[Moon-net] Measure for OM6AA round septum

[Marko Cebokli]

Hello,

I am sure that there were other articles in the past that lacked full 
technical detail, they just were not of such interest to me, so I did not 
notice. The fact that a septum polarizer is very interesting to me is the 
only reason that I mentioned exactly this article, there are no other 
personal or whatever other reasons!

I am just expressing my opinion that ham radio should be about sharing the 
knowledge.
I do not think that it is bad to make money selling stuff to hams, like the 
Japanese firms selling transceivers, not at all, but marketing belongs into 
the big "shiny" magazines.

DUBUS is a publication "by hams for hams", and I think it should be about 
sharing and cooperation, "open source" so to say.

Professionals do things for money.
Amateurs do things for "NON-money"  (love, fun, excitement, to kill time, to 
forget an unhappy love, to hassle the neighbor :-)

So as the motivation is "inverse", the pubblication rules should probably also 
be somewhat "inverse" of those of an professional journal.

BTW, If the IEEE has a publication practice, this does not mean that it is the 
best one - not even that it is a good one. The academics need to publish (or 
perish), but the corporations that fund their research want to keep their 
head in front of the competition by keeping some "trade secrets". So I guess
the IEEE practice is just a stinky compromise to keep both the academics and 
the corporations quasi happy.
And it is a relatively recent practice - just compare the wonderful papers, 
for example of Cohn in the 50s and 60s MTT, with what is published today!

Let me repeat, this is just my opinion, I am just expressing it, not trying to 
impose it on anybody.

Marko Cebokli


On Saturday 10 March 2007 02:32, Rastislav Galuscak wrote:
> Gentlemen,
>
>       I  am replying to your Moon-net discussion about not publishing
> detailed  dimensions of the septum feed described in my and Mr. Hazdra’s
> DUBUS  1/2007 magazine article.  I must  respectfully clarify that routine
> IEEE standard publication practice is  to not publish detailed dimensions
> of the contents or subject since it  is considered to be the author’s
> “know-how.”  Moreover,  I have reviewed some previous DUBUS articles
> published by other authors  where it also was not possible to find detailed
> drawings of PC boards  or other  details witout any moon-net  discussion...
>
>       The  goal of our article was to describe the feed’s design
> methodology,  pointing out “how to do it” with purposeful results, and not
> to be a  detailed step-by-step instruction manual.  In  addition, for a
> feed to achieve results similar to those published, it  is very important
> to hold the size and recognize that it is not  possible to accomplish this
> technology without using professional  machine tools. (I think that Milan`s
> prices are very affordable and  barely cover the manufacturing costs). 
> Regardless  of the feed’s dimensions, I believe that the article presents
> readers  with a lot of useful information relating to the unique problems
> and  challenges posed by this technology.  If  there is excessive reader
> opinion that we are publishing superfluous  and redundant information,
> doing marketing, or violating the  “ham-spirit” in our articles we may
> consider terminating our DUBUS  publishing activity.
>
>        Sincerely,
>
>       Rasto,  OM6AA
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
> (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
> _______________________________________________
> Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at
> http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html