> One defining characteristic of SO1R is that when the TX is
> on, the RX is off and vice versa. In other words, traditional
> transceiver operation.
"traditional transceiver operation" is a relatively new concept
and has no bearing on this topic. Separate transmitter/receiver
operation - including the ability to support duplex operation -
was the norm for the first 50 years of amateur radio.
The definition of the "single operator" entry classification is
simple - and it has nothing at all to do with the number of either
transmitters or receivers the operator has at his disposal. From
the ARRL general HF rules:
2.1.Single Operator: One person performs all transmitting,
receiving, and logging functions as well as equipment
and antenna adjustments.
2.1.2.Single-Operator stations are allowed only one transmitted
signal at any given time.
To attempt to create a separate entry class based on the number
of available transmitters or receivers is about as stupid as
creating separate entry classes based on the number of available
antennas.
> The advantage of SO2R is that the operator can be receiving (looking
> for mults and new stations) during the entire contest, where the SO1R
> op can only be listening about half the contest. Being able to do that
> is a great advantage, much like going to high power or using multiple
> transmitters.
This is a canard and comparable to saying:
"the advantage of 40 WPM CW is that the operator can make a QSO in
one quarter of the time it takes at 10 WPM. Being able to do that
is a great advantage, much like going to high power or using multiple
transmitters. To compete against people who can't do that is unfair. "
Perhaps it is time to enforce "speed limits" on CW or place those
who operate faster than 10 WPM enter a separate entry class.
You may not like an operating technique but so long as it is legal
(one operator, one signal) there is no basis to place it in a
separate entry class.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Bill Turner
> Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 9:25 PM
> To: Neal Campbell
> Cc: Shelby Summerville; rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] CQ-Contest SO2R
>
>
> ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
>
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:22:47 -0400, "Neal Campbell"
> <nealk3nc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >My new rig is a Flex5000a which is a full duplex SDR. In other words,
> >I can listen on the second rx while I am transmitting on another VFO.
> >What would you do with this one?
>
> ------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------
>
> Don't confuse the number of radios with the number of boxes on your
> desk. You have two radios in one box.
>
> One defining characteristic of SO1R is that when the TX is on, the RX
> is off and vice versa. In other words, traditional transceiver
> operation.
>
> The advantage of SO2R is that the operator can be receiving (looking
> for mults and new stations) during the entire contest, where the SO1R
> op can only be listening about half the contest. Being able to do that
> is a great advantage, much like going to high power or using multiple
> transmitters. To compete against people who do not do that is unfair.
> Most Americans like a fair fight, don't they?
>
> Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|