Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+SO2R\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+SO2R\s*$/: 68 ]

Total 68 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:45:15 -0400; Jim, Yes, SO2R is the same as single operator - that's why it is called "Single operator, two radio." No, they are not multi-operator, There is only ONE person/operator involved. This is the same old; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00320.html (9,978 bytes)
22. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Jim W7RY <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 08:13:27 -0700; In other words... More than one operator, multi op. More than one radio, multi radio. If you want to look for mults on the second receiver of that ONE radio, fine. You have to change bands to work th; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00321.html (10,359 bytes)
23. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:28:22 -0600; Ops have been using multiple radios for as long as I have been a contester since 1978. The only change is that the technology has improved and there are a number of devices that make it very easy to; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00323.html (11,411 bytes)
24. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:39:53 -0400; No - that's the point it is not multi-operator. It is *one* operator alternating between two radios. While the technique of listening to multiple radios at the same time, even listening on one radio; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00331.html (11,785 bytes)
25. [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "Tom Martin" <tmartin@chartermi.net>; Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 11:46:09 -0500; After losing both transceivers in the WPX RTTY test, both have been repaired and better than ever. I have spent a few hours making new stubs and getting ICE filters ready. I also removed an 80 meter; /archives//html/RTTY/2012-03/msg00038.html (7,146 bytes)
26. [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Sebastian Potenzo <lw3dc1@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 12:34:03 -0200; Hi everyone, my name is Seba, LW3DC, and I want to try some SO2R during next WPX RTTY. I run low power and I find this technique pretty amuzing. I have read a lot about it and received unvaluable hel; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00106.html (6,937 bytes)
27. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 10:13:24 -0800; Well, my question is simple and straight-forward: let's suppose I am running on 10 meters with radio A and I have a multiplier on radio B. Can I click and F key of radio B while calling CQ on radio A; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00121.html (7,523 bytes)
28. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Sebastian Potenzo <lw3dc1@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 10:14:15 -0200; Thanks a lot Don and Tim. It was just a misleading idea I had about the soft. I thought that after the CQ of any radio you could press an F key on the other and it will be activated when radio A stop; /archives//html/RTTY/2014-02/msg00147.html (10,313 bytes)
29. [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Fabi <va2up@live.ca>; Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 11:01:11 -0400; Hi all, there has been discussions about the delays when waiting for the reply of some so2r ops that possibly need some more practice. Being this the CQWW weekend I thought it might just be a good op; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00066.html (6,718 bytes)
30. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 19:19:18 -0700; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: I really don't recommend sending your call only once. That's fine when your signal is strong at the other guy's end, but how do you know? It may be short; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00075.html (7,778 bytes)
31. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:36:34 -0400; VA2UP was referring to sending his callsign during a CQ which is something that you do often on the same frequency. I send my call twice when I respond to a CQ and I do not recall getting a single re; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00078.html (8,568 bytes)
32. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Ed Muns <ed@w0yk.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:08:07 -0400; Why is RTTY different than CW and SSB? It is normal to send your call just once in response to a CQing station on CW and SSB. Only if conditions warrant do you send it multiple times. Maybe RTTYers; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00080.html (9,399 bytes)
33. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Martin Berube <ve2nmb@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:35:11 -0400; I stopped counting how many time I had to wait for a SO2R operatior to get back to me because he was transmitting on another band. I beleive fabi's suggestion is a way to shorten this wait time so th; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00083.html (10,272 bytes)
34. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Ed Muns <ed@w0yk.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:12:34 -0400; Yes, response delay can be due to an SO2R operator locked out while the other radio is transmitting. One of the SO2R skill-delvelopment challenges is to continually reduce that delay. Hence, ops like; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00084.html (12,296 bytes)
35. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Don AA5AU <aa5au@bellsouth.net>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:31:26 +0000 (UTC); I don't think it's just SO2R operators that are creating delays. I operated single band this weekend and realized there are far more delays from non-SO2R ops than SO2R ops. For the most part nearly a; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00086.html (12,085 bytes)
36. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Michael Schulz <mschulz@creative-chaos.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:41:54 -0700; Howdy, I agree with Don, the ops sending actually their full state name (e.g. TEXAS) or ZONE 5 and included regular QSO bits like PSE K or UR Report etc. far more made it a problem for me than someon; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00087.html (12,824 bytes)
37. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:47:32 -0700; I think the whole thing boils down to 'Who's time is more important - mine of the SO2R operator." I've operated SO2R on RTTY and it sometimes happens that there are 2 stations on the hook at the same; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00088.html (9,240 bytes)
38. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:24:47 -0700; -- ORIGINAL MESSAGE --(may be snipped) REPLY: 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00089.html (8,194 bytes)
39. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 11:30:11 -0700; I operate only SO1R but sometimes I have a delay caused by fat fingers or whatever, so I have a macro that sends QRX QRX and gives me a few seconds to correct things and keeps the other station from; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00090.html (8,057 bytes)
40. Re: [RTTY] SO2R (score: 1): Author: "David G3YYD" <g3yyd@btinternet.com>; Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 15:24:22 -0500; As a SO2R operator the CQ call is key. If made too short, for instance CQ M7T, then it does not give enough time for a complete reply to my CQ call on the other radio to be made. The idea is to time; /archives//html/RTTY/2015-09/msg00091.html (9,409 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]