CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Opinion: SO-unassisted should not be using CW Skimmer

To: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Opinion: SO-unassisted should not be using CW Skimmer
From: Jukka Klemola <jpklemola@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:15:09 +0200
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Aye.
I second Mark's view.

Amount of data equals a networked device, but only with stations that
are heard at the location.
Very powerful tool !

And, a fair-play based rule is the Skimmers should be networked.


73,
Jukka OH6LI



2011/11/30 Mark Bailey <kd4d@comcast.net>:
> Hi Tor:
>
> I, for one, don't agree - I see little difference between "local"
> skimmers and the worldwide network.  To the operator, they look the same
> during a contest.
>
> 73,
>
> Mark, KD4D
>
> On 11/29/2011 5:57 PM, RT Clay wrote:
>> It is also worth pointing out (again) that there is a BIG difference between 
>> allowing only "local" skimmers at one's own station, and allowing connection 
>> to a worldwide network of other people's skimmers. Some people only think of 
>> "skimmer" as the worldwide network- but so far no contest makes a 
>> distinction between the two cases.
>>
>> In the case of only a local skimmer there are still situations where a human 
>> op is better- for example skimmer is not very good at copying weak signals 
>> on the low bands.
>>
>> Tor
>> N4OGW
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>