[CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> None of the other hardware in a SO unassisted shack actually 
> does the hard part -- copying CW -- for you. Skimmer tells 
> you who's there, where he is and it's not much of a stretch 
> before it automatically tunes the radio to the station, calls 
> him, types the call into the logger for you and acks the QSO. 
> That it may miss a few guys doesn't change that.

By this logic *** EVERY *** RTTY operator is "assisted" since 
I doubt there is a single contester who can copy RTTY in his 
head with even 80% accuracy.  The argument that any machine, 
no matter how complex, is assistance went away the day the OTs 
started using code wheels to call CQ, the day the WV4VVF 
AccuMemory became a best selling kit, and the day CT was first 
released. 

Having been around for the last two break through steps in 
technology both the memory keyer and computer logging/duping 
were as revolutionary as CW Skimmer.  In fact, the only reason 
ANYONE can possibly claim that CW Skimmer represents "assistance" 
is because of the similarity in results to those that can be 
achieved through the abuse of the cluster system.  CW Skimmer 
is to the "band map" what CT was to the paper dupe sheet.  I 
predict it will take almost no time at all before we see "RTTY 
Skimmer" and less than five years before SSB Skimmer. 

The contest community accepted automatic transmission (CQ wheels, 
tape loops, memory keyers, DVK, etc.) and automatic logging (CT, 
NA, TR, SD, WriteLog, N1MM Logger, WinTest, etc.) and seems to 
be willing to embrace remote control without reservation, "Skimmer" 
technology is simply the next step in the march of technology. 




> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Sandy Taylor
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 3:54 PM
> To: steve.root at culligan4water.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup
> 
> 
> It's not that Skimmer is a piece of hardware in your shack 
> that makes you assisted.
> 
> Like someone once said, anyone who doens't mine their own 
> silicon, germanium, manganese and copper to make their own 
> radios could be considered "assisted."
> 
> What makes Skimmer "assistance" in my view is that it does 
> the heavy lifting for you. To run Skimmer and not say you're 
> assisted is like using a pitching machine and calling 
> yourself a pitcher.
> 
> None of the other hardware in a SO unassisted shack actually 
> does the hard part -- copying CW -- for you. Skimmer tells 
> you who's there, where he is and it's not much of a stretch 
> before it automatically tunes the radio to the station, calls 
> him, types the call into the logger for you and acks the QSO. 
> That it may miss a few guys doesn't change that.
> 
> My god, man, if that's not bordering on assistance, than what is?
> 
> 73, Kelly
> Ve4xt
> 
> 
> 
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of 
> steve.root at culligan4water.com
> Sent: March-21-08 12:50 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup
> 
> I think you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone 
> that a piece of 
> hardware in your shack suddenly makes you assisted. The 
> defacto definition of assistance involves information 
> acquired from another person. If a piece of gear in your 
> shack makes you assisted, then what is your receiver doing? 
> Or for that matter your second receiver in an SO2R station? 
> But none of this addresses the 
> real problem with Skimmer.
> I really don't care if my competition uses a machine to copy 
> CW. I do very much care if the guy I'm calling is using a 
> machine.... For example, let's assume I'm weak (not much of a 
> stretch there). I call K5ZD. Randy is going to know that someone 
> is calling him, he's going to get at least part of my call, 
> and hopefully he'll realize what "0SR" is and then call me. 
> Skimmer wouldn't even know I 
> was there. This isn't conjecture on my part but actual 
> real-world experience with Pete's Skimmer setup. There were 
> several days when I could call CQ on 20 meters with 200 watts 
> and a 2 element Quad, and Pete's Skimmer was completely 
> oblivious to my presence. 
> Imagine that happening during a contest weekend. No thanks, 
> I'd rather work people than machines.
> 
> Remember what Isaac Asimov once said:
> "Machines are absolutely rational and totally unreasonable"
> 
> 
> 73 Steve K0SR
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com 
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest