[CQ-Contest] RES: RES: M/2 Rule

PY5EG py5eg at iesa.com.br
Tue Sep 20 05:36:09 EDT 2005

Hi John:

Congratulations for the way you are proceeding.
In my personal opinion the lock out is the only real way to prevent the
break in the rules specially in big MM stations when operating as M/2.
With the recent technology, (in ssb several alternatives to key the station,
vox, computer, foot switch or the second operator, SO2R box etc)it is
impossible without a appropriated lock out mechanism to avoid 3rd station on
the air.
I´m curious about the lock out device you are using. Can you send a lay out
for us?
Best 73

-----Mensagem original-----
De: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] Em nome de John Laney
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 19 de setembro de 2005 17:07
Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
Assunto: Re: [CQ-Contest] RES: M/2 Rule

In every multi-op contest that I have done at W8JI and W4AN in recent years,
we had lock-out systems to prevent "extra" stations from transmitting at the
same time.

At the M/M station, NQ4I, we have search and pounce stations with lock-outs
to prevent more than one signal on the band at the same time. 
  This is why you will sometimes hear our run station suddenly be
interrupted in the middle of some sort of information.  I hope you will be
patient with us as we will be "right back."

I am very uncomfortable with extra stations unless there is a lock-out of
some sort.  I am aware of multi-op stations where there are great efforts to
prevent multiple transmissions in violation of the rules.  At the best, it
is almost impossible to prevent unintentional violations on occasion.  At
other multi-op stations, there is no attempt at compliance, and I'd prefer
not to operate at such stations.


John, K4BAI.

CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list