Dual CQ
Dualing
Alternate CQ-ing
or whatever you call it is NOTHING NEW!
It was used already back in 90ties!
Software like TR logger even CT or later Writelog, wintest or now DX log are
supporting this kind of operation with single PC
and SO2R box like WX0B, ZS4TX kombo keyer, EZ Master, microHAM MK2R+ etc
changing auto focus from one to other radio
automatically!
Intention is not to call CQ on 2 band and continue pile-up on one
Intention was always to to run 2 pile ups to maximize the rate !
There are few videos on you tube incl. audio from
UT5UGR showing as well very effective SO2R run with 2 PCs from TO7Auo to 285
QSO/h rate
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvdsbep9koE
and
UR0MC (UZ2M)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r700RM9Mmqk
in my opinion using 2 PCs is not so effective like using one
but there are always contra and pros!
Technique like this was used more from QTH with slower rates but now we can
see that everyone want to win
even from real rare DX QTH needs to use it .....
73s
Braco
E77DX
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] Im Auftrag von
Eric NO3M
Gesendet: Montag, 07. Dezember 2015 19:54
An: cq-contest@contesting.com
Betreff: Re: [CQ-Contest] High Rate Dual Radio CQing
I'm not disputing Steve's observation on how many operators use dueling CQ,
but to run dueling CQs without expecting at least a steady stream of
stations to work on both radios seems to be a waste of the second radio,
when it could probably yield a higher rate doing efficient S/P a-la "classic
SO2R" style.
As far as I know, current software implementations are not conducive to the
concept of actually running both sides, and using two (2) PCs with lockouts
is more effective in such a case, even though there is more physical
movement. I haven't run N1MM in a couple years after switching the shack PC
to Linux, but from what I remember, once a QSO is started on one radio, the
focus stays there until the QSO is complete and resumes dueling CQs. If
there is a station to work on the other radio, you can toggle back and forth
with an extra keypress. Anything extra is inefficient.
When I submitted patches to N4OGW to add dueling CQ to his 'so2sdr'
logger, a different approach was taken. During dueling CQ, entry focus is
automatically opposite the transmitting radio, just like N1MM, et.al.,
however, when a QSO is started on one side, the logger drops into "Toggling
ESM" mode. Every subsequent <enter> keypress toggles transmit between
radios. Function (Fx) message keys are no longer on-demand, rather they
become queued for the next <enter> keypress.
This allows for a clean, normal ESM flow between radios, no extraneous
keypresses needed, and with the function key queuing, one can perform fills
or fill requests easily. If more time is needed on one side, an empty
message can be "sent" on that radio to force a dummy toggle while still
maintaining pace on the other. Despite even these optimizations to the
operation of dueling CQs / simultaneous runs, two (2) PCs may still be more
effective when there are decent pileups, unless things are flowing
perfectly, then one can just keep pressing enter until their finger falls
off. (ESM ops, check out USB footpetals, ie. XKeys... map switch to <enter>
key and use foot instead or in combo).
At any rate, dual runs can be exhausting and tricky. The CQing operator has
to maintain cadence, control, etc. N6MJ, et.al., demonstrate a wonderful
mastery.
73 Eric NO3M
On 12/06/2015 09:11 PM, Steve London wrote:
> There is some terminology confusion.
>
> Dueling CQ's has been built into most contesting software for many
> years. You send a CQ on one band. When the CQ finishes, a CQ is
> automatically started on another band. If someone answers you on the
> first band, the CQ on the other band is automatically terminated, and
> you complete the usual QSO sequence on the first band. If no one
> answers, the software automatically bip-bops CQ's between the 2 bands
> until someone answers on either band, or you change strategy.
>
> What ZF2MJ, OH0V, V47T, and others have advanced is running
> simultaneous pileups on two bands, with 2 QSO's in progress at the
> same time, but never transmitting on the two bands at the same time.
> This is quite different from the dueling CQ's which many contesters
> have used for years.
>
> I propose using the term "simultaneous pileups", not "dueling CQ's",
> to describe what ZF2MJ, et.al., have done.
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|