[CQ-Contest] The damn robot won

Michael Tope W4EF at dellroy.com
Thu May 28 20:44:26 PDT 2009

Pete Smith wrote:

> I'm still hoping that one of the guys who was involved will tell us 
> how the Skimmer number was arrived at, and particularly what 
> validation level was used.  With 3 KHz of audio from a typical audio 
> tape, Skimmer would "hear" much the same muddle as a human.  If a 
> second signal appears on exactly (or close to) the same frequency, it 
> gets as confused as we do.  But in any case, nobody is suggesting that 
> a human mind can do what a properly implemented Skimmer can do, even 
> in a 3 KHz bandwidth.
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> At 04:59 PM 5/27/2009, Michael Tope wrote:
>> Doesn't skimmer implement more than one demodulator (i.e it can
>> demodulate multiple code streams simultaneously provided that there is
>> enough frequency offset between the streams to allow for filtering) ? An
>> interesting comparison would be to add up the total number of unique
>> calls copied by all the human operators (i.e. the gang of human
>> demodulators) and then compare that with Skimmer (i.e. the gang of
>> robotic demodulators).
>> 73, Mike W4EF......

It occurred to me that another thing Skimmer has going for it is that it 
doesn't drink :-)
That has to be worth 20 QSOs.

73, Mike W4EF.....

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list