BENEFITS of MULTI-Operator ONE Transmitter Category for CQ WW de Tom Russell N4KG 1 - INCREASED PARTICIPATION (Domestic, DX, Expedition) Many people are reluctant to enter as a serious single operato
Tom, do us a favor...don't pollute "our" SO/Asst. category with your perversion of multi-single. Multi-op is just that...many guys in the chair, mult radio or not. Single-op,. with or without packet
I know a couple of old farts that could probably kick your a** period Tom - -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/ Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
I changed from single-op unassisted to the assisted class after realizing that my ambitions of working New Ones benefited greatly by sharing spots. We also had an absolutely fantastic group participa
Tom, give me a break. You know I often operate SOA. How can you suggest that one guy, trying to operate as much of 48 hours as he can, can compete with 2 or 3 guys who can work in shifts, listen on o
I am all for adding a "real" multi-single category to the CQWW. However, I don't see any reason to screw up the SOA category to do it! The problem is pretty simple but the solution is not. - We want
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. This is the only way
Randy sez: 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