See DX-Summit
----- Original Message -----
From: <rtty-request@contesting.com>
To: <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 6:53 PM
Subject: RTTY Digest, Vol 43, Issue 40
> Send RTTY mailing list submissions to
> rtty@contesting.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rtty-request@contesting.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rtty-owner@contesting.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of RTTY digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Montenegro on RTTY? (Barry)
> 2. Re: Not to beat the SO2R horse (J. Edward (Ed) Muns)
> 3. Re: Not to beat the SO2R horse (Phil Sussman)
> 4. Re: (no subject) (Joe Subich, W4TV)
> 5. Re: 6 Meter RTTY (Dick Kriss, AA5VU)
> 6. SO1R vs SO2R - Limited class vs Unlimited class
> (Ron Stailey)
> 7. Re: Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse... (Joe Subich, W4TV)
> 8. Re: Not to beat the SO2R horse (Barry)
> 9. KWM-2 S-Line factory instruction sheet for RTTY
> (Steve Lenaghan VE4LR)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 17:52:47 +0000
> From: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>
> Subject: [RTTY] Montenegro on RTTY?
> To: RTTY List <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <44C265EF.4010707@mindspring.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Anyone have any info?
> 73,
> Barry
>
> --
>
> Barry Kutner, W2UP
> Newtown, PA
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 10:53:39 -0700
> From: "J. Edward (Ed) Muns" <w0yk@msn.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse
> To: <dezrat@copper.net>
> Cc: rtty@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <BAY0-SMTP081BAE50F6E0843AD28E1890670@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> > If the RX is off when the TX is on, it's SO1R. The advantage
> > of SO2R is listening while transmitting.
>
> And ... transmitting while listening.
>
> 73,
> Ed - W0YK
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:56:03 -0400
> From: Phil Sussman <psussman@pactor.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse
> To: rtty@contesting.com
> Cc: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>
> Message-ID: <1153590963.44c266b36b95a@webmail.pactor.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> But Barry, Bill was not talking about SO2R. He was
> replying to 'what consitutes SO1R?'.
>
> My observation is that you can have SO2R capability in
> your rig and only use SO1R by choice! It's not the rig
> to me, but rather how you use that rig that constitutes
> the 'operating class.'
>
> Using a second receiver in the same rig or two separate
> receivers, or a wide view spectrum analyzer or two
> separate (or more) rigs or for that matter transmiitting
> and receiving at the same time is plainly not SO1R.
>
> Phil Sussman
> Clayton, Ohio
>
> ----------------
>
> Quoting Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>:
>
> >
> > Bill,
> > Not necessarily true. When I do RTTY SO2R, more often than not, I
> > alternate CQs on 2 bands. As soon as R1 goes into rcve, R2 starts
> > CQing. I've found it more productive than listening on the second
> > band. This is unique to RTTY. Besides the fact you don't need to
> > listen to anything on RTTY, there's really no way to hold 2 freqs on CW
> > or SSB.
> > 73,
> > Barry
> > > Quoting Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>:
> > >
> > >
> > >> If the RX is off when the TX is on, it's SO1R. The advantage of SO2R
> > >> is listening while transmitting.
> > >>
> > >> Bill, W6WRT
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > RTTY mailing list
> > > RTTY@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Barry Kutner, W2UP
> > Newtown, PA
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:57:47 -0400
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] (no subject)
> To: <dezrat@copper.net>
> Cc: "'Carter, K8VT'" <k8vt@ameritech.net>, RTTY@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <007e01c6adb8$57907330$0b80a8c0@laptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Bill writes:
>
> > Joe, let's cut to the chase.
> >
> > What is your real motivation for opposing an SO1R class? You have
> > given us all kinds of excuses, but all of them are easily overcome.
> >
> > Do you have a hidden agenda we are not aware of? Could it be
> > financial?
>
> My current "antenna farm" consists of a multiband vertical for
> 20/17/15/12/10 and a trap dipole for 80/40/30 at 30' ... that
> is fairly common, perhaps even advanced, for someone in a HOA
> or antenna restricted community. I have done reasonably well
> in the last couple ARRL 10 Meter contests by using a variant
> of the SO2R technique (the second receiver in my Mark V) to make
> up part of that antenna disadvantage.
>
> I find it possible to monitor two pile-ups or do "dual S&P"
> in some of the other contests using the same techniques - again
> it helps overcome some of the antenna disadvantages.
