WriteLog
[Top] [All Lists]

[WriteLog] One computer versus two in SO2R contesting

To: <writelog@contesting.com>
Subject: [WriteLog] One computer versus two in SO2R contesting
From: jflanders2@home.com (Jerry Flanders)
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 12:27:10 -0400
In the thread: Re: [WriteLog] Auto-CQ'ing in SO2R operation? At 11:05 PM 
9/30/2001 -0500, martyt@pobox.com wrote:

>I think you'll find it difficult if not impossible to run on two 
>frequencies at a time.
>
>Call CQ on one radio, search & pounce on the other radio.
>
>-Marty NW0L
>  martyt@pobox.com

Actually I found it surprisingly easy unless the QSO rate was high. I did 
SO2R RTTY for the first time this past weekend, but used two computers, one 
dedicated to each radio. It was working so well during the low rate times 
that I started wondering how this could be done with only one computer + 2 
radios and couldn't see how it could be set up - hence the question I 
posted last night.

I set up a 4 second CQ in a 10 second repeat cycle on each machine and then 
started the second one 5 seconds late. It worked well - the only difficulty 
was that one machine's timer would sometimes mysteriously take an extra few 
hundred milliseconds in the cycle, so eventually they would have gotten out 
of sync. Usually, I had to break the cycle anyway to answer a CQ before 
this could have happened. When someone replied to either CQ, I just hit 
both esc keys to cancel everything (two separate keyboards also).

Initially I wondered how I would deal with two simultaneous replies, and 
actually did miss the first two (sorry, guys, and thanks for returning 
later) but then realized I could just interleave my report and confirmation 
on one radio with his report and confirmation on the other with only a 
couple seconds delay on the second QSO. I was fortunate to have zero 
crosstalk between the radios, so near-simultaneous QSOs like this were 
possible (I strictly observed the "one transmitter on at a time" rule).

When things got hot I simply didn't re-start the auto-CQ on the slower band.

One problem I ran into was being unable to distinguish the radios by sound. 
I was using the same high tones on both and was unable to always "hear" 
calls  with the radio's monitor features on. I had to watch the MMTTY 
waterfall constantly, on _both_ monitors. This also kept me distracted 
while trying S&P on one radio. Next time I will use low tones on one of 
them. I was using external speakers and had placed them to the far right 
and far left, but there was not enough directionality to the sound.

I was only using low power because I had smoke-tested the radio crosstalk 
only at the 100 watt level and was concerned that full power might damage 
something. I will have this all checked out next time and, with full 
power,  I _hope_ to be too busy then to do two-radio CQ'ing.

If anybody is interested, the antennas were about 150 feet apart, one 
horizontal (40+15 multiband wire dipole) and one vertical (20+15+10 
multiband wire dipole).  I had put a crude 40+15 band attenuation stub on 
one and a 20+10 attenuation stub on the other. Radio A was restricted to 
40/15 and radio B was 20/10. Measured RF on the rx antenna was down in the 
millivolt range at 100 watt tx on the other on all 4 bands even without the 
stubs (probably didn't really need the stubs). No filters. Computers were 
peer-peer TCP/IP networked and WL was maintaining interleaved logs OK, but 
sequence numbers got out of whack.

Jerry W4UK




>At 10:31 PM 9/30/2001 , you wrote:
>>How do you set up an "timed CQ" (automatically repeating key macro) when 
>>you have two radios on one computer with one copy of WL?
>>
>>Can you set it to repeat on both radios, alternating, or only one of the 
>>radios?
>>
>>Jerry W4UK


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>