Scott,
I think the ORION is a remarkable achievement, and completely understand
Ten-Tec's decision not to build a very expensive radio for the exceedingly
small number of SO2R ops in the market. However, I find the following
verbatim quote from Ten-Tec's website *very* misleading:
'"Instant Two Radio Mode" allows ORION to instantly QSY between two
different bands. Two linear amplifiers, two sets of accessory devices via
dual band data outputs and two antennas can optionally be connected to ORION
to allow instantaneous QSY (useful for seeking out and working stations on
one band during a contest while CQing on a different band, for example).'
If that's not a description of SO2R, I don't know what is (and I do quite a
bit of SO2R myself.) If both receivers are muted during transmit, I don't
see how you can say that the radio will let you seek out stations (i.e.,
receive them) on one band while CQing (i.e., transmitting) on another band.
I suppose I was na?ve and did not really stop to consider the cost of
actually building SO2R into one box, but after reading the above paragraph I
definitely assumed that this was a major feature of the ORION. Obviously,
I'm not the only person who thought so. I even went so far as to inquire of
Writelog's author whether he would support automatic SO2R switching for the
ORION (i.e., use rig control commands for TX and audio switching instead of
flipping bits on the LPT port.) He also would have had to modify Writelog's
rig control code to deal with two "rigs" over one COM port. All that is
certainly possible with ORION's robust command set, but useless if both
receivers are muted during transmit.
Anyway, I suggest you reword the paragraph to be less misleading. I would
not use the term "Two Radio Mode". That's just too close to Single-OP Two
Radio, especially when used in the same paragraph with the word "contest".
Also, I would leave out the entire phrase in parens at the end of the
paragraph. Unless you want to rely on the slim technicality that you can
hear between CQs (or code elements with full break-in), the claim is simply
not true.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott R. [mailto:w4pa@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 3:22 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] SO2R Orion - 4 bands at once? 4 amps? Hoy!
>
>
> K3NA wrote:
>
> >TenTec is promoting the Orion as the best radio for
> contesting to date,
> >based on the receiver measured performance parameters, and the
> >flexibility in the "full dual receive" capabilities with the
> >transmitter. The website states, in part, ""Instant Two Radio Mode"
> >allows ORION to instantly QSY between two different bands.
> Two linear
> >amplifiers, two sets of accessory devices via dual band data outputs
> >and two antennas can optionally be connected to ORION to allow
> >instantaneous QSY (useful for seeking out and working
> stations on one
> >band during a contest while CQing on a different band, for example)."
> >Sounds great, eh?
> >I have my doubts, and would like more information from those who have
> >used the radio.
>
> Sure - how much information would you like?
>
> I've been known to send a dit or three in contests as a full
> blown proponent of SO2R operation...and had a significant
> amount of input into the design and implementation of the
> Orion as a result of my contesting experiences. I also wrote
> the text quoted above that appears on the Ten-Tec web site at
> www.tentec.com/TT565.htm
>
> > After reviewing the website and owners manual, it appears
> the main
> >receiver's signal processing chain is used while
> transmitting. So, one
> >can NOT use the main receiver while transmitting.
>
> >There is nothing that indicates whether the sub-receiver
> continues to
> >operate while transmitting. If the sub-receiver is also disabled
> >during transmission, then the Orion is NOT a "SO2R station in a box"!
>
> >One will still need a second radio to implement an
> >SO2R contesting station, since it is essential to be able to receive
> >>(at least on a different band) while transmitting.
>
> Correct - nor have we ever promoted it as being so ("SO2R in a box").
> Come to think of it, I may need to update our website because I
> couldn't find anywhere where it said it was full dual receive either,
> now that I read what I wrote there a few months ago!
>
> What is very different about Orion is (leaving muting the receiver
> while transmitting aside, which every other dual receive radio does)
> - is that the main receiver performance is leagues ahead of anything
> available today, and that the numbers we quote for receiver
> performance
> are not manipulated to take advantage of the ARRL Product Review
> process (you can manipulate IP3 to read anything you want if you're
> willing to give up the radio's ability to receive weak signals by
> sacrificing rx sensitivity, for example - IP3 could look AWESOME and
> the radio could be deaf as a post - more on that at some
> later date).
> You can use the sub receiver on any frequency, not just the same band
> that the main receiver is used on. Spatial diversity RX with both
> receivers at the touch of a button. Stereo receive. Assign audio to
> any ear from any receiver in the headphones by button pushing.
> Programmable AGC on each receiver, continuously variable
> filtering from
> 100-6000 Hz on rx. And on and on...
>
> Not to mention interfacing a second linear amplifier to the radio, so
> when something appears on another band (like a packet spot)
> there is no
> need to retune an amp or change antennas - your other amp and antenna
> are already there. Even better, have packet deliver the spots direct
> to the sub rx frequency through the serial interface and just transmit
> to work 'em.
