How about if you receive callsign and frequency information that is outside of your receiver passband (2.4 KHz or 2.7 KHz), then it is assistance? In other words, if you can hear it and your "decoder
... ... Please realise the SCP files most of us use in good faith, are in real life getting assistance from other operators by the help of the computer and the SCP database that gets input from hundr
No skimmer network can duplicate the skimmer spots I receive from my own copy of Skimmer running on the S&P radio. That is totally contained in my station and not the product of any other operator.
Here's a suggestion. If you consider CW to be just another data mode, then it's perfectly logical to use code readers, or Skimmer, or any future technology to decode it. After all, that's what you wo
I am 100% with Randy here. Skimmer is very similar to packet (and even more efficient as I read and hear) in what is offers and the same statistical methods can be used to detect skimmer use as packe
I'm with Fabian, DJ1YFK. Let them use whatever they like. Cheers, Terry G4MKP --Original Message-- From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of cq-c
Joe, I don't think anyone is trying to marginalize skimmer technology, nor do I think that the "assisted" category is to be considered inferior to "unassisted". There are elite in both categories. I
I agree with Ed, keep on developing the technology. He also has a good point on the "robo wars", which won't be too far down the pike. There is another possible benefit that I haven't seen discussed
The significant advantage of Skimmer - particularly in a DX contest, will be to narrow the significant multiplier advantage of those in favored locations. It will allow the "disadvantaged" stations
Then what would you say to this: I use a waterfall display like a Skimmer, but with no code-reading capabilities. It just takes a "snapshot" of the band in time and frequency, showing dots and dashe
Again, you are thinking about the spot trail from a centralized skimmer collector, not a local skimmer. What my skimmer gets in MS and what ARRL gets in CT will be significantly different. There is
Joe, W4TV wrote: "Will skimmer change the way some people operate a CW contest? Of course. Could it change the "competitive balance" and allow operators in areas that are not geographically favored t
Yes, I realize that guys using code readers do not pass the "your own ears" requirement. Same for RTTY. Open to suggestion on how to word this better. Perhaps something like, "by ear, or electronic d
ops. I think it will too. And when they get a little experience they'll want to move up from Skimmer class into a class without training wheels. 73, de Hans, K0HB Just a boy and his radio -- _______
Paul, You have captured the essence of the argument perfectly in those words. Thank you! 73, de Hans, K0HB Just a boy and his radio -- _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mail
This statement hits the nail squarely on the head! Again, I'll add my definition of "Single Operator" who is "not assisted". Put this fellow out in a field, in a tent or shack, with no outside connec
Hey Tor, All excellent points, indeed. None changes my mind that Skimmer should be assisted, however. I see no reason why calling Skimmer 'assistance' in any way negates the advantages you so correct
Joe is 100% right, logical in the true spirit of ham-spirit. Contesting is a technological sport, including mastering of technology, operating skills and knowledge of propagation. Yuri, K3BU.us _____
I don't like this definition because the boy might take a 2M radio into the shack to receive packet spots. -- Put this fellow out in a field, in a tent or shack, with no outside connection to the wor
Or just maybe it makes the assisted category pointless. Interesting idea, anyway. Just how long do you think that it will be before a skimmer for SSB appears. I've already worked out the technical de