Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SO2R\s+technique\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Guy Molinari" <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 00:08:19 +0000
I'm an SO2R newbie. Now that I have a basic CW SO2R setup off the ground (one DX contest and one domestic contest so far) the first problem that I have encountered revolves around operating technique
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00049.html (7,683 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Robert Naumann" <w5ov@w5ov.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 07:19:59 -0500
Guy, Thank you for posting your message. Your observation is correct. It's not easy to do SO2R, and you have hit on one of the main reasons why it does not double your capacity simply by adding the s
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00053.html (8,866 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk@mail.ee>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 15:23:48 +0300
Hi Guy, I think you should never time your calls on the second radio according to your CQ but whenever you find someone on the second radio you should be able to call him instantly meaning that it wi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00054.html (9,973 bytes)

4. [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: Scott Robbins <w4pa@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 08:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
Always stop the CQ on #1 to work a station on rig #2. Do not synchronize calling a station with your CQing. The beauty of TR-Log for SO2R CW is how seamless it does this: Call CQ on #1, interrupt wi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00063.html (8,143 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: sawyered@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 11:53:26 -0400 (EDT)
A great question and one that has no "fixed" answer. I can only offer comment for myself. First of all, I NEVER use auto CQ. It keeps me awake in the middle of the night for one. Secondly, the timing
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00064.html (8,809 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: <w9wi@w9wi.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 12:29:35 -0400
Tonno, I think you're being too nice to these people<grin>. Seriously, I believe starting a CQ without inquiring whether the frequency is occupied is **cheating**. It should result in penalties and p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00065.html (8,252 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Peter Voelpel" <df3kv@t-online.de>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:25:06 +0200
You are not allowed to have two signals on the air at the same time, so you have to interrupt your CQ 73 Peter How do I time and synchronize my callls on the second radio without interrupting the CQ'
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00066.html (7,533 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Guy Molinari" <guy_molinari@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 04:18:50 +0000
During NAQP I did have to concede my freq once for that very reason. I just chalk it up as a risk associated with SO2R and a reason to get it right. I just wish some folks would just listen, listen,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00068.html (9,705 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:27:58 -0500 (CDT)
But at what point do you "lose" the frequency when you jump to the other rig? I will agree that if you're making a quick (stress: "quick") jump back & forth, especially on CW at a decent speed, you p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00073.html (12,899 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:45:12 -0400
I don't know - there can be a variety of reasons for turning up on or near someone's frequency without realizing it. One I encounter all the time is that the other station is down off the low-side of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00074.html (8,490 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "W4ZW" <w4zw@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 18:28:19 -0400
Pete has a good point. Another reason is the disparity of rigs/filters. When I have my filters tightened down to 250Khz with DSP on, and the roofing filter and the 40M yagi are in line with big sign
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00076.html (9,076 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 20:46:53 -0500
The question of losing a run frequency isn't dependent on the 1R vs 2R question: it's the same. If you leave a frequency long enough that a reasonably courteous op feels no compunction about calling
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00077.html (8,830 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "Randy Thompson" <k5zd@charter.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 02:10:08 -0000
But... in the example below, is AA4GHI obligated to give the frequency up when NA2DEF returns?! k5zd _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00079.html (9,388 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: "Michael Shapiro" <michael@shapiro.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:04:49 -0800
This is a very good point. With a long skip I may not hear the other station on my frequency and am running a risk that the station I just worked will not have me in the log. N6RO, Ken's advices for
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00081.html (10,217 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 07:25:29 -0400
Depends on the exact exchange, which is very truncated in the example below. If it's unconditional? No, probably not. If it's conditional? Probably. (Although "obligated" might be too strong a word).
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00084.html (10,229 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R technique (score: 1)
Author: <w9wi@w9wi.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:18:04 -0400
This is a good explanation as to why someone CQs after a QRL? request recieved an (unheard) affirmative reply. It is not, however, an excuse for CQing without checking for occupancy at all. == Doug S
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00085.html (8,976 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: <w9wi@w9wi.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:22:35 -0400
IMHO, as soon as someone asks "QRL?" and you fail to reply. I have seen that tried, and I believe that too is cheating. == Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View, TN EM66 _____________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00086.html (9,161 bytes)

18. [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "James Cain" <cainjim@mindspring.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:20:49 -0400
30 years ago a contester said to me that "you have to keep the frequency warm." I knew that but it was a nice choice of words. This was in the day when even an efficient station required 15 to 20 sec
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00087.html (8,649 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "Eric Hilding" <dx35@hilding.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 08:24:56 -0700
Well, an option would be for all SO2R ops to use "callsign/SO2R", but that would be worse than those who use "callsign/QRP" and take up everyone's time in a contest ;-( I do NOT enter "/QRP" into any
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00088.html (8,184 bytes)

20. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Technique (score: 1)
Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 09:16:38 -0700
Plus, SO2R is a valid call sign: http://www.qrz.com/callsign/SO2R -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R kenharker@kenharker.com http://www.kenharker.com/ _______________________________________________ CQ-Contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00089.html (8,815 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu