I see the day of "Zero Operator, Multi Transmitter" classification
coming very soon.
Why not? if a skimmer can decode the entire band, why can't it be
configured to control the transceiver, call CQ, respond to calls
received, decode what is received, place it in a log, etc.
"May the best programmer of the computer robot software win" in this new
category.
73 de n8xx Hg
On 12/23/2010 3:00 PM, Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com> wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:43:20 -0500
> From: Pete Smith<n4zr@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW + Skimmer
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Message-ID:<4D13A658.3020305@contesting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The Skimmer CW decoder is great, but when it is decoding one signal, it is
> also simultaneously decoding anything else that is within its passband,
> whether that is 3 KHz or 192 KHz. Only one signal is decoded at the bottom
> of the page, but you can read the others, including retrospectively, simply
> by clicking on them. Moreover, it can't keep itself from decoding the
> callsigns of stations that are within its passband.
>
> As Al has re-stated the rule, the example of CW Skimmer is perfectly
> appropriate, because it cannot be used in a single-signal mode solely to
> decode exchange information. It also happens to be the only extant example
> of its type, but who knows what may be coming next?
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> <snip>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|