[CQ-Contest] Extent of computerization

[Guy Olinger, K2AV]

My, how we strain to create lines in the sand to keep others boxed out.
And, for that matter, strain to keep anything from changing, especially
if it seems to put us at some disadvantage.

Tell me, what is the difference between the wire from the front of the
Xcvr to a headset and an internet "wire" of some greater length.

Knowing W4AN, he's going to drub you or me in any contest whether he's
personally up on that mountain or running it remotely from some random
site in the US where his work has him stuck. For that matter, he could
stomp us with some number of lesser plain backyard setups. It's ALWAYS
the dB's between the ears that makes the BIG difference.

The essentials:

SINGLE operator. SINGLE location for all transmitters, receivers and
antennas. Not broken by his setup.

Why do you begrudge him that with the internet extension he can get on
some weekends that would otherwise have him off the air?

All along, I have been convinced that the true spirit in Ham Radio was
INNOVATION and SERVICE. A cynic might wonder if it's really
rule-mongering and self-service.

When I was Radio Officer for Putnam County (NY) Office of Emergency
Management, the hams did some VERY useful stuff in public service
exercises with remote controlled equipment. According to you that wasn't
really ham radio?

I still think all the contests need a SOUL class (Single Operator,
UnLimited). Do ANYTHING you want within the most basic rules of the
contest, and legal in the country, as long as ONE and ONLY ONE HUMAN at
any of the controls for the duration (all of the various arguments
pro/con on packet assist still apply here, as they relate to the one and
one only concept). IF you can run sixteen MP's simultaneously, that's
fine, although I'll be really curious as to how you managed.

Then we could put an end to these discussions with a SOIP class (Single
Operator, Inchy-Pinchy) with strict, highly controlled parameters ala
RadioSport.

Them that has to make sure the other guys in their class absolutely have
no possible advantage can operate SOIP and feel good. The rest of us who
aren't into the multi-X scene can operate SOUL and try out our latest
whatever to see if it works or helps in a contest, including remote
control. Scores will not be listed together.

 If someone really sticks out in SOUL, all the talk will be what new
thing did he do. If someone really sticks out in SOIP, all the talk will
be if he cheated or had some ingenuous advantage. (Remember all the
high-pitched yak after the last radiosport, what it was all about?)

We can keep records in SOIP, because everything is the same from
year-to-year. In SOUL, we'll only keep last year's scores for comparison
with this, and then toss. After all, with the increasing CPU and A/D
converter bandwidth and speeds, someone is bound to figure out an
algorithm to decode CW out of bad noise real-time (call it a dynamic
computer based dynamic noise canceller). Then, at least on the low
bands, guys with the CBDNC's  (this year's scores) and without (last
year's score) aren't comparable ongoing. Just beat out last year.

And could there be a better place to test out such a contraption than a
QRN-laced contest on the low bands? The thought makes me drool....

73
-----------------

Guy Olinger
Apex, NC, USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul EI5DI" <paul at ei5di.com>

> My only reservation is that, at some stage - depending on distance and
> methodology, this leads to something other than amateur radio
> contesting.


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com