>
> Why should you be allowed an A3 at 50' in the "basic" category but
> my second receiver makes me "unlimited?" Both better antennas and
> a second receiver or second transceiver are simply another tool to
> optimize both my score and my enjoyment of the contest ... yet you
> would discriminate against MY tool because of nothing more than
> simple bigotry but YOUR tool of choice is absolutely fine.
>
> Again, if you want to define "BASIC" and "UNLIMITED" classes,
> define the basic class to eliminate ALL the tools. Make it
> attractive to the beginners and those who are HOA/antenna limited
> ... those who must use hidden end-fed wires, attic dipoles, their
> flagpole, or the antenna on their car. As soon as you allow one
> set of station improvements, you are creating a situation that
> is just as unfair to that group as you clam the current situation
> is to you.
>
> Nothing prevents you from doing SO2R ... you choose not to (for
> whatever good reason). However, those who are prevented from
> installing better antennas often have no choice in the matter.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:00:03 -0500
> From: "Dick Kriss, AA5VU" <aa5vu@sbcglobal.net>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] 6 Meter RTTY
> To: rtty-contesting <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <C0E7D1D3.1D306%aa5vu@sbcglobal.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Russell NC5O,
>
> I have worked some RTTY stations using the DOS (Digital-On-Six)
recommended
> frequency of 50.290. I have worked FH, RTTY and PSK at 50.290 to 50.295.
>
> 73, Dick AA5VU
>
> > Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 09:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Russell Blair <russell_blair86@yahoo.com>
> > Subject: [RTTY] 6 meters RTTY
> > To: rtty@contesting.com
> > Message-ID: <20060722162007.98008.qmail@web50504.mail.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
> >
> > IS THERE ANY POSTED FREQUENCY ON 6M THAT RTTY IS ON ?,
> > I HAVE MY ICOM 560 WORKING ON 6M RTTY NOW, BUT STILL
> > NEED TO DO SOME CLEAN UP WORK, I'M ONLY RUNNING 10W
> > WITH A DIPOLE ANTENNA UP 20 FEET. HOPE TO SEE SOME
> > ACTIVE ON 6M.
> >
> > RUSSELL NC5O
> >
> > ========================================
> > Russell Blair
> > QTH ========= Richardson Tx
> > CALL ========= NC5O
> > GRID ========= EM12tx
> > FH# ========== 300
> > ========================================
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:07:27 -0500
> From: "Ron Stailey" <k5dj@austin.rr.com>
> Subject: [RTTY] SO1R vs SO2R - Limited class vs Unlimited class
> To: <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <007401c6adb9$b1231820$0301a8c0@Ron>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Another way to look at this is NEVER list SO2R EVER again. Since your
>
> using ONE radio at a time you are still SO1R when your using that single
>
> radio, and SO1R when your using the other single radio. Listing SO2R
isn't
>
>
> a rule or necessary. Just send in your score as Single Op HP or LP and
let
>
> it go at that.
>
>
>
> "BUT", this has been mentioned B4. :-) No matter how you look at it
> someone
>
> can and will find a way around it. Human factor of finding a loophole or
>
> advantage point, will always be in play. I'm sorry but that's the way it
> is.
>
>
>
> How many times have we talked about this in the last 10yrs??? Make your
> category
>
> SO1R and SO2R - Limited and Un-limited and see how many list S/O, SO1R or
> just
>
> simply S/Op HP or LP. Title the category anyway you want, I'll bet
someone
> can
>
> find a loophole the first day the rules appear in print. There still
using
> one
>
> radio at a time. I don't see anyway around this. If there was, especially
> with
>
> this much chatter about it, I feel the rules would have been changed by
> now.
>
> Don't you??? I would make a station or equipment change to get a 10%
> advantage. I
>
> would especially make a self operating change, for the 40% advantage your
> talking
>
> about. YEP I shore would and did..
>
>
>
> Since there is a 99.3% chance the rules won't change, maybe we should
have
> some
>
> good discussions on how to make SO2R work for you, the man that hasn't
done
> it, or
>
> feels like he can't do it. I assure you, YOU can do it. Never mind the I
> can't
>
> afford it stuff. Bull Dunk, you can afford it and you can do it if you
want
> to
>
> bad enough.. It's NOT that hard.
>
>
>
> Just food for thought, nothing bad or insulting intended..
>
>
>
> 73, de Ron K5DJ
>
> ====
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 14:07:47 -0400
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the ANTENNA OVERKILL horse...
> To: "'Carter, K8VT'" <k8vt@ameritech.net>
> Cc: RTTY@contesting.com
> Message-ID: <007f01c6adb9$bcfdea30$0b80a8c0@laptop>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Carter writes:
>
> > > That same top contester also says he started doing SO2R to
> > > overcome antenna disadvantages.
