DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=HoScSG+sSSRB8qXQezeAhVazaJ+tzQw0NeGM0Kl9KCcBJL/Fvvd52X+vguBwCzq7Fd
         00MSTb/oNjAhDq0KESUENw5oUok8SKDZnygZ0ZAPdGOB5qG+fwee61Ijy2Gyg/Tpi9om
         0ieqXTzZcohP9+RLjAmKIPmP4GlhpTCEbEm0s=
Message-ID: <fc7eccec0807190230p5ae1d4e7n3249476ee4480518@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 09:30:24 +0000
From: "Andy Talbot" <andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
In-Reply-To: <bfa.1d593849.35b27ccf@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <bfa.1d593849.35b27ccf@aol.com>
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: Re: LF: Rad Com / critical mass etc
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


Not speculation, I've had several discussions with him on the subject,
and my idea of Radcom going unstable had him quite amused.  But it is
a feedback situation, and as in all control systems, the wrong phase
of feedback leads to instability or lockup.   Probably the main reason
that little gets sent in, is that for most people writing-up a project
is a very major task, and with no apparant guarantee of publication
there is no incentive.  The other magazines are crying-out for
articles of all types, and some regular authors (ahem!) have even been
propositioned by them to write articles.

There still is a Tech Committe who are supposed to vet Radcom
articles. Unfortunately they are a bit of a bottleneck, and tend to
strangle the technical editor, who has far more experience of what is
best in the mag than they do.

Andy  'JNT


2008/7/18  <G0MRF@aol.com>:
> In a message dated 18/07/2008 19:56:24 GMT Standard Time,
> andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com writes:
>
> That's because no one sends anything in !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> As I said in a previous posting a few months ago to one of the many
> groups (microwaves, probably)  - its positive feedback.  People see
> reduced technical content, assume RC are taking the stand
> deliberately, so don't bother writing it up.  Self perpetuating and
> leading to instability, in this case probably a bistable stuck in the
> '0' state.  Your comments, Dave, are exactly what I was speculating
> on.    Did you ever phone the editor and discuss their requirements,
> and whether thay'd be interested?  I bet not.
>
> Thanks Andy
>
> In 2000, there was a Technical + publications sub-committee. They had
> mountains of material with a year or so backlog of items that they were
> interested in. A much larger pile that was not suitable.  I respect your
> opinions Andy as you are a regular and valued contributor, but Is your first
> line speculation or fact? Is it that bad?
> Actually the prolific chap currently in RadCom is Eamon EI9GQ.  Items just
> scattered in his column are deserving of a seperate article in themselves.
> e.g. The 100 / 200W FET amplifier for 2m.
> Can it be that a total absence of articles is the result of 8 years of time
> passing. We're all a bit older, but we're still here. Also there are
> affiliated groups with specific interests and magazines. Sprat for QRP,
> scatterpoint for the microwave group. Surely things can be selected from
> these for wider publication.  It doesn't ring true. There are many sources
> that can be trawlled for material...but that needs work, whereas cut and
> paste fills the pages.
> Oh well todays newspaper is tomorrows fish and chip wrapper. (sorry DX.
> quaint old English practice) Saves filling up shelf space.
>
> But, I'll give them a call and quote your first line to the editor.
>
> 73
>
> David



-- 
Andy G4JNT
www.scrbg.org/g4jnt