[CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings

[Joe Hetrick]

prickler.schneider at t-online.de wrote:

 >Exactly in the same sense as marathon runners would feel threatend  
if engine driven wheel chairs were allowed in the same category -  
taking out the individual human >challenge. But other than in running  
we have no definition and no consensus to what extent the human part  
may be replaced by tech-aids before we loose an essential >part of the  
competition (finding and identifying stations via human S&P vs.  
Skimmering).
I think thats a sense that some people have.  It's the march of new  
technology.
My personal habits are single op, low power, and, I'm a CW op outside  
of contesting;  My contesting habits aren't dictated by lots of  
experience, i do what seems to work for me.  Skimmer seems to be a  
blurred line.  For example: it's only slightly different,  
conceptually, than using the band-map features of something like  
N1MM.  Being low power, I'll start a VFO at each end of the band and  
work towards one another when I'm S&P.  If I come across stations I  
want, but, hear that they're busy, I switch VFO's and keep working,  
periodically checking back.  Sometimes I'll leave them i the band-map,  
and, I'll keep moving.  After a few hours, I have quite a list of  
stations in there, and, I'll go back and see if they're still working  
pileups, or, if I can sneak in.  I try to limit the amount of time  
that I'm calling any one station; I favor movement.
In a sense, Skimmer does this, only, automagically...and much much  
more quickly.  I haven't followed the debate as to how folks think  
this could be utlized; either folks using it on the band they're  
operating, or, folks running it on another band, watching for openings  
or mults...
 >With the majority (?????) defining it only as a tech competition  
there will be no real barrier on the route to robo-contesting. The  
individual skills required will be those of >the engineer planning,  
constructing, programming, wiring and setting up things to require as  
few slow human actions as possible during the contest. Remain a few  
 >strategic decisions about band changes, performance control of the  
station and the necessary skill set to deal with information overload  
as long as no capable software >is available to completely select and  
sort all the input.
This year when I participated I ARRL Sweeps, I was a mere 2 away from  
a sweep.  I was bummed, and some local guys sent me an email from one  
of their friends out west.  This ham hadn't operated CW for quite some  
time, slow, rusty, etc.  His preferred approach was 100% automated.   
He used a CW reader, software TX, and he worked a sweep without ever  
copying CW with his own ears.  The only thing he probably used was his  
mouse.  I tend to feel on the side of: if thats what works for him,  
thats fine.  I was bummed I missed the sweep by so little, but, thats  
the way it goes.  There are times when his approach won't be to his  
advantage, though.
I, personally, find part of the challenge of contesting to be the CW.   
With modest stations, I don't think it's reasonable to expect to be  
able to have RX good enough to copy things without your grey matter.   
Sometimes software isn't going to help you get that contact.
 >Will be interesting to see whether a "traditional" category will  
evolve besides an "open" category.
I like N4ZR as quoted on radio-sport on this.  I also think that  
making such a category more well defined; use of keying interfaces (no  
feelings one way or another), things like Skimmer, code-readers, etc,  
etc.  Decide how "traditional" it needs to be, and make it consistent.
The potential for a remotely operated robo-station exists, and, as a  
technological challenge, is kind of nifty.  I don't think it should be  
discouraged.  I don't think that folks wanting to operate with  
modestly outfitted stations with much more real human interaction  
should be discouraged, either.
I, personally, wouldn't particularly want to be lumped with other un- 
assisted stations who were running Skimmer, if I were not, and I'm not  
likely to do it.  I find it difficult to reconcile other tools in the  
contest shack (bandmaps, software-keying, software decoding, call  
databases, etc) to limiting it's use in the Un-assisted class,  
though.  Dis-allowing it doesn't seem like it's consistent with the  
other tools allowed.  I do think it would offer a significant  
advantage, but, there is also the reality that you need to have the  
station capable of making use of that advantage.  Skimmer does little  
good if he can't hear you.
I don't agree with statements that CW has little to do with CW  
contesting.  I prefer to think CW is at it's heart, right next to the  
tech.  For others, it's the station-building aspect.  Whatever gets  
you making RF.
73,
Joe, KC0VKN