[CW] ARRL MUST GET BETTER

[John/K4WJ]

At 12:33 AM 03/08/2005, Donald Chester wrote:



>> >> I don't like the content of "QST", I'd rather
>> >> get "QEX" than "QST".
>> >
>> >> The technical content of "QST" has gone from "some
>> >> extremely challenging",
>> >> to some "quite easy" to articles which are
>> >> written at 6th grade level.
>>... One thing that
>>irked me is that I became a Life Member in
>>about 1980. Then they created "QEX", and moved
>>alot of the good stuff (that I thought I had paid
>>for) to "QEX".
>>One thing I don't particularly enjoy in QST is the
>>"Lifestyle Pieces". You know, like the retired
>>Doctor who goes on boat trip with ham radio, etc.
>>These seem kind of like "Trailer Life" type
>>articles
>>Then one that took the cake was the two page
>>article on using the phonetic alphabet. You know,
>>like "A" is "ALPHA", "B" is "BRAVO", etc. I
>>couldn't believe that would warrant a two page
>>QST article!

I wonder how many old timers grumbled about QST when novice articles 
appeared back when we were starting out in amateur radio? (The 1950s and 
1960s.)


>QEX evolved from the old Experimenters Section in QST.
>
>Now, in QST, most of the construction projects are accessory toys such as 
>keying monitors, line voltage indicators and field strength meters, or 
>silly little novelties like a QRP cw transmitter built into an empty match 
>box. The "technical" articles are mostly at the novice level, designed to 
>explain to newcomers such things as proper microphone technique, what SWR 
>is and how to use the ALC in a transceiver. In other words, QST has 
>evolved into what is primarily a "Novice" publication even though the 
>Novice class licence is being phased out.  Occasionally there are some 
>good antenna articles, but most of the real technical stuff is in QEX.  I 
>resent being a full member but having to pay extra for a second 
>publication (which I don't do), for the material that I most interested in.

Have you tried procuring parts for electronic projects?  Would you like to 
see an article on building your own 9 band QSK transceiver? The article 
would be so long that they would probably have to stretch it out over 
several months, sort of like they had to do with Maxwell's article, 
Reflections. By the way, how many of us read all of the "Reflections" 
installments. Do you currently own a copy of "Reflections" or "Reflections II"?

If they did print an article on how to "Build Your Own Nine Band QSK 
Transceiver", could you duplicate the PC boards and drill them? Do you have 
the tools to fabricate the chassis? Where are you going to find the logic 
chips for the display board at a reasonable price? Do you get quantity 
discounts on your parts? (I can't run down to the local Army & Navy Surplus 
store and find the parts I need for a construction project. In fact I don't 
think there is a local electronics parts store in all of South Florida.)

I'm no genius but I believe I understand why complicated construction 
articles are lacking in QST, and even in today's ARRL Handbook. It is 
because of what I stated in the above two paragraphs.


>With the advent of the internet, the news content in QST (and the other 
>remaining "mainstream" ham publication) is old by the time it arrives in 
>the mail.  Up-to-date "happenings" are now obtained off the web, so QST 
>has become less usesful in that aspect as well.

This is true and possibly just one of many contributing factors that are 
causing the ARRL to reduce the size of QST.

>Supposedly, the annual fee is for League membership, and the publication 
>is an extra that comes with it.  If they insist in dividing the 
>publication into two magazines, members should have a choice of which one 
>to receive.

You can't compare QEX to QST. QEX is for the experimenter and for the 
person that wants to keep up with the latest technology. For example, the 
Nov/Dec 2004 issue had such articles as, "HSMM Radio Equipment", "Coaxial 
Traps for Multipband Antennas, The True Equivalent Circuit" and even "A 
Method of Measuring Phase Noise in Oscillators".

I find some articles in QEX to be very interesting, and, some are way above 
my ability to grasp because I lack the knowledge to understand them.

>To  me, the present-day QST clearly indicates that the League has accepted
>"dumbing down," even though they would never admit to that.

How can you say this when the League publishes QEX? Do you think QEX is a 
"dumbed down" publication?

BTW, there must not be too much demand for publications like QEX because 
Communications Quarterly had to merge with them. This is how I became a 
subscriber to QEX for the second time. (I subscribed to QEX when they first 
began publishing it but then dropped my subscription and replaced it with a 
subscription to Communications Quarterly, which I kept renewing until its 
demise.)

I'm not trying to 'tick' you guys off, I'm just trying to be objective 
about the situation.

Now it's time to fire up the old Alpha 77 and meet the boys on 7.020.

73..de John/K4WJ


73..de John/K4WJ
***********************************************************
   John/K4WJ in Pembroke Pines, FL
    QTH  26 00 51 N
         80 16 16 W

K8PXG from 18 Jun 59 to 11 Feb 97
K8WJ  from 12 Feb 97 to 07 Apr 97
ZF2HZ from 17 May 84 to 31 Dec 84
***********************************************************