[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] The future of Contesting in 10 years

To: sawyered@earthlink.net, cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] The future of Contesting in 10 years
From: R Johnson <k1vu@tmlp.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:24:43 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
"SO2R in a box" was a reality 15 years ago when Yaesu introduced the FT-1000D.

The FT-1000D had Dual "Out of Band Receive" which allowed listen on, say both 
and 20M at the SAME time. The FT-1000 did not have this feature unless you added
the optional BP-1 filter.

When Yaesu introduced the FT-1000MP series they made it into a Dual "In Band 
radio which meant you could tune the Main and Sub receiver to different 
but they had to be in the SAME band. A big step backwards IMHO.

Now that Yaesu has introduced the FT-9000 Series radios, they brought back the 
"Out of Band Receive" capability on at least one in the series. I don't know if 
other FT-9000 models can be converted to Dual "Out of Band Receive" as easily 
as the

All I know is that in another 10 years we are going to pay more $$$ for 
whatever we buy !!!

Bob, K1VU

At 12:59 2/1/2007, sawyered@earthlink.net wrote:
>While I believe that technically, internet based remote contesting might be 
>achievable (seems like delays are an inhibiter right now), I am predicting 
>that the practice would regulated out by the Contest Committees.
>I think that the digital embedding of callsign information in our signals may 
>be another frontier that will be available, kicking off another round 
>"assisted vs. unassisted" debate.
>SO2R "in a box" is no doubt on the horizon.
>I think some other innovative multi-band antennas will be here.
>"real time scoreboards" are already here, the question of whether they are 
>adopted is another issue.
>I would love to see the output Tonno.  Good Luck.
>Ed  N1UR
>CQ-Contest mailing list

CQ-Contest mailing list

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