CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R

To: <dezrat@copper.net>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SO1R vs. SO2R
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 23:38:07 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
W6WRT writes: 

> Shall we also get off the HP/LP thing? The SO/MO thing? The
> assisted/unassisted thing?
> 
> Those operations were separated into their own classes because each
> one had a *significant* advantage/disadvantage over the other.
> 
> One radio/two radio has a similar significant difference and should 
> be treated the same.

Bill, let this die ... until you are willing to add antenna systems 
into the mix (tribander at 50', tribander stacks, monoband stacks, 
and bigger) SO1R/SO2R is of no consequence.  

Multiple Operator and Assisted are major departures from "single 
operator does everything" and merit separate categories.  SO2R vs. 
SO1R is no different than bigger antennas. 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
     

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

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