>
> How 'bout some examples:
>
> Let's say you have a typical real SO2R setup with two Orion's and all
> the necessary hardware, running SO/Assisted. Have packet deliver the
> appropriate spot to the subreceiver, and just transmit to work them.
> You can even do this with a third and fourth band. Have 2 Orion's, 4
> amplifiers, lots of monobanders. CQing on 20 and 40, have packet
> deliver spots on 15 and 80 to the subreceiver so all you have to do is
> pick them off one by one in between CQing on whichever of the two
> radios you are using. Or if you're a nutcase like me, just operate
> your usual SO2R setup by CQing on one band with one radio,
> then monitor
> the output from two different bands simultaneously in the opposite ear
> with the second radio, without even bothering to add packet into the
> mix (oops...I think I'm giving away what I'm planning for
> operating for
> the future, but yes, I am planning to operate 3 or 4 bands all at the
> same time in SO2R mode in the future...if I can teach myself how to do
> it now that the hardware, Orion, exists to do so. I don't
> see why not.
> Three ought to be fairly simple - transmit on one rig, monitor two
> bands with the other rig - man, come on SS CW - I can't wait!)
>
> >The website data lavishes praise on the very promising receiver
> >specifications... but I see in the fine print that the
> >sub-receiver's performance is FAR below the main receiver.
> >To wit:
> > 5 kHz 2-two 3rd order dynamic range / 5 kHz spacing IP3
> >Orion: 101 dB / +24 dBm
> >K2: 88 dB/ +1 dBm
> >FT1000MP Mk V: 73 dB / -5.2 dBm
> >Sounds great, eh? But look a little further...
>
> >Orion main receiver:
> > IP3: +25 dBm for 20 kHz spacing, 2.4 kHz bandwidth, pre-amp off.
> > +24 dBm for 5-kHz spacing, 0.5 kHz bandwidth, pre-amp off.
> > IMD3 dynamic range: 101 dB, preamp off, 20- and 5-kHz spacing.
>
> >Orion sub-receiver: far fewer details given, but...
> > IP3: +5 dBm typical, 20 kHz spacing. (no clue about
> bandwidth used
> >in this measurement)
> > ... also no 5 kHz spacing figures at all.
> > IMD3 dynamic range: unspecified.
> >That 5 kHz spacing IP3 figures will be worse than 20 kHz spacing for
> >the sub-receiver because the sub-receiver doesn't employ the
> >same crystal roofing filter scheme as the main receiver.
> >Does anyone have better specs for the sub-receiver?
>
> This is easy to quantify - the subreceiver is essentially an offshoot
> of the receiver used in the Ten-Tec Jupiter transceiver. I
> think "FAR"
> below the main rx performance might be stretching a little, but yes,
> it's not up to the main receiver performance. Could we have
> duplicated
> the main receiver to have two receiver performance specs like the main
> one? Sure, but it would have increased the price significantly,
> probably to not much additional advantage even for the typical SO2R
> contest operator. Keeping in mind that SO2R's are a minority of
> contest ops, and contesters are the minority of hams in
> general (I'm sure there are a lot of Orion's parked on 75m SSB at this
> very hour....)
>
> Of course, you can use the sub rx on any frequency you like, program
> the AGC, use any of the 590 filters built-in...so it's just a
> *tad* :-)
> different than the others out there. Not to mention you can put them
> together and tune both receivers simultaneously by turning one tuning
> knob.
>
> >So, as a SO2R operator, one gets to use the excellent receiver -- but
> >ONLY when not transmitting!
>
> No, as an SO2R operator, you'd be using a second Orion.
>
> >Based on what I've seen so far, it seems like TenTec missed its
> >implied goal: two excellent, independent receivers and one
> >transmitter in a configuration that can be used as a SO2R
> station in a
> >single box.
>
> Nope, there was no intention to put two excellent independent
> receivers
> into a box and make them stay open for SO2R operation in one single
> package. That rig would have been at retail kind of like two Orion's
> would be, and as we SO2R contesters are a minority of contesters,
> contesters are minority of hams in general - it really didn't make any
> sense for Ten-Tec to do that. Like I said, I was part of this from
> even before day 1 when I started begging my superiors at Ten-Tec to
> listen to my plaintive cries for something...more, better, different
> that a wack-o contest operator like myself, the typical DXer, and the
> average ham who just likes having a very high end piece of gear could
> all appreciate. I drew pictures. I pounded my fist. They listened.
> They also did a SUPERB job of engineering the Orion; I'm proud of 'em.
>
> CU folks in the upcoming contest season....2 x Orion SO2R.
>
> 73
> Scott Robbins, W4PA
> Amateur Radio Product Manager, Ten-Tec, Inc.
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
|