Here's a novel solution to Skimmer misspots: copy them yourself!
I am not opposed to Skimmer nor am I opposed to packet. I still don't think
a Skimmer-assisted op is any less assisted than a packet-assisted op,
however. But that's a dog that's long run away.
73, Kelly
Ve4xt
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
Sent: April-16-08 5:57 AM
To: Ken Widelitz; CQ-Contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] "Reverse Beacon" - Skimmer as LID
I think you're jumping too quickly to that conclusion, Ken. Yes, it makes
too many mistakes, right now. I've been testing a simple solution, though
- running each Skimmer spot through a quick comparison with the master.dta
file, and only posting the ones that match on the bandmap. You'll lose a
few genuine uniques that way, but it also cleans up almost all the junk. I
have no doubt that Alex will develop other techniques for improving the
output in the coming months.
As I reported a month or so ago, I ran CW Skimmer against a KC pileup
contest recording, and even without the master.dta comparison it would have
finished 4th or 5th.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 09:37 PM 4/15/2008, Ken Widelitz wrote:
>I clicked on the link in Pete's post and saw the following spots made by
>skimmers on 7031.6:
>
>KO3I 0131
>KO4OK 0129
>KO4D 0128
>
>I have followed the skimmer thread with interest. This single sample
>convinces me I won't use skimmer in SS this year.
>
>73, Ken, K6LA / VY2TT
_______________________________________________
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
|