[CQ-Contest] Benefits of Multi-operator ONE Transmitter Categ ory

DavidHarper at tx.slr.com DavidHarper at tx.slr.com
Thu Nov 13 10:22:48 EST 1997

Randy sez:

> I think the WRTC concept was the right idea.  Allow only one radio
> that can 
> transmit.  Allow a second receiver.  If the first radio breaks, then
> you 
> can use the second to transmit.

I won't go into my opinions about whether there should be a separate
class for SO-2R (single op - 2 radio); there are pros and cons. But I
would like to point out something that I haven't seen mentioned.
Several people in favor of a separate classes for SO-1R and SO-2R have
suggested rules for the SO-1R class that limit the op to one
transmitter, but until now no one has mentioned a limitation on
receivers.  Randy indicates WRTC rules allowing a second receiver.
With the automation now available for quickly switching antennas,
using a second receiver could be virtually identical to using two
transceivers.  After all, you can only transmit one signal at a time.
If you are running on 15M and S&P with the receiver on 10M, you could
easily jump the transmitter to the S&P frequency and back, even
continuing to CQ on 15M between calls on 10M if you have to call more
than once.  With some slight tweaking of contest software to swap
frequency info between the transceiver and receiver, plus some
auto-antenna switching, this would be easy.  The receiver could even
jump to 15M to monitor the run freq while the transceiver is on 10M.
I am thinking this might all be possible even with a single rig like
the FT1000D.  Just some food for thought for those of you contempating
new rules.

Dave WD5N   /    VP5EA   (one rig and LOW POWER, hoping for some good
10M openings this year!)

< davidharper at tx.slr.com>

CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list