CW decoders are strictly prohibited in the majors.
Barry W2UP
On 5/3/2019 1:05 PM, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:
There are Cw contesters who use cw decoders and many CW contesters use
computer generated CW. It’s simply not as good as a human ear yet but it’s
there already.
Ria
N2RJ
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 9:07 AM Jim via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
wrote:
These digital modes, with appropriate tweaks to allow non-trivial
information, can be very useful for communicating. But for sport? Not
unless your sport is robotics.
Imagine a similar takeover by machines of a well known sport: tennis. It’s
not hard to imagine a robot that would eject a tennis ball into the air and
use a mechanical arm with a tennis racquet attached to hit a ball at a
similar robot on the other side of a tennis net, and with appropriate
vision software then get to that ball when it is returned to again hit it
over a net, and so on. What would that prove, and what about it would be
interesting to observe?
And I find that mentally decoding a call out of a pileup or out of noise
comprises a lot more than 1% of contact management.
73 - Jim K8MR
On May 2, 2019, at 9:01 PM, Sterling Mann <kawfey@gmail.com> wrote:
In the beginning, there were people. And people raced on foot. And then
man
domesticated the animal, and raced that. And then man got creative,
making
cars, planes, boats, trains, rockets, and so on and so forth...and raced
them all.
Ham radio is the same. In the beginning there was CW. And then phone. And
then RTTY. And then BPSK. And so on and so forth, until now with FT4.
What I'm getting at is that FT4 contesting will still be just as much fun
as CW, SSB, and RTTY, and just as competitive. But, I think now after
reading a negative opinion or two on CQ-contest, QRZ, eHam, reddit, and
elsewhere, is that the contesters ingrained in CW, phone, or RTTY
radiosport will be hard pressed to believe me. Meanwhile contesters of
modern-day modes will have as much fun with FT4 as those who have been
contesting with CW for their lifetimes and it makes me sad that they'll
be
unlikely to share that experience. So, I challenge the naysayers to give
it
a try. I promise you that the "robot" you QSOing with will be no
different
than the N1MM automation that manage 99% of a contact already.
-Sterling N0SSC
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 7:08 PM Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa@nbnet.nb.ca>
wrote:
Hey guys n' gals,
I am not against FT# contesting, but I certainly won't pretend to
understand
it. (nor am I a Luddite)
IMO, if you remove too much of the human element from the picture, the
'rush', the 'reward', the 'competition' (if you want to call it that) is
lessened.
IE: I derive the greatest pleasure from CW, then SSB, and much much less
for
RTTY. (I don't do very much RTTY - and that is one reason) Watch my
computer
work someone elses computer with a few mouse clicks and some guessing
as to
the callsign and exchange depending on QSB/QRM etc.? Some editing of
function key files to tweak my exchange "better" than maybe Joe-Blow
down
the road who sends everything except his hat size. Being quick with the
mouse.(timing) Much less than SSB or CW, but at least there's some
human
interaction.
When the JT modes hit 6m, it created a situation for the CW/SSB ops,
that
lessened the overall appeal of 6m as "everyone was up the band on the JT
modes".
Again, not against it, but don't "get it". Maybe it's that
generational/instant gratification for very little outlay of energy
mentality. Maybe it's just the soup de jour. I dunno.
Even though I am admittedly not a huge proponent of RTTY (as explained
above), I don't think RTTY contests and awards should be watered down by
including FT#, PSK31 or whatever. There is still some human element in
RTTY, however small that might be.
Respectfully,
VE9AA Mike...CW and SSB forever !
Keswick Ridge, NB
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|