[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Basic SO2R

To: Dave Lawley <dave@g4buo.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Basic SO2R
From: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 09:12:28 +0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I really dislike SO2R or SO4R or ....   because of the empty CQs with no op
present to answer your call to them.
Hey out there, I know you can hear me and know you are not listening to
your run freq.  So you expect me to wait around until you get back to
ur Run Radio???  Nope, not me.
Some SO#R CQs are so close together that my call sign, sent once, is longer
than your pauses.

I bet there are SO5R out there somewhere.  And I bet there are
automated empty CQs holding a freq while the op eats lunch.   The Old Man
called this Rotten Radio,  73
Charly, HS0ZCW

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 2:55 AM, Dave Lawley <dave@g4buo.com> wrote:

> That's not the only way to use SO2R. When starting out, it's fine just to
> use the second radio to spot band openings and to fill up the band map on
> the next band prior to a QSY.
> 73, Dave G4BUO (M6T next weekend)
> > As someone who has spent the past 15 years doing SO2R Low Power, I can
> give
> > you a few comments from my perspective:
> >
> > - I find that SO2R only helps if the rhythm can be reasonably maintained
> > between the CQing and grabbing Qs on the second radio.  If you spend call
> > after call after call, trying to work the second radio Q, your CQing rate
> > will suffer, even if the CQing rate is fairly slow.  So there is a point
> > where SO2R can potentially be less effective than SO1R.
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

Charly, HS0ZCW
CQ-Contest mailing list

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