I understand your point, Chuck. I won't say whether automated CW is more
help than the cluster, but I make the distinction that automated CW is
technology which you have implemented in your station design, while the
cluster is tapping into EXTERNAL real time information which is the result
of the work of a different operator DURING THE CONTEST.
I hold the view that TECHNOLOGY incorporated into your station design
(automated CW, SO2R, a comfortable chair, innovative antenna configurations)
are not assistance in the sense of "heat of the battle" contesting.
I also hold the view that INFORMATION developed by others (cluster spots,
super-check partial data files) are the essence of "assistance" because they
are the result of the work by OTHER OPERATORS.
73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Just a boy and his radio"
--
Proud Member of:
A1 Operators - http://www.arrl.org/a-1-op
MWA - http://www.W0AA.org
TCDXA - http://www.tcdxa.org
CADXA - http://www.cadxa.org
LVDXA - http://www.lvdxa.org
CWOps - http://www.cwops.org
SOC - http://www.qsl.net/soc
TCFMC - http://tcfmc.org
--
Sea stories here ---> http://k0hb.spaces.live.com/
Request QSL at ---> http://www.clublog.org/logsearch/K0HB
All valid QSL requests honored with old fashioned paper QSL!
LoTW participant
--------------------------------------------------
From: <KI9A@aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 1:22 AM
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW CC Update
> Very true, Hans, but, letting the computer send the CW is more assistance
> on the air, than a packet cluster, isn't it?
>
> The computer is ACTUALLY doing the work sending CW.
>
> Just saying...
>
> 73! Chuck KI9A
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|