[CQ-Contest] Re; Skimmer Ultimate Setup

[Michael Coslo]

On Mar 21, 2008, at 5:44 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
>> 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.
>

I'm going to try to approach this subject without slippery sloping it  
too much.

The radiosport community has to define what it wants to be. It can be  
about advancing the technology and operating efficiency of those who  
partake in it.

Or it can be about contesting itself, and the rest of amateur radio  
can fend for itself, "we are a different group."

Joe, your last paragraph speaks to a radio community that takes  
technology as it becomes available, implements it into an existing  
system, and uses that to improve efficiency and accuracy.  CW Skimmer  
is simply another step on that path, and in fact may be a saving  
grace for CW contesting in the future. That is what I see as a  
vibrant, dynamic,  and growing community.

Now if we just see it about "us", sure, we can ban whatever  
technology comes along. We can all sit down and argue about every  
single advancement that comes along, wasting time in the process, and  
in the end have an effect of holding back contesting while amateur  
radio moves on. We can insist on paper logs only - to cite an extreme  
example - computer logging was probably the biggest single spur to  
increased QSO rates. It's technology, and it certainly isn't "fair"  
to those who don't have computers, but that's how things evolved. Ham  
radio embraced the technology because it worked and it helped.

Comparisons to Indy car racing come to mind when they effectively  
banned turbine cars after the 1967 Indy race. They didn't ban them  
because they were evil or unsafe, they banned them because they were  
faster. Stomp the technology.

As I see it, the amateur radio contesting community can go one of two  
ways here, forward, or backward. There is no staying in one place,  
neither time nor technology allow that.

Where would contesting be now if all the "unfair technology" was  
banned from contesting? I have visions of people using radios from  
the 1950's, (to make sure that technology like bandscopes was not  
used) making up paper logs, and using only straight keys, or maybe an  
assisted class where you could use a bug.

-73 de Mike N3LI -