One thing is for sure: This subject has certainly charged the emotions.
I don't support the idea of an all-out ban on use of skimmer technology
in contesting, so I will not sign the petition. However, I do fear its
casual adoption will be bad for contesting and acutely so for CW. Given
skimmer is here and unfortunately, cannot be uninvented, I believe a
sensible response is to allow its use but only within specific
categories and events.
Skimmer capability has been waiting to happen for quite some time. That
it didn't, has little to do with a lack of enabling technology, much
more with personal restraint shown by those who had given it earlier
consideration. Up until now these good people have maintained
realisation of the concept under heavy guard, contained in a lead
shielded box marked, "Threatening to the Fundamentals of CW & Contesting
at large". Alas, it seems Pandora has found the guard snoozing and
slipped in to prize open the box.
So what's the big deal?
Firstly, for CW contesting in particular: The only thing which makes CW
an art instead of a data mode, is that it's decoded and sometimes even
now, encoded by humans. Electronic CW readers have been available,
allowed and perhaps even used in contests, without restriction, for
several years and nobody has made much fuss. Whilst true, this fact is
of little significance. Single signal electronic readers have proven no
match for the skills of a proficient CW operator, so it has been easy to
ignor them. The potential of skimmer to translate multiple CW signals
and render them on screen simultaneously is a very different
proposition. This is something no human operator can do.
If skimmer is given "open season" even the most talented CW operators
will rapidly need to adopt it to maintain competitive edge. A swift
metamorphosis will likely be forced upon the code, from human art form
to data mode. This would be a travesty. We already have a
comprehensive data mode contest calendar. What point is there in
augmenting it with data CW? Surely the huge popularity of CW contesting
arises out of the attraction provided by the art of CW itself. And
anyway; how long would it take for it to be realised just how inferior a
data mode transit CW makes?
Secondly, for contesting in general: The talent to hunt multipliers
effectively has long been a key differentiator between the good and the
best. DX cluster has performed a huge disservice to the development of
individual operator skill. Sadly, cluster cannot be uninvented either.
Skimmer poses a greater threat. Even with cluster, the study of
propagation yields benefit. Stations from the four corners of the globe
are spotted 24 hours a day during major events. Despite this, operators
still needs to develop awareness of when rare multipliers might be
workable. Skimmer has the potential to remove this need. A skimmer
running at my QTH will only display signals from stations audible at my
qth. When a potential multiplier appears in my bandmap I will know the
path is open. Why bother to learn anything about propagation?
Those who sit on the sidelines of contesting, commenting on all and
participating in little, will likely see no problem in the above. They
may well consider the deskilling of contesting no more than an overdue
leveling of the playing field. Reading what some have written on this
subject has me wondering whether they so vociferously participate in
sports discussion groups, propounding the argument that those who've not
learned to ride a bike should not be disadvantaged in events such as the
Tour de France, nor those without driving skills in Formula One. Sigh.
So, just what is the answer?
Well perhaps some contests might benefit from an "Anything goes"
unrestricted category. Where participation is restricted only by terms
of operating licence and the broader law. This would provide for those
wishing to embrace skimmer, remote station technology and whatever else
comes along, be it good or bad. Other categories would continue to
place limitations on equipment used, so maintaining focus upon the
development and recognition of human skill and catering to the
requirements of significant common interest groups. QRP, restricted
antennas, limited hours etc.
You've all had your 2 cents, so now you have mine.
73
Bob, 5B4AGN, P3F
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|