Although I have very little 2R experience, I can say I agree with Bob 100%.
What comes to Jim's (K8MR) concern about SO2R operators using more
frequencies, I can see his point, but what I don't understand is how
creating a separate SO2R category would solve that problem.
IMHO, splitting SO1R and SO2R up into two separate categories would soon
generate even more categories - SO2R T/S, SO1R T/S, SO2R Assisted and
Unassisted, etc. How about SO2R with one radio connected to a
tribander/single wire and the other one to a monoband yagi :). And of course
then there is always SO3R. :)
73
Toivo ES2RR
> This is not an issue of the 2-radio guys wanting to stay in a category
> where
> they can "beat-up" on all the poor single radio guys.
>
> The issue is that the number of radios (or any other hardware) should
> *not*
> be the determining factor in a category.
>
> It's as though the balance of the single operators, who have not been able
> to master 2 radios, are now saying, "you guys are so much better than us
> and
> you should leave us behind in another category".
>
> When I operated from K2GL's station in the late 70's and 80's, I used 6
> radios - and a chair with good wheels to get to them quickly. Granted, I
> did not listen to two of them at once, but could have.
>
> The issue is that one operator, regardless of hardware, is performing all
> operating and logging functions.
>
> If you begin to use different hardware to determine the classification,
> where would it end? Several others have commented that we'd need to have
> different categories for number of antennas, towers, voice keyer or not,
> air
> conditioned shack or not, etc.
>
> If a single operator can operate 1, 2, 10 or even 100 radios effectively
> and
> win, then he deserves the credit of being the best single operator. The
> rules barring simultaneous transmissions covers all the legal issues here.
>
> As far as expense goes, no one has an excuse. Good radios can be
> purchased
> at very reasonable prices today. You guys running FT-1000D's(or TS950SDX,
> IC-781 etc. etc.) could have bought two TS-850's and had a lot of money to
> spare for switching hardware. Used radios like the TS520 or TS820 are
> available for less than what most pay for their Internet access on a
> yearly
> basis. These older radios are excellent for use as a second radio.
>
> Despite my respect for some of the commenters who have mentioned this, the
> "frequency monopolization" issue is not really valid either. Some
> one-radio
> single ops sit on one frequency and never move. At least the 2-radio guys
> move around a little. When they go to the other frequency, their
> frequency
> is fair game. If you can't keep them from re-gaining it, then that's
> another discussion.
>
> I've only used two-radios in SO2R mode a few times. For me, even though I
> get beat by single radio guys, I have much more fun this way. If nothing
> else, it allows me to change bands more quickly. Even at home, I have my
> two TS-850's side by side. The one on the left can do 160-10 on an open
> wire fed 100' dipole, the one on the right does 40-10 on an R-7000
> vertical.
> Not the best station, but in the Sprint, or NAQP, it's very effective -
> certainly much more so than if I just had one radio.
>
> Admittedly, the single-op bar has been raised by guys who have mastered
> 2-radio operation. I think that it's a good thing.
>
> 73,
> Bob N5NJ
>
>
> ------Original Message------
> From: "Bill Turner" <w7ti@jps.net>
> To: CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> Sent: June 2, 2000 12:58:38 PM GMT
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R
>
>
>
> It's interesting that the two-radio guys are the most vociferous about
> having only one category. Sort of like the Indy cars wanting to race
> against everybody.
>
> W7TI
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|