CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest

To: <kr2q@optimum.net>, <k1ep.list@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest
From: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Reply-to: wc1m@msn.com
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:43:09 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
This is common practice in large M/M stations with multiple radios per band.
CT even has a "Partner" mode which allows the second-radio op to enter
his/her version of the call and have it displayed just below the entry box
on the screen of the run op.

73, Dick WC1M

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kr2q@optimum.net [mailto:kr2q@optimum.net]
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 12:01 PM
> To: k1ep.list@gmail.com
> Cc: wc1m@msn.com; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest
> 
> I don't think it is a loop-hole at all.  Multi-ops, as far as I know,
> have ALWAYS had the
> ability and option to have more than one op per operating frequency.
> In other words,
> if N2AA is running on 7001, it was not uncommon to have two ops
> listening to 7001.
> 
> I know that I did that when I was M/M.  It was not uncommon for each
> of the two ops to
> either share the callsign that "they" copied (and it was always
> amazing to me how two
> guys would copy separate stations), or they could "help" each other to
> get a single callsign
> right.  When the pile up is that big, there are plenty of calls to
> copy and having two heads
> copying just keeps things boiling at a higher rate.
> 
> I haven't done M/M in about 20 years, but isn't this still a
> reasonable practice for multi-ops?
> 
> de Doug KR2Q
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed K1EP
> Date: Monday, December 8, 2008 11:39 am
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest
> To: wc1m@msn.com, kr2q@optimum.net, cq-contest@contesting.com
> 
> > So in that vain, in a MM, you could a non-operator as a
> > "reviewer". He or she would review the recorded audio for any
> > questionable QSO that was flagged by an op. The op could
> > continue to
> > op and the reviewer would make any corrections to the log. As
> > long
> > as it takes place during the 48 hours, it would be legal. I am
> > NOT
> > suggesting this be done, but it is a "loophole" within the rules.

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

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