[R-390] A modest proposal (was Y2K Addendum)

[Barry Hauser]

Hi Tim & List

I agree mostly, but must disagree on corrections.  The whole effort on the
Y2K manual initiated from the idea to correct errors and inconsistencies, so
it makes sense that if any remain, they should be corrected in place -- so
the manual stands on its own.

There were a number of other significant enhancements vs. the military
manuals that are generally available - -improved clarity of drawings, fresh
color photos to make it easier to spot the components, etc.  Some photos
were never replaced and should be to make the work complete and consistent.
Part of the idea was to have a manual on line that was at least edit-able --
not a pdf consisting of all grainy, un-modifyable gray scale images of old
manual pages.

So -- Y2K should get a second revision to complete it and correct any
remaining typos.  (Are those typo's in the revision or original version?)

It would also be nice to incorporate Scott's gear train rebuild -- with his
permission.  That would add about 3 megs to the 14 or so of the current
version.  I would only suggest adding some labeling/callouts here and there.

Other stuff can be developed separately to avoid overburdening the Y2K
manual.  As I recall Wei Li offered to further develop his "Pearls", so
maybe they can be reorganized and indexed.  I'm sure someone can assist if
he needs it.

Between those two things, and perhaps one other work, practically everything
imaginable would be covered -- leaving some room for further activity on the
reflector. like beating dead horses and deja vu all over again stuff.
(Would be nice to have a digitized version (true text) of the TM-11-4000
receiver section.)

So, basically, I agree, primarily with the exception of the corrections.
The Y2K is not carved in stone.  At the same time, I would not recommend
using it as the foundation of a new pyramid at Giza.

Barry

Tim wrote:
> OK, my mind is oversimplistic this Christmas. But let me try to
> categorize the things running around in my mind:
>
> 1. The Y2K Manual is a nice electronic edition of what's in
>   TM 11-5820-358-35 (Field and Depot Maintenance Manual), PLUS
>   it includes many of the military-approved mods, PLUS it is
>   cross-indexed in a few interesting ways (broken out schematics,
>   etc.)
>
>   The scope of the Y2K manual, in other words, is almost the same
>   as the scope of the military maintenance manual.
>
> 2. There are some misprints/typos/incorrect statements in the Y2K
>   manual, most of which have been discussed here in the past or
>   are self-evident on comparison with reality.
>
> 3. There are lots of other resources out there on the 'net and
>   elsewhere which are very useful. BUT... if we tried to put them
>   into a form like the Y2K manual it blows it out of the water
>   in terms of size/weight/editing effort.
>
> 4. Some of the "other" resources consist of opinions and factoids which
>   have been the subject of much discussion, and occasional vitriol,
>   on this mailing list and in other places. Incorporating these might
>   prove difficult (unless we've got a single editor with an iron fist,
>   in which case we may all end up disagreeing with the result in at least
>   one and maybe multiple major ways!)
>
> So, MY opinions:
>
> A. Limit the Y2K addendum to corrections to the current document and
>   things that "should have been" in the field/depot maintenance manual.
>   The one thing I can think of that "should have been" is the teardown/
>   rebuild of the RF deck mechanisms, ala Scott Seickel's very fine
>   writeup and photos. And seeing as how Scott's writeup is so fine
>   already, I don't feel that it should have to go through an editing
>   process - just link to it.
>
> B. For the things that are not clearly in the scope of the original
>   field/depot maintenance manual, we already have this mailing list,
>   it's archives, and Wu Li's selected and categorized extracts from
>   the list. The wonderful things about these forms is that we don't
>   have to all agree as to what goes in - skip the editorial process
>   and give access to the raw stuff.
>
> C. What would be useful is an electronic index to certain factoids to
>   make it easier to dig up previously posted facts. Sifting through
>   the mailing list archives can be difficult, as a month's worth of
>   postings often tops a megabyte, and even Wu Li's Pearls is less
>   straightforward to search than I'd like (popping open a dozen or
>   so PDF's and searching each by hand is cumbersome at best.) I'm
>   thinking that I should be able to type "C227" into a search engine
>   and have it come up with past posts to this list and maybe into the
>   Pearls that tell me more about C227, and even better (you know
>   I'm dreaming now!) show it to me in the schematic and in a photo
>   of the chassis.
>
>   Now Google does not serve as the electronic index: qth.net's mailing
>   lists are excluded by QTH's sysadmins from being crawled by Google.
>
>   BUT I can imagine a search engine that does know about, for example,
>   part numbers and common "noise" threads (e.g. ballast replacement!)
>   and gets to what I want.
>
> So am I too far off-base in my proposal? I happen to have some time
> coming up in mid-January, as I recover from a certain common elective
> surgery and will not be allowed to work on the house or haul around
> 80 pound radios, that maybe I could put something like my modest proposal
> of a R-390A specific search engine together. Am I onto a good idea, or a 
> pipe
> dream, or worthless drivel?
>
> Tim KA0BTD.