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
The World Contest Station Database, updated daily at www.conteststations.com
The Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at
reversebeacon.blogspot.com,
spots at telnet.reversebeacon.net, port 7000
On 12/23/2010 7:46 AM, David Robbins wrote:
> that just goes to prove my point that brand names should be avoided. CW
> Skimmer is well known for generating spotting information so many people see
> that name and assume that is its only purpose. but it also makes a nice
> audio passband code reader. In this case it is lumped in with 'code readers'
> for copy 'exchange information', after specifically excluding all sources of
> spotting information... so 'obviously' the writer of the rule change
> understands that it can be used just as a code reader and wants to allow that
> while excluding the user from decoding a whole band for spotting purposes.
> While this is an improvement over other ways of writing the rule, it would
> still be better to leave off that brand name software and just state that
> audio bandwidth code readers are ok for making contacts.
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|