Thank you Tony. :)
One large elephant delivered into the room.
Marty
W1MD
> On Mar 14, 2017, at 10:47 AM, N2TK, Tony <tony.kaz@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> So if using twice the spectrum, which I agree, why are SO2R and SO1R in the
> same category? One could be running on two bands while the other can only
> run one band at a time.
> N2TK, Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Martin Durham
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:30 PM
> To: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PJ4G ARRL DX SSB Recording by N2IC
>
> That's not using two frequencies?? A good SO2R is cqing on one freq and
> either dueling CQs on a second freq or working multi. If time right
> transmits and receives make this a finely choreographed dance. Absolutely
> SO2R is using twice the spectrum that a SO1R is using.
>
> Marty
> W1MD
>
>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:21 PM, Barry <w2up@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> SO2R ops aren't using two freqs. They are CQing on one and answering
> stations on another freq already in use by someone else.
>>
>> Barry W2UP
>>
>>> On 3/13/2017 14:59, Martin Durham wrote:
>>> Not the issue. SO2R wouldn't be on a second frequency if it were not
> producing contacts.
>>>
>>> SO2R operators have twice the spectrum use of SO1R.
>>>
>>> THAT is the advantage. Why do multi ops exists? To sit on a frequency
> calling CQ into dead air??
>>>
>>> I've been doing multi operator contests for over 30 years.
>>>
>>> Marty
>>> W1MD
>>>
>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:55 PM, Ria Jairam
> <rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not necessarily since propagation varies widely within that space.
>>>
>>> Ria
>>> N2RJ
>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:46 PM Martin Durham
> <W1md@w1md.net<mailto:W1md@w1md.net>> wrote:
>>> Hmmmmmm
>>>
>>> What if you look at the spectrum as 1.8 - 30mhz. One station cq'ing
>>> on two frequencies is using twice the spectrum. Regardless of the
>>> 'band' you are on. Riiiight?? :)
>>>
>>> SO2R operators effectively get to use twice the spectrum that SO1R
> operators use...right?
>>>
>>> Marty
>>> W1MD
>>>
>>>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 4:40 PM, Ria Jairam
> <rjairam@gmail.com<mailto:rjairam@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some bands are more limited in space than others.
>>>> 40m - 75kHz
>>>> 20m - 200kHz
>>>> 15m - 250kHz
>>>> 10m - 1.4MHz
>>>>
>>>> Some bands are more productive than others, depending on propagation.
>>>>
>>>> So with two CQs by one station on the same band the station engaging
>>>> in this practice takes up twice the space and denies others the use
>>>> of the productive or limited space band.
>>>>
>>>> CQing on two bands is different because the other band may not be as
>>>> productive, and even underused in low solar years.
>>>>
>>>> Ria
>>>> N2RJ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 3:58 PM john@kk9a.com<mailto:john@kk9a.com>
> <john@kk9a.com<mailto:john@kk9a.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as spectrum usage goes what is the difference between this
>>>>> and a single op CQing on two bands?
>>>>>
>>>>> KK9A
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To: cq-contest@contesting.com<mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] PJ4G ARRL DX SSB Recording by N2IC
>>>>> From: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com<mailto:w0mu@w0mu.com>>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:32:05 -0600
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeff,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the comments. I agree with your interpretation of the
>>>>> rules, I don't like that it is allowed and like many have asked the
>>>>> ARRL to close this loophole.
>>>>>
>>>>> Many believe that if everyone adopted this philosophy that the band
>>>>> would be a mess. People would have a very difficult time finding a
>>>>> place to CQ unless you were a big gun etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> 73 and thanks for all the contacts from everywhere!
>>>>>
>>>>> W0MU
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
>>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|