that have made it in the past, they were all in the
authors own words.  The peer review is more or less a rubber stamp if
the article in straightforward and constructional- if its about zero
loss magnetic loops that would be a different matter)

As for the need for repeatability, say so.  If you've done a one off
with components from the junk box it still be of interest and that
won't stop the editors / TC, but be prepared for a lot of questions
from constructors

I've been following the way this thread has developed with
considerable interest, and am actually rather pleased that the problem
appears to be worldwide.  Now I do know its not a personal radcomic
thing, but is part of a more general malaise.  Can be assume either
that :

1)

They DO WANT TO PUBLISH TECHNICAL ARTICLES (shouting intentionally)
but as there are so few being written the general trend is to

>I've often wondered about writing something for RADCOM but have
>been put off by the need to conform to some house style, to pass
>some form of "peer review", and for constructional articles to be
>provably repeatable (don't want the little dears to go to the trouble
>of buying a soldering iron and some BC109s only to find it doesn't
>work first time.... )
>
>
>What we need is something like SPRAT, but on a bigger scale and
>not just for QRP, where the construction projects are more like
>"here's an idea I've had, I got mine to work using the following
>circuits/components. Use it as a starting point for your own
>experimentation."
>
>The writer can happily assume that the reader has some technical ability
>and can source components themselves and can fault find and fiddle and
>alter things for their own particular needs. Of course if a particular
>component is vital to success then by all means indicate a source for
>it, but assume the reader has a junk-box and knows how to use it!
>
>RADCOM will never allow this kind of article.


On 29/10/2007, Johan H. Bodin <jh.bodin@telia.com> wrote:
> John, LF,
>
> you may wish to have a look at QEX, http://www.arrl.org/qex/
>
> If you accept a paperless forum, there is a Yahoo group called EMRFD at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emrfd/ . It was started by Roger KA7EXM
> (W7ZOI's son). I found the group yesterday (!) so I don't know much
> about it yet, but the authors of the book EMFRD (Experimental Methods in
> RF Design) seem to be active on the mailing list, including the
> legendary Wes Hayward W7ZOI himself. The group has about 500 solder
> melting members, it certainly looks promising :-)
>
> 73
> Johan SM6LKM
>
> John Pumford-Green GM4SLV wrote:
> > BTW does anyone know of something along the lines of a QRO version of
> > SPRAT? A magazine for tinkerers in the RF arts?
>
>
>