> >
> > Which is a roundabout way of admitting that there *IS* an
> > advantage for SO2R.
>
> I'm not arguing that.
>
> > However, most of us seem to agree that there is an advantage to:
> >
> > -single vs. multiple ops
> >
> > -high power vs. low power
> >
> > -SO1R vs. SO2R
> >
> > ...and we seem to want to have separate categories for *some* of
> > these advantages and yet turn a blind eye towards other advantages.
> > Which brings us back to...
>
> The first two are obvious significant advantages and have been for
> 50 years of contesting. The High vs. Low power advantage was
> perhaps 100% in the early days. However, SO2R will certainly not
> double the score of a good operator with an effective SO1R station.
>
> what you fail to comprehend (or acknowledge) is that there are other
> tools ... better antennas, no-tune radios, improved receivers,
> computer logging, that can also improve a single operator's score
> by 10, 15 or 20%. Why should each of those incremental improvements
> be permitted but only the second receiver or second transceiver be
> prohibited? Frankly, it is only because you don't like the idea of
> competing with a SO2R equipped station.
>
> If I, or AA5AU, or anyone else cannot use one set of tools (e.g.,
> better antennas), we should be absolutely free to use another tool
> (e.g., SO2R) to make up the difference. To define a BASIC or
> LIMITED class that permits a stack of three element monoband
> yagis at any height (Bill's proposal) but prohibits SO2R is
> nothing more than discrimination against SO2R. It is no different
> that saying "I don't like that kind of person so I won't let them
> move into my neighborhood."
>
> Is there a place for BASIC and UNLIMITED classes? If you want
> "LIMITED" and "UNLIMITED" classes be consistent - don't use the
> limits to create an advantage for yourself.
>
>
> > > Sure, if you want "basic" and "unlimited" classes, make the basic
> > > class truly basic ...
> >
> > So, it looks like we ultimately agree! :-)
> >
> > By having just these two classes, we make the problem of smaller
> > and smaller entry pools go away, we give the little guy a chance
> > to compete on a (more or less) equal footing with other little
> > pistols and we may even induce more people to get into (or return
> > to) contesting!
>
> We agree only to the extent that the "BASIC" class is truly basic
> and fair to all - including the HOA/antenna restricted types. Once
> you start allowing one set of advantages you cannot discriminate.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 18:09:36 +0000
> From: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Not to beat the SO2R horse
> To: dezrat@copper.net, RTTY List <rtty@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <44C269E0.5010003@mindspring.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Bill,
> When you said one is in rcve, I interpreted that as tuning the band
> while xmtg on the other radio, when in fact, I'm just copying an
> exchange or station calling. You win this round :.)
> 73,
> Barry
>
> Bill Turner wrote:
> > You say "not necessarily", but I don't see any disagreement. In your
> > example, when one TX is on, so is the other RX. With SO1R you can
> > either be in TX mode or RX mode but not both.
> >
> > Please clarify.
> >
> > Bill, W6WRT
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------
> >
> > ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
> >
> > On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 17:42:36 +0000, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Bill,
> >> Not necessarily true. When I do RTTY SO2R, more often than not, I
> >> alternate CQs on 2 bands. As soon as R1 goes into rcve, R2 starts
> >> CQing. I've found it more productive than listening on the second
> >> band. This is unique to RTTY. Besides the fact you don't need to
> >> listen to anything on RTTY, there's really no way to hold 2 freqs on CW
> >> or SSB.
> >> 73,
> >> Barry
> >>
> >>> Quoting Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> If the RX is off when the TX is on, it's SO1R. The advantage of SO2R
> >>>> is listening while transmitting.
> >>>>
> >>>> Bill, W6WRT
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> RTTY mailing list
> >>> RTTY@contesting.com
> >>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Barry Kutner, W2UP
> Newtown, PA
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:55:38 -0500
> From: "Steve Lenaghan VE4LR" <VE4LR@arrl.net>
> Subject: [RTTY] KWM-2 S-Line factory instruction sheet for RTTY
> To: <RTTY@contesting.com>
> Message-ID: <NGBBLIFKFINKDCHDBPBNCECLDOAA.VE4LR@arrl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I came across an instruction sheet (Sept 64) on using a Collins on RTTY.
I
> can make copies for a small price. In due course this will probably
appear
> on the CCA manual page.
>
> 73 Steve VE4LR
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
> End of RTTY Digest, Vol 43, Issue 40
> ************************************
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|