[RTTY] ARRL RTTY

[David Levine]

Hank,

If SO2R at times is advantageous, then it's advantageous. Not making it a
different category based on some of the reasons below is like saying that
using a packet spotting network and being assisted shouldn't be a different
category because...

1) I got focused on running rate and didn't look for needed mults.

2) There were SO1R stations who bested my score and they were on the west
coast or in the southwest let alone be on the east
coast. Nothing beats location and aluminum high in the air for performance
results in a DX contest.

If #1 is true, then turn off the 2nd radio and be a SO1R operator. If you
feel it's not an advantage to using a 2nd radio then why waste the
electricity?

David - K2DSL


On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Hank Lonberg <kr7x1 at verizon.net> wrote:

> Jim and others:
>
> <snip>
>
> As far as a separate class for SO2R I don't agree that this is
> a valid argument, should there be a WPM limit in CW Mode or
> classes for say LT 15 wpm > 40 wpm. The push to level the
> playing field will not help the geographic or antenna farm
> advantage not to mention propagation. One can, with the proper
> radio, do SO2V and almost have the same preceived advantage of
> S/P on the second VFO while running the other VFO. In this
> case, there is only 1 radio. Let us allow for the innovation
> and growth of the technology of the mode and stop wishing for
> mechanical RTTY machines to make a come back.
>
> I operated SO2R and admit that at certain times it was
> advantageous, and for about the same time, a disadvantage. I
> got focused on running rate and didn't look for needed mults.
> There were SO1R stations who bested my score and they were on
> the west coast or in the southwest let alone be on the east
> coast. Nothing beats location and aluminum high in the air for
> performance results in a DX contest.
>
> <snip>
>
> Ciao and 73
>
> Hank / KR7X
>