[Elecraft] RSGB RadCom K3 review posted on RSGB Members web page

[David Yarnes]

Ian and All,

While I agree with much of what you say, and I sympathize with the various 
issues, I can't quite agree that it necessarily is a "good reason" for 
everything.

First of all, U.K. stations had the same access to K3's as U.S. stations 
did.  Indeed, many U.K. bound units were included in the early shipments. 
But Elecraft's production delays does make it extremely complex to get a 
unit on any kind of a predictable timeline.  If Radcom intended to review 
the K3 (and I would assume they should have been interested from day 1), 
they should have probably been quicker off the mark to get a unit in the 
"Que", unless they were willing to delay review until they had proper time 
to do it right.  I'm not saying Peter did it wrong--indeed his review may be 
quite accurate based on the radio he had--but saying he didn't have enough 
time suggests a hurried review.

It seems to me that any committment to make such a review should be 
predicated on having sufficient time to do it properly.  If Radcom wants it 
done earlier, they should insure access to a unit on a timely basis.  The 
timing should not be the sole responsibility of the author.

I also don't understand why any review (QST, Radcom, or otherwise) would be 
done without allowing sufficient time for communication with the 
manufacturer in case problems arise.  Now, if the manufacturer doesn't 
cooperate, so be it.  But I assume Elecraft, or any manufacturer, would want 
to be consulted about any claimed specifications not achieved.  The need to 
work with the manufuacturer should be disclosed, as it says something about 
the status of "production units", but the long term benefit of the review 
really depends on  disclosing whether or not claimed specifications are 
achievable, and what it took to get there.  After all, the problem could 
possibly be on either end.

In short, I think any review that is "rushed" due to time constraints is of 
limited value.  I'm not being naive' about deadlines, but deadlines must be 
imposed reasonably.  I also think that a review should be something that is 
updatable.  If issues occur, which are subsequently resolved, I think it's 
good practice to disclose them on a timely basis in a subsequent issue, 
including how it was achieved.  Buyers rely heavily on such reviews, and I 
would think it is in everyone's interest to do them as completely as 
possible.  And they shouldn't "pull any punches" either.  I hate it when 
reviewers seem to "gloss" around certain issues.  If it doesn't perform as 
advertised, say so!!!

Dave W7AQK

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian White GM3SEK" <gm3sek at ifwtech.co.uk>
To: <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] RSGB RadCom K3 review posted on RSGB Members web 
page


>>
> Like the ARRL review, this one was very much a first shot -  and as we all 
> well know, the K3 is a moving target.
>
> A few words about Radcom reviews may help put this into perspective. 
> Availability of new models is typically several months behind the USA, and 
> quite frequently the QST review is already in print before a reviewer in 
> Europe can even lay hands on the hardware. This puts reviewers under 
> intense time pressure.
>
> On receiving the equipment, the reviewer has a very short time to make 
> some basic functional checks, just to confirm that the equipment is fit to 
> be reviewed. More than once, I have rejected equipment at this point, and 
> I'm sure Peter Hart has too. But once a reviewer commits himself to the 
> magazine's production schedule, the process cannot be stopped. If subtle 
> issues emerge from the detailed measurements, the reviewer will report 
> whatever he sees.

> 73 from Ian GM3SEK         'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
> http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>