[CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup

[Michael Coslo]

On Mar 21, 2008, at 9:51 PM, Sandy Taylor wrote:
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup
>
>
>> 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
> testing.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> Unfortunately, there is no logic to that idea: RTTY has never been
> considered a format that humans can decode.
>
> It's as spurious an argument as the idea that to call Skimmer  
> assistance
> relegates those who use transceivers they didn't build themselves,  
> from
> semiconductors they didn't create themselves from silicon they  
> didn't mine
> themselves, as assisted.
>
> RTTY has always been considered a machine-copied mode. CW is a  
> skill that we
> should treasure, not sell out to some $20 receiver and $70 software  
> program

	I can appreciate the sentiment, but we have to look at the present  
situation. CW as a mode requires a lot of learning, and for some of  
us (like me) it is extremely difficult due to major hearing problems.  
But that's another issue.

And for those who might be interested in the mode at present, there  
are computer programs that will copy and transmit CW Morse pretty  
well. I know one Ham who is using computerized CW to further his  
DXCC. It works.

I find programs such as Skimmer to be a way to extend the life of CW  
use. If not, we'll eventually have so few Hams using "unassisted" CW  
that those classes will disappear. It won't happen overnight, but 20  
years down the road?


-73 de Mike N3LI -