RadCom review policy
RadCom will review commercial items that are noteworthy, brand new or current, and of an amateur radio nature. Other equipment of any type may be featured as part of a RadCom article, but such reviews are outside the scope of this policy.
RadCom has three tiers of product review
New Product page: RadCom will carry a page each month of new equipment, subject to space and/or sufficient material being sent to the RadCom editorial team. Each page will carry 4-6 items but this may vary as need dictates. Any item can be featured providing it is relevant to amateur radio. To have items featured in this page please send firstname.lastname@example.org suitable pictures and words to represent the product – Maximum words 250. Product information must be sent to RadCom prior to the copy deadline (available online) if they are to be included in a specific issue. Items will otherwise be included in RadCom at the next opportunity.
Minor Reviews: Where a product is either from a reasonably well known genre or offers few new features, RadCom may offer a 1-2 page review. These will not normally be ‘technical’ reviews but will be limited to a “typical” user experience of operating the equipment and details of its specification.
Major Reviews: These will be of the established ‘technical’ review type. They will normally be 3-5 pages and generally feature major HF rigs or very new technology items. These will usually involve some degree of testing including compliance with the manufacturer’s specification.
For either a small or major review to take place, the equipment will normally have previously featured in the ‘New Product Page’.
All reviews must be arranged with the RadCom editorial team email@example.com. Any decision on whether a review will be carried is a decision for the editorial team only. Decisions on reviews will communicated to the supplier as quickly as possible but usually within 2 weeks. All decisions on reviews will be shared with the RSGB advertising representative to ensure any commercial opportunities are made available to all parties.
Both small and major reviews can take some time to arrange and conduct. RadCom will though seek to publish these are quickly as it can. It should be noted however reviews will be published as space permits and not necessarily be in the order they are received. Please note that major reviews can take as much as 6 – 10 weeks for all the tests to be completed. This is in addition to delays that occur whilst waiting for other items to be reviewed. In such circumstances where there may be a significant delay, the RSGB reserves the right to appoint alternative reviewers or change the type of review. RadCom will always endeavour to complete the review in as short a time scale as is reasonable.
The supplier will be informed of the proposed publication date in time for any changes to possible advertisements to be made. The RSGB advertising representative will also be informed of publication dates. Prior to publication, suppliers will receive a copy of the review for comment but the content of reviews will not be amended unless there has been a factual error on the part of the reviewer. Space can be made available within the review should the manufacturer/supplier wish to comment.
Anyone can supply or recommend equipment for review. The person recommending the review should always be able to arrange the loan or supply of the item. Where an item is considered appropriate for review, one of the editorial staff will find a suitable reviewer. The editorial department will keep the supplier informed if there is a delay or difficulty finding a reviewer. The equipment supplier is welcome to request a reviewer but no guarantees can be given that this recommendation will be followed.
All equipment for review should be despatched directly to the reviewer once the RadCom editorial team have confirmed the address details. Under no circumstances should equipment be sent to RSGB HQ unless specifically advised to. Equipment suppliers are responsible for all costs associated with the equipment despatch and its collection.
Reviews reflect the personal opinion of the reviewer and they do not necessarily represent the views of the RSGB. Whilst every effort is made to ensure accuracy the RSGB cannot guarantee the accuracy of any published measurements made by a reviewer.
Whilst every reasonable care is taken with review equipment, the RSGB or its reviewers accept no liability for loss of or damage to the equipment whilst in their care how so ever caused. The review process may also mean that equipment becomes unserviceable or identifiably used – the RSGB accepts no responsibility for any losses incurred in this way. It is also the responsibility of the supplier to insure the item against any losses to the RSGB, its reviewers or any third party, how so ever caused.
If you need more information about RadCom Reviews please contact the editorial team by email firstname.lastname@example.org