Re: [Tlf-devel] TLD and ARRL Field Day

[w9ya]

I am inserting some comments where appropriate below:

> * address@hidden <address@hidden> [2007 Jun 30 09:51 -0500]:
>> Hey gang;
>>
>> Other than the ops "keyboarding" each other, since there can only be
>> one transmitter per band/mode on Field Day, is there an advantage to
>> networking such stuff together for a contest such as Field Day.
>
> Unless each station is dedicated to a band or mode or both, then the
> dupe checking becomes very handy.  One year I was involved with a 2A
> station and the club didn't have enough CW ops to keep one station
> going.  So I networked a pair of computers with CT and all we had to
> make sure of was to not be working SSB on the same band.  It gave each
> station the freedom to pick a band and for both stations to work phone
> for about half the FD period.  Since then I've been involved in 1A
> efforts.

Yes I had not considered switching band/modes as you have detailed.
Although with proper log merging, which can be done outside of the program
in question, the need inside of the program seems nice if you are doing
band/mode stations as you have describe. Thank you for the input.

>
> As it turned out, the logs still got slightly out of sync on the
> primitive CT network and some work was involved afterward merging them.

Ug, CT is NOT a good logging program, as it was designed by a committee of
1000 monkeys working on it for 100 years, or so it seems. (GRIN !)

>
>> I suppose that log backup over the network would be useful, but can't
>> that be done easily enough outside of the logging software anyways ?
>
> A near real time merge seems like it could be very useful for a
> multi-multi type station.  Done right, the programs running on the
> various computers can sync more quickly and accurately than an
> individual can afterward.

Multi-multi is NOT field day, and that was what I was referring to.

>
>> I am sure I am missing something, but I cannot seem to see the
>> advantage during this particular contest/operating activity.
>
> Those features are driven by the top contesting teams.  They evidently
> find value in them.

Well, if they find usefulness for some of these things on field day,
great, but the multi-multi features are significantly reduced in their
effectiveness when one considers field day use where a "multi-multi" is
not the order of the day (so to speak).

>
> 73, de Nate >>
>
> --

Thanks for all of the comments so far, as they certainly have helped me
shape my thoughts.

Vy 73;

Bob
w9ya