[RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question

[Doug Hall]

On 7/24/06, Joe Subich, W4TV <w4tv at subich.com> wrote:

> To be honest you have to treat SoxR and gain antennas the same way.
> If you want a separate category for SOxR, you must be willing to
> accept a separate category for gain antennas.
> 73,
>
>    ... Joe, W4TV

You mean like the separate categories we have for high and low power?

Above all else I think we should be consistent. As you said earlier,
radios and antennas are just tools, and "Why should it be a surprise
when any tool helps a station produce a better result?"

If it makes no sense to categorize by antennas and radios then why
distinguish between  power levels? Radios, antennas, amplifiers -
they're all just tools, no?

My point is that I have never heard the SOnR advocates complaining
about different power classes. But from what I've gathered the power
distinction was introduced for the very same reasons people are
calling for a distinction between SO1R and SOnR. The very same
reasons.

I will say that all this discussion has helped me see and appreciate
(somewhat) the argument for keeping single ops in the same class,
regardless of how many radios or what kinds of antennas they use. The
point is well-made: They're just tools. But I can't resolve the
high/low power issue - there's that consistency thing; it just doesn't
fit. An amplifier is a tool just like an antenna, and there isn't any
appreciable skill involved in using either one. So if we're not going
to distinguish between how many radios you can use then I think we
should abolish the power classes as well.

Doug, K4DSP