Phil Howlett wrote:
>
> We certainly do need something along these lines as the way the radio is now
> it is user vicious. Apparently no one at T-T is a serious DXer who has ever
> had the occasion to actually work DX with the various methods of DX
> operating. As far as I'm concerned, T-T has really missed the boat with
> their present user interface scheme. It would be so easy to correct if some
> minds could be changed. I've mentioned my feelings on this subject to Scott,
> Jack, and others and all I get is a response very similar to the one others
> received when the CW MOX issue ran rampant several months ago. It would
> appear an act of God will be necessary to have anything done about the user
> vicious split issue with this radio. Thank goodness I don't need any DX
> entity on SSB or CW or this radio would be on the floor and the Paragon put
> back on line. That radio was a pleasure to use in pileups, far superior to
> the Omni 6+ I had for several years and an order of magnitude superior to
> the Orion.
You're ribbing us, right?
The Paragon and Omni VI operations were some magnitudes different in
operation? Working split frequency SSB or CW DX with the Orion is a
difficult feat? Sheesh. I've owned all three and don't happen to
agree.
Maybe I'm not serious enough in my DXing as I fail to see a large
problem.
Perhaps you could recount some of the exotic methods of working DX since
I'm only familiar with simplex and split frequency. The only variations
on these schemes of which I am aware are: 1) call when the DX invites a
call or 2) call like mad even when the DX is transmitting or when he is
in QSO with another. I've heard rumors of a method which involves
having computer software direct the rig and antenna to a particular
frequency/mode in response to a 'cluster spot but I don't consider that
DXing.
Dave Heil K8MN
Cameron, WV
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|