At 08:38 AM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Ron,
>
>I don't think that 2 radio ops have a huge leg up on single radio ones
>especially out here in the Northwest. Other station equipment plays as big
>or bigger role than a second radio. I found that my SS score went up more
>after I changed my station arrangement to allow more combinations of
>antennas than the addition of a second radio. The second radio works well
>too, but the addition of a side mounted tribander pointed towards California
>was more productive.
>
>Just my thoughts.
>
>Gary K7FR
>
Several random thoughts...
You know, that is an interesting paragraph above. I have been trying to
deal with the concept of two radios and I find it to be annoying. I guess
by old brain can't separate all the signals well enough. Or maybe, I am
using it wrong.
I know that in the last several years, my competition level has decreased.
Is that the two radio advantage or I am getting along in years? Or, there
some dong on good operators who are just better than me (and there are!).
Anyway, I find the above statement interesting to revisit station layout and
antenna design at the contest station. Maybe we should discuss that issue
as well here. What works best for some people might be a hint to others to
try doing the same thing.
Just one other comment...if those people with a second radio work 200 more
QSOs than I do...they win and I don't. So, even if the second radio gives a
very small edge...isn't that benificial? Again, a contest is measure in
inches, feet, and points. Sometimes, the "edge" determines the winner.
Lee "Recovering from email depravation - Thanks Bill"
k0wa@southwind.net
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|