[CQ-Contest] NAQP CW + Skimmer

[Hank Greeb]

I see the day of "Zero Operator, Multi Transmitter" classification 
coming very soon.

Why not?  if a skimmer can decode the entire band, why can't it be 
configured to control the transceiver, call CQ, respond to calls 
received, decode what is received, place it in a log, etc.

"May the best programmer of the computer robot software win" in this new 
category.

73 de n8xx Hg

On 12/23/2010 3:00 PM, Pete Smith <n4zr at contesting.com> wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:43:20 -0500
> From: Pete Smith<n4zr at contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP CW + Skimmer
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Message-ID:<4D13A658.3020305 at contesting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> The Skimmer CW decoder is great, but when it is decoding one signal, it is also simultaneously decoding anything else that is within its passband, whether that is 3 KHz or 192 KHz.  Only one signal is decoded at the bottom of the page, but you can read the others, including retrospectively, simply by clicking on them.  Moreover, it can't keep itself from decoding the callsigns of stations that are within its passband.
>
> As Al has re-stated the rule, the example of CW Skimmer is perfectly appropriate, because it cannot be used in a single-signal mode solely to decode exchange information.  It also happens to be the only extant example of its type, but who knows what may be coming next?
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> <snip>